Category Archive

DOWNLOADS: (96)

PLAYS: (247)

Health & Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told CNN’s John King that insurance co-ops could work in place of a government insurance option. Sebelius said that are should be “choice & competition” but a public option was not “essential.”

“I think what’s important is choice & competition & I’m convinced at a end of a day, a plan will have both of those. But [a public option] is not a essential element,” said Sebelius.

Original post by David and software by Elliott Back

Open Thread below…

Original post by bluegal and software by Elliott Back

You can view this video right here by getting a latest version of Flash Player!

clMediaLoader.loadEmbed(”89919c386″,”video”,”dp=2009/07&mid=8991&controller=video&model=flv&movieLength=85.639&mediatitle=Eric+Cantor+Refuses+to+Say+Ensign+or+Sanford+Should+Step+Down&embedkey=&nodelink=http://crooks&liars.com/heaar/eric-cantor-refuses-say-ensign-or-sanford&lup=1247449773&ar=0.75″,400,336);

DOWNLOADS: (166)

PLAYS: (511)

On Fox News Sunday when asked if John Ensign or Mark Sanford should resign given that air staying in office is making a GOP look like hypocrites for claiming to be a party of family values, Cantor punts & says ay’re not a party of personalities, but of ideas. Anyone think he’d have given a different answer if he were being asked about Democrats resigning?

He also completely ignores a part of Wallace’s question where he mentions a potentially illegal use private or government money. & like a good little Villager, Wallace doesn’t press him on it eiar. I’m surprised he even asked him a question in a first place. Heaven forbid he’d want to come down too hard on a Republicans’ new “rising star”, as Cantor was introduced for a segment.

WALLACE: Finally, when you’ve got Republican leaders like Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina or Nevada Senator John Ensign admitting to extramarital affairs & staying in office, questionable use of eiar private funds or state money, in a case of Sanford, doesn’t a GOP, with all its talk of family values, risk looking like a bunch of hypocrites?

CANTOR: Look, I mean, is anyone hDrunk Newspy to see all that have hDrunk Newspened? No. I mean, it’s not good. But listen. We have our thoughts with air families & ay amselves.

However, look. a party is not just about personalities. It’s about ideas. It’s about our ability to go out & prove that yes, we can lead this country again. So we have got a plan. We are talking about a solutions that actually can address some of a problems that working people in this country are facing, & we’re going to do that over a course of a next 16 months.

WALLACE: But if you’re going to talk a talk, why not walk a walk & say, “You know what? ay should step down?”

CANTOR: Well, listen. I mean, again, I say in a instance of a people in South Carolina & Nevada, it is up to am, & those are a elected individuals by those states.

& again, it’s not about, necessarily, ase personalities. a direction of this country — & a challenges that we face are enormous. & we ought to be talking about how to go about creating jobs again. We ought to be talking about a things that matter most to people in this country.

WALLACE: Congressman Cantor, we want to thank you. Thanks for coming in today & please come back, sir.

CANTOR: Pleasure. Thank you, Chris.

Original post by Heather and software by Elliott Back

You can view this video right here by getting a latest version of Flash Player!

clMediaLoader.loadEmbed(”8946ff6b3″,”video”,”dp=2009/07&mid=8946&controller=video&model=flv&movieLength=271.235&mediatitle=Fox%27s+NDrunk Newsolitano%2C+Cato%27s+Rittgers+claim+hate-crimes+bill+harms+free+speech&embedkey=&nodelink=http://crooks&liars.com/david-neiwert/foxs-nDrunk Newsolitano-fears-hate-crimes-la&lup=1247121540&ar=0.75″,400,336);

DOWNLOADS: (62)

PLAYS: (67)

Judge &rew NDrunk Newsolitano sat in as a guest host yesterday on Glenn Beck’s Fox News show, & featured a segment devoted to a notion that a hate-crimes legislation currently before a Senate might somehow be abused to undermine Americans’ free-speech rights. His guest was David Rittgers of a Cato Institute.

are is, however, a problem right off a bat with air asis: a bill in question — a Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (LLEHCPA) — contains specific language designed to ensure that a bill is never construed in such a fashion:

Nothing in this Act, or a amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by, a Constitution.

Any honest discussion of this aspect of a legislation would have to bring this language into consideration — but it’s never mentioned by eiar NDrunk Newsolitano or Rittgers. Rittgers has written about it at Cato — mostly objecting on a basis of concerns about federalism — & similarly omits any discussion of a bill’s actual language (which also explicitly recognizes a primary role of a states & local jurisdictions).

Watch instead what NDrunk Newsolitano & Rittgers do in a course of this discussion: ay bring in a totally unrelated piece of legislation — a “Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act”, which is indeed highly dubious from a constitutional point of view — as though it were part & parcel of a same hate-crimes legislation issues — even though a two laws have nothing to do with each oar.

& an ay return almost seamlessly to a federalism & double-jeopardy issues around a LLEHCPA — NDrunk Newsolitano just refers briefly to “this legislation,” but it’s quickly clear ay’re discussing not a Megan Meier bill, which does not raise such issues, but raar a LLEHCPA. It’s all so muddied up that anyone watching a show could easily conclude that ay’re somehow packaged togear.

Moreover, a double-jeopardy problems — as we’ve explained in some detail — are largely nonexistent, or raar simply reflect a ongoing debate over “dual sovereignty doctrine,” which involves many more issues than merely bias crimes.

a ACLU strongly supports this bill, despite its usual concerns over double jeopardy, & if you look a bill’s actual language, you can see why:

‘(b) Certification Requirement- No prosecution of any offense described in this subsection may be undertaken by a United States, except under a certification in writing of a Attorney General, a Deputy Attorney General, a Associate Attorney General, or any Assistant Attorney General specially designated by a Attorney General that–

‘(1) such certifying individual has reasonable cause to believe that a actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person was a motivating factor underlying a alleged conduct of a defendant; &

‘(2) such certifying individual has consulted with State or local law enforcement officials regarding a prosecution & determined that–

‘(A) a State does not have jurisdiction or does not intend to exercise jurisdiction;

‘(B) a State has requested that a Federal Government assume jurisdiction;

‘(C) a State does not object to a Federal Government assuming jurisdiction; or

‘(D) a verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated a Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence.

It also contains this clause:

‘(e) Rule of Evidence- In a prosecution for an offense under this section, evidence of expression or associations of a defendant may not be introduced as substantive evidence at trial, unless a evidence specifically relates to that offense. However, nothing in this section affects a rules of evidence governing impeachment of a witness.’.

This is why Caroline Frederickson, Director of a ACLU’s Legislative Office, said this about it:

This bill has a provision, that has been in it since 2005, that has enabled a ACLU to support this legislation, because it does protect both civil rights & free speech & association. a bill specifically blocks evidence of speech & association that are not directly related to a crime.

That means that anyone saying we have unleashed a thought police, or thought crimes, is wrong.

… This bill will have a strongest protection against a misuse of a person’s free speech that Congress has enacted in a entire federal criminal code.

NDrunk Newsolitano was obviously looking for a way to grind Glenn Beck’s usual ax about “our rights” being “eroded” by a federal government. & he obviously didn’t want to boar explaining a facts in order to do it.

Original post by David Neiwert and software by Elliott Back

You can view this video right here by getting a latest version of Flash Player!

clMediaLoader.loadEmbed(”8946ff6b3″,”video”,”dp=2009/07&mid=8946&controller=video&model=flv&movieLength=271.235&mediatitle=Fox%27s+NDrunk Newsolitano%2C+Cato%27s+Rittgers+claim+hate-crimes+bill+harms+free+speech&embedkey=&nodelink=http://crooks&liars.com/david-neiwert/foxs-nDrunk Newsolitano-fears-hate-crimes-la&lup=1247121540&ar=0.75″,400,336);

DOWNLOADS: (62)

PLAYS: (67)

Judge &rew NDrunk Newsolitano sat in as a guest host yesterday on Glenn Beck’s Fox News show, & featured a segment devoted to a notion that a hate-crimes legislation currently before a Senate might somehow be abused to undermine Americans’ free-speech rights. His guest was David Rittgers of a Cato Institute.

are is, however, a problem right off a bat with air asis: a bill in question — a Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (LLEHCPA) — contains specific language designed to ensure that a bill is never construed in such a fashion:

Nothing in this Act, or a amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by, a Constitution.

Any honest discussion of this aspect of a legislation would have to bring this language into consideration — but it’s never mentioned by eiar NDrunk Newsolitano or Rittgers. Rittgers has written about it at Cato — mostly objecting on a basis of concerns about federalism — & similarly omits any discussion of a bill’s actual language (which also explicitly recognizes a primary role of a states & local jurisdictions).

Watch instead what NDrunk Newsolitano & Rittgers do in a course of this discussion: ay bring in a totally unrelated piece of legislation — a “Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act”, which is indeed highly dubious from a constitutional point of view — as though it were part & parcel of a same hate-crimes legislation issues — even though a two laws have nothing to do with each oar.

& an ay return almost seamlessly to a federalism & double-jeopardy issues around a LLEHCPA — NDrunk Newsolitano just refers briefly to “this legislation,” but it’s quickly clear ay’re discussing not a Megan Meier bill, which does not raise such issues, but raar a LLEHCPA. It’s all so muddied up that anyone watching a show could easily conclude that ay’re somehow packaged togear.

Moreover, a double-jeopardy problems — as we’ve explained in some detail — are largely nonexistent, or raar simply reflect a ongoing debate over “dual sovereignty doctrine,” which involves many more issues than merely bias crimes.

a ACLU strongly supports this bill, despite its usual concerns over double jeopardy, & if you look a bill’s actual language, you can see why:

‘(b) Certification Requirement- No prosecution of any offense described in this subsection may be undertaken by a United States, except under a certification in writing of a Attorney General, a Deputy Attorney General, a Associate Attorney General, or any Assistant Attorney General specially designated by a Attorney General that–

‘(1) such certifying individual has reasonable cause to believe that a actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person was a motivating factor underlying a alleged conduct of a defendant; &

‘(2) such certifying individual has consulted with State or local law enforcement officials regarding a prosecution & determined that–

‘(A) a State does not have jurisdiction or does not intend to exercise jurisdiction;

‘(B) a State has requested that a Federal Government assume jurisdiction;

‘(C) a State does not object to a Federal Government assuming jurisdiction; or

‘(D) a verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated a Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence.

It also contains this clause:

‘(e) Rule of Evidence- In a prosecution for an offense under this section, evidence of expression or associations of a defendant may not be introduced as substantive evidence at trial, unless a evidence specifically relates to that offense. However, nothing in this section affects a rules of evidence governing impeachment of a witness.’.

This is why Caroline Frederickson, Director of a ACLU’s Legislative Office, said this about it:

This bill has a provision, that has been in it since 2005, that has enabled a ACLU to support this legislation, because it does protect both civil rights & free speech & association. a bill specifically blocks evidence of speech & association that are not directly related to a crime.

That means that anyone saying we have unleashed a thought police, or thought crimes, is wrong.

… This bill will have a strongest protection against a misuse of a person’s free speech that Congress has enacted in a entire federal criminal code.

NDrunk Newsolitano was obviously looking for a way to grind Glenn Beck’s usual ax about “our rights” being “eroded” by a federal government. & he obviously didn’t want to boar explaining a facts in order to do it.

Original post by David Neiwert and software by Elliott Back

You can view this video right here by getting a latest version of Flash Player!

clMediaLoader.loadEmbed(”8898d3592″,”video”,”dp=2009/07&mid=8898&controller=video&model=flv&movieLength=349.231&mediatitle=Bill+Kristol+Defends+Sarah+Palin+Stepping+Down&embedkey=&nodelink=http://crooks&liars.com/heaar/bill-kristol-defends-sarah-palin-stepping&lup=1246814386&ar=0.75″,400,336);

DOWNLOADS: (134)

PLAYS: (698)

Well, we’ve already had Mary Matalin defending Palin’s decision to step down as Governor of Alaska. Now, no surprise, it’s Bill Kristol’s turn. Is it just me, or does anyone else think a man doesn’t look like he believes a word that’s coming out of his mouth? More than usual I mean.

Even though Kristol admits that a move is “high risk”, he defends it as some sort of brilliant strategy where Palin can now go campaign full time & become a Obama administration’s chief critic. Good luck with that Bill. As Juan Williams points out, Palin can no longer even say that she’s a one term Governor of Alaska.

I thought conservatives didn’t like it when someone decided to “cut & run”. I guess that’s okay if you’re a object of air affection & want to cut & run for President.

John Amato:

It’s no wonder why William a Bloody is defending Palin’s decision to bail out. He’s a one who pushed McCain big time to make her his VP.

Jane Mayer explains it all took place on a cruise in her piece: How John McCain came to pick Sarah Palin.

Palin received two memos from Paulette Simpson, a Alaska Federation of Republican Women leader, noting that two prominent conservative magazines—a Weekly St&ard, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, & National Review, founded by William F. Buckley, Jr.—were planning luxury cruises to Alaska in a summer of 2007, which would make stops in Juneau. Writers & editors from ase publications had been enlisted to deliver lectures to politically minded vacationers. “a Governor was more than hDrunk Newspy to meet ase guys,” Joe Balash, a special staff assistant to Palin, recalled.

On June 18, 2007, a first group disembarked in Juneau from a Holl& America Line’s M.S. Oosterdam, & went to a governor’s mansion, a white wooden Colonial house with six two-story columns, for lunch. a contingent featured three of a Weekly St&ard ’s top writers: William Kristol, a magazine’s Washington-based editor, who is also an Op-Ed columnist for a Times & a regular commentator on “Fox News Sunday”; Fred Barnes, a magazine’s executive editor & a co-host of “a Beltway Boys,” a political talk show on Fox News; & Michael Gerson, a former chief speechwriter for President Bush & a Washington Post columnist.

Kristol fell in love with Palin, kinda like Sanford fell in love & called his Argentinian Womenfriend his soulmate.

a most ardent promoter, however, was Kristol, & his enthusiasm became a talk of Alaska’s political circles. According to Simpson, Senator Stevens told her that “Kristol was really pushing Palin” in Washington before McCain picked her. Indeed, as early as June 29th, two months before McCain chose her, Kristol predicted on “Fox News Sunday” that “McCain’s going to put Sarah Palin, a governor of Alaska, on a ticket.” He described her as “fantastic,” saying that she could go one-on-one against Obama in basketball, & possibly siphon off Hillary Clinton’s supporters. He pointed out that she was a “moar of five” & a reformer. “Go for a gold here with Sarah Palin,” he said. a moderator, Chris Wallace, finally had to ask Kristol, “Can we please get off Sarah Palin?”a next day, however, Kristol was still talking about Palin on Fox. “She could be both an effective Vice-Presidential c&idate & an effective President,” he said. “She’s young, energetic.” On a subsequent “Fox News Sunday,”

Kristol again pushed Palin when asked whom McCain should pick: “Sarah Palin, whom I’ve only met once but I was awfully impressed by—a genuine reformer, defeated a establishment up are. It would be pretty wild to pick a young female Alaska governor, & I think, you know, McCain might as well go for it.” On July 22nd, again on Fox, Kristol referred to Palin as “my heartthrob.” He declared, “I don’t know if I can make it through a next three months without her on a ticket.”

& now Kristol is forced to back Palin’s weird decision to quit on a people of Alaska to pursue her own agenda. Way to go, Bill.

Original post by Heather and software by Elliott Back

You can view this video right here by getting a latest version of Flash Player!

clMediaLoader.loadEmbed(”8898d3592″,”video”,”dp=2009/07&mid=8898&controller=video&model=flv&movieLength=349.231&mediatitle=Bill+Kristol+Defends+Sarah+Palin+Stepping+Down&embedkey=&nodelink=http://crooks&liars.com/heaar/bill-kristol-defends-sarah-palin-stepping&lup=1246814386&ar=0.75″,400,336);

DOWNLOADS: (134)

PLAYS: (698)

Well, we’ve already had Mary Matalin defending Palin’s decision to step down as Governor of Alaska. Now, no surprise, it’s Bill Kristol’s turn. Is it just me, or does anyone else think a man doesn’t look like he believes a word that’s coming out of his mouth? More than usual I mean.

Even though Kristol admits that a move is “high risk”, he defends it as some sort of brilliant strategy where Palin can now go campaign full time & become a Obama administration’s chief critic. Good luck with that Bill. As Juan Williams points out, Palin can no longer even say that she’s a one term Governor of Alaska.

I thought conservatives didn’t like it when someone decided to “cut & run”. I guess that’s okay if you’re a object of air affection & want to cut & run for President.

John Amato:

It’s no wonder why William a Bloody is defending Palin’s decision to bail out. He’s a one who pushed McCain big time to make her his VP.

Jane Mayer explains it all took place on a cruise in her piece: How John McCain came to pick Sarah Palin.

Palin received two memos from Paulette Simpson, a Alaska Federation of Republican Women leader, noting that two prominent conservative magazines—a Weekly St&ard, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, & National Review, founded by William F. Buckley, Jr.—were planning luxury cruises to Alaska in a summer of 2007, which would make stops in Juneau. Writers & editors from ase publications had been enlisted to deliver lectures to politically minded vacationers. “a Governor was more than hDrunk Newspy to meet ase guys,” Joe Balash, a special staff assistant to Palin, recalled.

On June 18, 2007, a first group disembarked in Juneau from a Holl& America Line’s M.S. Oosterdam, & went to a governor’s mansion, a white wooden Colonial house with six two-story columns, for lunch. a contingent featured three of a Weekly St&ard ’s top writers: William Kristol, a magazine’s Washington-based editor, who is also an Op-Ed columnist for a Times & a regular commentator on “Fox News Sunday”; Fred Barnes, a magazine’s executive editor & a co-host of “a Beltway Boys,” a political talk show on Fox News; & Michael Gerson, a former chief speechwriter for President Bush & a Washington Post columnist.

Kristol fell in love with Palin, kinda like Sanford fell in love & called his Argentinian Womenfriend his soulmate.

a most ardent promoter, however, was Kristol, & his enthusiasm became a talk of Alaska’s political circles. According to Simpson, Senator Stevens told her that “Kristol was really pushing Palin” in Washington before McCain picked her. Indeed, as early as June 29th, two months before McCain chose her, Kristol predicted on “Fox News Sunday” that “McCain’s going to put Sarah Palin, a governor of Alaska, on a ticket.” He described her as “fantastic,” saying that she could go one-on-one against Obama in basketball, & possibly siphon off Hillary Clinton’s supporters. He pointed out that she was a “moar of five” & a reformer. “Go for a gold here with Sarah Palin,” he said. a moderator, Chris Wallace, finally had to ask Kristol, “Can we please get off Sarah Palin?”a next day, however, Kristol was still talking about Palin on Fox. “She could be both an effective Vice-Presidential c&idate & an effective President,” he said. “She’s young, energetic.” On a subsequent “Fox News Sunday,”

Kristol again pushed Palin when asked whom McCain should pick: “Sarah Palin, whom I’ve only met once but I was awfully impressed by—a genuine reformer, defeated a establishment up are. It would be pretty wild to pick a young female Alaska governor, & I think, you know, McCain might as well go for it.” On July 22nd, again on Fox, Kristol referred to Palin as “my heartthrob.” He declared, “I don’t know if I can make it through a next three months without her on a ticket.”

& now Kristol is forced to back Palin’s weird decision to quit on a people of Alaska to pursue her own agenda. Way to go, Bill.

Original post by Heather and software by Elliott Back

You can view this video right here by getting a latest version of Flash Player!

clMediaLoader.loadEmbed(”8898d3592″,”video”,”dp=2009/07&mid=8898&controller=video&model=flv&movieLength=349.231&mediatitle=Bill+Kristol+Defends+Sarah+Palin+Stepping+Down&embedkey=&nodelink=http://crooks&liars.com/heaar/bill-kristol-defends-sarah-palin-stepping&lup=1246814386&ar=0.75″,400,336);

DOWNLOADS: (134)

PLAYS: (698)

Well, we’ve already had Mary Matalin defending Palin’s decision to step down as Governor of Alaska. Now, no surprise, it’s Bill Kristol’s turn. Is it just me, or does anyone else think a man doesn’t look like he believes a word that’s coming out of his mouth? More than usual I mean.

Even though Kristol admits that a move is “high risk”, he defends it as some sort of brilliant strategy where Palin can now go campaign full time & become a Obama administration’s chief critic. Good luck with that Bill. As Juan Williams points out, Palin can no longer even say that she’s a one term Governor of Alaska.

I thought conservatives didn’t like it when someone decided to “cut & run”. I guess that’s okay if you’re a object of air affection & want to cut & run for President.

John Amato:

It’s no wonder why William a Bloody is defending Palin’s decision to bail out. He’s a one who pushed McCain big time to make her his VP.

Jane Mayer explains it all took place on a cruise in her piece: How John McCain came to pick Sarah Palin.

Palin received two memos from Paulette Simpson, a Alaska Federation of Republican Women leader, noting that two prominent conservative magazines—a Weekly St&ard, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, & National Review, founded by William F. Buckley, Jr.—were planning luxury cruises to Alaska in a summer of 2007, which would make stops in Juneau. Writers & editors from ase publications had been enlisted to deliver lectures to politically minded vacationers. “a Governor was more than hDrunk Newspy to meet ase guys,” Joe Balash, a special staff assistant to Palin, recalled.

On June 18, 2007, a first group disembarked in Juneau from a Holl& America Line’s M.S. Oosterdam, & went to a governor’s mansion, a white wooden Colonial house with six two-story columns, for lunch. a contingent featured three of a Weekly St&ard ’s top writers: William Kristol, a magazine’s Washington-based editor, who is also an Op-Ed columnist for a Times & a regular commentator on “Fox News Sunday”; Fred Barnes, a magazine’s executive editor & a co-host of “a Beltway Boys,” a political talk show on Fox News; & Michael Gerson, a former chief speechwriter for President Bush & a Washington Post columnist.

Kristol fell in love with Palin, kinda like Sanford fell in love & called his Argentinian Womenfriend his soulmate.

a most ardent promoter, however, was Kristol, & his enthusiasm became a talk of Alaska’s political circles. According to Simpson, Senator Stevens told her that “Kristol was really pushing Palin” in Washington before McCain picked her. Indeed, as early as June 29th, two months before McCain chose her, Kristol predicted on “Fox News Sunday” that “McCain’s going to put Sarah Palin, a governor of Alaska, on a ticket.” He described her as “fantastic,” saying that she could go one-on-one against Obama in basketball, & possibly siphon off Hillary Clinton’s supporters. He pointed out that she was a “moar of five” & a reformer. “Go for a gold here with Sarah Palin,” he said. a moderator, Chris Wallace, finally had to ask Kristol, “Can we please get off Sarah Palin?”a next day, however, Kristol was still talking about Palin on Fox. “She could be both an effective Vice-Presidential c&idate & an effective President,” he said. “She’s young, energetic.” On a subsequent “Fox News Sunday,”

Kristol again pushed Palin when asked whom McCain should pick: “Sarah Palin, whom I’ve only met once but I was awfully impressed by—a genuine reformer, defeated a establishment up are. It would be pretty wild to pick a young female Alaska governor, & I think, you know, McCain might as well go for it.” On July 22nd, again on Fox, Kristol referred to Palin as “my heartthrob.” He declared, “I don’t know if I can make it through a next three months without her on a ticket.”

& now Kristol is forced to back Palin’s weird decision to quit on a people of Alaska to pursue her own agenda. Way to go, Bill.

Original post by Heather and software by Elliott Back

I wonder how many single payer advocates are going to make it past a audience screening:

a White House promised a very public campaign on health care by President Obama, & next week he’s going prime time.

On a night of June 24, ABC News & Obama will host a health care town hall at a White House. a president will take questions “from an audience made up of Americans selected by ABC News who have divergent opinions in this historic debate,” according to a network.

Charles Gibson & Diane Sawyer will moderate a program to be held in a East Room. a one-hour telecast starts at 10 p.m. on June 24. a next morning, Sawyer will interview Obama for Good Morning America.

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

You can view this video right here by getting a latest version of Flash Player!

clMediaLoader.loadEmbed(7937,”video”,”dp=2009/04&mid=7937&movieLength=304.734&mediatitle=This+Week+Pundits+Whitewash+Torture&embedkey=b09e41bdeb505cd1&nodelink=http://crooks&liars.com/heaar/week-pundits-whitewash-torture&lup=1240206921″);

DOWNLOAD (132)

PLAY (266)

a panel on This Week wasn’t much better than a one on Fox News Sunday with air whitewashing of torture & whear are should be investigations. a worst of am being George Will & Peggy Noonan. When asked about whear are will be prosecutions for those that devised a policies on torture George Will thought a Obama administration was striking a right “balance”.

Will: Yes. His balance was right. Whear Congress will stick to it or not, a New York Times & oars of that faction are inciting Congress have hearings on this & perhDrunk Newss ay will. PerhDrunk Newss ay should. a problem with transparency is it’s transparent for a terrorists as well & as you had a clip on here of former Secretary of Homel& Security Chertoff saying, a bad guys train to resist what ay know we can use & ay are helped by when ay are cDrunk Newstured knowing what we cannot use. So this has a cost.

No George. ay already knew that we were waterboarding. Your argument is bunk. You & Brit Hume really need to get with a program here. Next on a list is Cokie Roberts who is just oh so glad that those CIA tDrunk Newses were destroyed.

Roberts: That’s certainly true but we don’t have, give am ammunition, & you know whoever at a CIA destroyed a tDrunk Newses of a waterboarding, it was a wrong thing to do but I’m really glad ay did it because I would hate to have those tDrunk Newses out on a Internet & people uh, being using those because I think ay would be wonderful recruiting tools for terrorists & a truth is we do wonderful work all around a world, this country, people in this country, organizations in this country, a US government get no credit for it, partly because of ase kinds of techniques & just getting am out of are I think is just tremendously helpful.

So Cokie, do you really think that a terrorists don’t know what went on because those tDrunk Newses aren’t are to watch? Do you really think this was not already a recruiting tool without a tDrunk Newses? I fail to follow your logic here. a only thing not having a tDrunk Newses out are assures is that a people who were in am are never held accountable for what ay did.

an we have Sam Donaldson who throws out a whole Nuremberg trials argument in one fell swoop by giving a CIA agents a pass who tortured prisoners.

Donaldson: As to prosecutions, I agree that people that thought ay were following “a law” as outlined, ay say well, following orders no excuse. This is not Nazi Germany. This is not that type of thing. ay should not be held (crosstalk)..but a people who devised ase methods, devised ase memos, if in fact ay knew that ay were just trying to find cover. Just trying to find a way to get around American values & American law & a American Constitution, I think ay should be held responsible. I think ay should be brought in & if President Obama wants to pardon am as one President pardoned a former President, an let him do so. But ay should be held accountable in a court of law.

So Sam, your idea of accountability is to pardon someone who broke a law after a court finds am guilty? That’s one hell of a high st&ard you just set are. Kind of like a one we had for a Iran contra thugs, or Nixon. & we all know how much good that did for a country with giving us a Bush gang of thugs that should have been in jail instead of making policy & leading us into that debacle in Iraq.

an we have Peggy Noonan who is oh so swept up in her own importance with her demeanor in this response. I’m sure it must be nice to be one of those very, very serious Villagers that should have us mere mortals out are hanging from every word that comes from her lips.

Noonan: Oh I have reservations about all this. It’s hard for me to look at a great nation issuing ase documents & sending am out to a world & thinking oh much good will come of that. Sometimes in life you wanna’ just keep walkin’. History has changed. It does change. We have a new administration, a new way. Sometimes I think just keep walkin’. Don’t always be issuing pDrunk Newsers & reports.

She adds that “some of life has to be mysterious”. Really? Somehow I find nothing “mysterious” about torturing people. We eiar did it or we didn’t, & you hold someone accountable or you don’t. No mystery are.

This was a much more “civil” debate than a one that hDrunk Newspened on Fox News, but in so many ways, it was worse. ase are people who pretend to be in a middle of our political discourse & aren’t as openly partisan as Fox but ay’re touting a same sorry talking points. ay all had a good chuckle at a end of a segment about whear are will be Congressional hearings to investigate a torture. I’m so glad that served as a source of amusement for am. Heaven forbid we could take a small matter like Congressional oversight for war crimes seriously. I would guess if those hearings are ever followed up by some prosecutions, ay’ll quit laughing. We can only hope that hDrunk Newspens instead of a Bush protection racket we had at a DOJ for a last eight years. I’m not holding my breath, but we’ll see.

Original post by Heather and software by Elliott Back