|
i dont see why a formal process geared toward holding this administration to account for its actions would be problematic.
the bush squad has been a multivariate demonstration of why a parliamentary system, with the possibility of bringing down a government via a no-confidence vote, is preferable to what the americans have. there i no doubt that, under such a system, the bush squad would already be a thing of the past.
the present american system in fact offers little in the way of meaningful checks on the abuse of power in comparison.
in fact, i would think that a prosecution of the bush administration--regardless of how these prosecutions turned out in the end--would be an excellent demonstration of the adage that even folk from the right have repeated from time to time when (and only when) it served their political purposes: no-one is above the law. i think the exercise would send a salutary message, both internationall and domestically, about the centrality of law in the american system. the contrary message has been sent repeatedly since 2001.
the administration obviously sees itself as vulnerable on a number of counts to such a judicial review--whence the deal it cut with the senate to avoid hearings into its wiretapping adventures.
the question of whether such proceedings should happen is seperate from those of whether it will or not in the short run (the scenario could well change after the midterm elections).
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|