Reply to Who is the new CIA head, Gina Haspel

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Who is the new CIA head, Gina Haspel"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I'll do you one better. I'll create a thread. But it'll probably get deleted.

Obama DOJ Forced FBI To Delete 500,000 Fugitives From Background Check Database

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department under Barack Obama directed the FBI to drop more than 500,000 names of fugitives with outstanding arrest warrants from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, acting FBI deputy director David Bowdich testified Wednesday.

Fugitives from justice are barred from buying a firearm under federal law. But what is a fugitive from justice? That definition has been under debate by the FBI and the ATF.

According to The Washington Post, the FBI considered any person with an outstanding arrest warrant to be a fugitive. On the other hand, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives defined a fugitive as someone who has an outstanding arrest warrant and has crossed state lines.

That disagreement was settled at the end of Obama’s second term, when the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel sided with the ATF’s interpretation. Under President Donald Trump, the DOJ defined a fugitive as a person who went to another state to dodge criminal prosecution or evade giving testimony in criminal court, and implemented the Office of Legal Counsel’s decision. The decision meant that around half a million fugitives were removed from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/15/doj-fbi-fugitives-background-check-database/

[/quote]

So, you seem to have given this example as a kind of argument defending Haspel's order to destroy videotapes of torture (which is a crime).  Your argument seems to be -- Haspel ordered something to be deleted but so did the Obama Administration, therefore what she did isn't wrong.  Putting aside that, as a matter of logic, the conclusion that Haspel didn't commit a crime doesn't follow.... Your example is inapposite.  The torture tapes Haspel ordered were (arguably, at a minimum) evidence of a crime.   What the Obama Administration did was interpret who was a fugitive in order to determine whether the fugitive's name should or should not be included in a database.  This does not affect any evidence of the underlying crime committed by the fugitive.

Or maybe your argument is the Obama Administration used the administrative definition/regulation process to keep something from the public eye, therefore it is OK that the Bush Administration used the administrative definition/regulation process to keep something from the public eye?  Well, that is a more apt comparison.  The Bush Administration did indeed, thru the Bybee and You memos, try to redefine what they called "enhanced interrogation" as something that was not "torture".  Unfortunately, your comparison falls apart.  The people who engaged in torture now defend their actions as "following orders" and "legal" even though the memos were subsequently withdrawn and Congress passed the Detainee Treatment Act (2005) to reaffirm existing anti-torture statutes.   By contrast, including or not including someone in a criminal database is not a criminal act.

Sadly, but predictably, people who followed orders ARE now subject to serious criminal penalties if the Executive Branch ever decides to prosecute, plus they are subject to prosecution and suit in other countries (like as is being requested in Germany).

I will explain in a response to your other post why your assertion that no crime was committed is false.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics