Bygones
I grow increasingly uneasy at the spectacle of high-placed criminals being given a pass because of their position: Jane Harman, the unnamed torturers in the CIA, the six high-placed people in the Bush Administration who clearly specified and authorized torture. Granted that these people all have significant positions, and several of them (including Harman) are wealthy. But, really, do we want to continue along the path that high-placed people can commit crimes and be immune from investigation and prosecution? As noted in the Jeff Stein column, Jane Harman did a “completed crime,” yet seemingly it will be ignored.
Surely the law should apply to people regardless of their position and wealth. And to say that “we don’t want to look back, that’s in the past” is beneath contempt: all crimes that are prosecuted are in the past. Just because a crime occurred in the past is no reason to ignore it. What if Bernard Madoff made the case that he should not be prosecuted because his Ponzi scheme occurred in the past?
I fear the US is moving toward increasing lawlessness at the top, since those crimes carry no penalty.
