I wonder, will the ICC consider a warrant for FFOTUS arrest?
I think the notion of FFOTUS, Musk, Miller, etc facing a new generation of Nuremberg tribunal to be a nice thought for this Monday afternoon.
@karlauerbach What would be the specific charge?
@volkris Crimes against Humanity.
@karlauerbach again, specifically what?
Broad hand waving doesn't do any good. Nothing happens without specific charges.
@volkris We could begin by taking a look at the charges against Duterte, which boils down, on page 13, to a charge of crimes against humanity by murder.
Whether "murder" would stick to the Maga crew is a matter of factual analysis, ranging from the handling of Covid to deportation to a country where death is almost a certainty.
I would suspect that other forms of crimes against humanity - such as separation of families and what could be argued as genocide against immigrants, particularly of certain religions (Islam) or origin (Latin America).
But my larger point is that the FFOTUS administration is creating events that ought to be evaluated for criminality by non-US eyes.
"W arrant of Arrest for M r Rodrigo Roa Duterte"
https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/CourtRecords/0902ebd180aeb09d.pdf
@karlauerbach again, the operational ideal of taking someone to the ICC over crimes against humanity and seeking a warrant for arrest isn't just vague handwaving that you don't like someone or their policies.
It's not about here's the person, now find the crime.
It's about bringing specific charges, which sounds opposite from your larger point.
Such a use of the ICC undermines its legitimacy and gets us nowhere.
@volkris I am kinda of the belief that splitting families, due-process-less deportations to hostile countries (and likely death) are definitely in the category of criminal, even genocidal acts committed by a head of state (not unlike Duterte's actions). TFG's handling of Covid was an effort in deception that led to people dying, but we can't say exactly which people - and that same deception leading to death is being practiced by FFOTUS and RFK - those are acts less clearly criminal,(not because they are not horrific, but rather because the chain of causation is indirect) but they do have the effect of leaving people dead.
@karlauerbach I mean you can believe whatever you want, but you're talking about going to institutions to impose your beliefs when they, for better or worse, don't really agree with you.
You can yell at the umpire all you want, but if he doesn't agree with you about where you kind of believe the strike zone should be, you're not going to make any headway that way.
And that's my point. It sounds like you're trying to follow a strategy that is not only futile but can be actually counterproductive, actually supporting the exact behaviors that you are against.
If you want to improve things, especially if you want to convince other people over to your personal beliefs, then you have to think strategically, not just act on reflex like that.
@volkris Your note has me confused. How can holding FFOTUS and his gang accountable be counterproductive?
The ICC has a moral compass as well as a legal foundation; it's not a rogue organization. And other judicial efforts - such as the Nuremberg trials (and their counterparts in post WW-II Japan) and the Israel trial of Eichmann - all suggest that there is both legal and social value in such procedures.
The things that the trump-gang are doing are clearly criminal, the most overt being the separation of children from their parents and the KGB-style round-ups and deportations.
Our own institutions are proving inadequate and it would be good to see the moral and legal authority of bodies such as the ICC take a stand by considering whether to issue indictments.
One of the books on my shelf is the play "The Deputy" about the failure of the Pope to call out the Nazi holocaust as it was happening.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Deputy