Glenn Greenwald: Yeah. So, I think - I think what you're going to see is increasing use of violence on the part of Police forces, on the part of even federal authorities, if the protest movement grows enough, and it is going to be designed to intimidate and deter people from participating.
Rob Kall: The federal forces are going to get violent?
Glenn Greenwald: Well, I think if the protest movement continues to grow and sustain then yeah, I think you are definitely going to see more state violence in response.
Rob Kall: As an attorney, what's your suggestion for the movement to do? You are a Constitutional attorney and if the State becomes more, more violent, what do the people do?
Glenn Greenwald: Well, I think, I think they've been doing exactly the right thing, which is continuing to insist on the right of the assembly being very aggressive and persistent in their demands , but at the same time maintaining the posture of non-violence. I think that's the best success to the Movement and at the same time they can take legal action to ask Federal Courts to protect their right to assemble, as they've done in Cleveland and in other areas, but I think the movement is doing exactly the right thing. I think, they should continue to grow and demand its right to assemble and its rightto free speech and the right to petition the government but not engage in the kinds of actions that will justify police abuse.
Rob Kall: Now, who are bad guys? This is all about treating the elites totally differently, better than the 99 Percent. Who are the bad guys who are perpetuating this and making it worse?
Glenn Greenwald: Well, I mean, certainly the people in political power are abdicating their responsibility to limit one another through the force of law and to limit those who are most in power. And it's the people here who - have financial power who decided that they can completely disregard the constraints of law without any consequence, so of course Wall Street tycoons in investment banks that engage in systematic fraud that precipitated the 2008 Financial crisis are "
Rob Kall: Wait, wait. There are the bad guys who should be prosecuted. I meant the bad guys who were not prosecuted. Who are the people who are - you know "
Glenn Greenwald: Well, the responsibility to prosecute lies with the Executive branch in Article II of the Constitution. It said, "The President shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed," and it's the Department of Justice iresponsible for prosecuting people who violate the Criminal Law, the Federal Criminal Law. They're the ones who have the jurisdictions to prosecute Bush torturers and eavesdroppers and to prosecute Wall Street criminals as well and they've abdicated that responsibility.
Rob Kall: So, I'm looking for names. Are you talking about Obama? His aides? Is it Eric Holder?
Glenn Greenwald: Yeah, of course. And Obama is the President and Eric Holder is the Attorney General and they run the Justice Department and they're the ones with responsibility.
Rob Kall: So, would you have a conversation with them? Have you talked to them?
Glenn Greenwald: I mean, I talked to people in the Justice Department. I've never talked to either President Obama or Attorney General Holder but, you know, I think for a while, there was a desire on the part of the Justice Department, including Holder, to investigate Bush crimes, to be more aggressive about Wall Street investigations and there was pressure, quite openly, and publicly placed on them from the White House not to do so. Rahm Emanuel went on ABC News and said the desire of the President is they asked Holder not to investigate. Robert Gibbs said the same thing from the podium of White House when he was the Press Secretary. And so, there was clear pressure both privately and publicly exerted by the White House on the Justice Department to refrain from engaging in these kinds of Investigations.
Rob Kall: Now, you've talked about how they use this idea of looking forward and justice and criminal prosecution is all about looking backward. Could you talk a little bit about that?
Glenn Greenwald: Well, the Orwellian cliche that has been invented to justify shielding Bush criminals from accountabilities is that we should look forward and not backward. And as you said, the whole idea is preposterous because all crime is by definition, committed in the past, not the future. There's no such thing as a crime committed in the future, and you know, if it were the case that we were to decide that we wanted to be a lenient society and adopt this mentality of look forward not backwards, you know, you could argue it but at least it would be legitimate if it were applied across the board.
So, if you are somebody who, you know, rob the bank and you get caught by the Police and the Police come arrest you and you say, "Look, officer. You got me. I did what you claimed I did," but you know, that was in the past , that was three months ago. Why go digging in the past? Isn't it more important to look in the future? If you got away with the crimes you committed based on the plea, then I think that, you know, you can have all, you know, now under your (garbled) but at least to rule of law would be equally applied, But of course, of course, this whole idea of look forward not backward applies only to political and financial elites. Ordinary Americans can't avail themselves of this kind of defense.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
