Any politician whose vote is responsible for getting U.S. troops involved in a conflict and is found to be lying about the reason for sending said troops into conflict should be held responsible for the deaths of any service members involved in that conflict. Additionally, before any conflict can be voted on there must be a clear outline of that conflict’s purpose and end goal.
It’s quite ridiculous that we’ve had two nearly 20-year conflicts, Vietnam and Iraq, within living memory that were predicated on lies, and the politicians involved in starting those conflicts faced zero repercussions for it even though it’s been proven that they knew they were lying to the American public.
First off, you’re right. That’s a problem, and I’d like it addressed. Unfortunately, I doubt this could be done, because I don’t trust the courts to act faithfully.
On the one side, proving beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law that a politician knowingly lied about a war will be really hard, and you’ll have a hell of a time finding courts willing to hear the case.
On the other side, if an activist judge really hated some specific congress critter, they’d happily help frame an innocent (well, as innocent as a politician CAN be) man for political purposes.
Better to just release the Diddy and Epstein lists, and the congressional sex offender slush fund and get them that way.
To mitigate this issue going forward, though, it would be prudent to just prohibit congress critters and their immediate families from owning any stocks (with the possible exception of index funds) so they don’t gain financially from staging phony wars.