Change? Job of collecting evidence against BP may go to — BP
From the start it's been embarrassingly clear that BP has alot invested...in America. But at least with the election of Obama to the White House, I had assumed that one or two small changes might be realized.
For example, one of the defining issues of the Bush Administration came from big, litigation-averse industry putting his team in charge of the DOJ and appointing corporate activists to the Supreme Court.
Under Obama, I figured at least some of the ostensible industry investment in the American justice system might be rolled back. BP's influence has been overbearing according to my sense of things in this disaster but I've had to allow that the Bush Administration stripped regulators of power and assets, all of which require time to restore. How much benefit of doubt can I allow before giving up on expectations of 'change that I can believe in'?
RawStory reports that we're letting 'em gather the deep-water evidence for which they'll be accountable?!
...BP and Transocean — which could face heavy penalties if found to be at fault — have said they will raise some of the wreckage if it can be done without doing more damage to the oil well. That would give the two companies responsibility for gathering up the very evidence that could be used against them.
Don't forget that all of the dead animals and damage that gets destroyed or disappears is all that much less that BP is liable for in judgements of compensation and penalties the corporate person owes to American fisherman destroyed by their catastrophe in the GOM.
They're already disposing of BP-branded whate carcasses. Remember who really made the decision on dispersants and locking out the media and... How much are we just going to roll over? I may have to rethink the idea of 'change' just a little bit, is that what you're going to tell me?