Friday, January 20, 2006
George Bush: John Brown He's not
This really is “divine right” isn’t it? Bush appears to be convinced that he can do as he wants in regards to the law, because he is a) George W. Bush, b)President of the United States, c) God’s Chosen Instrument of Vengeance, d) All of the above.
The man is dangerous.
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:12:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Bush's misuse of Presidential power
From Capitol Hill Blue
Bush Leagues
Bush's misuse of Presidential power
By DALE McFEATTERS
Jan 13, 2006, 06:48
Over White House objections and by convincing,
veto-proof margins, Congress voted late last year to
ban the torture of anyone in U.S. government custody.
When President Bush signed that ban last month, he
added a disclaimer, saying that nothing in the ban
affected his prerogatives in a time of national
emergency to fight the war on terrorism how he chose.
In other words, he reserved the right to torture even
though Congress explicitly outlawed it.
And he used the same justification for bypassing the
courts and ordering the National Security Agency to
conduct warrantless eavesdropping on American
citizens.
Bush also invoked this same authority to assert that
he could hold U.S. citizens indefinitely, without
trial or counsel, simply on his say-so.
Taking an expansionist view of a new law on the
treatment of the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detainees, the
administration insists that it bars federal courts
from any jurisdiction over the detainees, "including
application for writs of habeas corpus." The right to
be brought before a judge is fundamental to civil
liberties, but the administration has decided it can
selectively suspend that right. It has asked the
federal courts to dismiss all detainee lawsuits,
effectively leaving the detainees' fate in the hands
of a legal process effectively controlled by the
president.
The assertion of these powers has its roots in the War
Powers Act of 1973, a controversial law, parts of
which are widely believed to be unconstitutional, and
resolutions on the war on terror and the invasion of
Iraq that Congress passed post-9/11. And the White
House says the emergency powers will last as long as
the war on terror _ in other words, until the
president declares the war on terror over.
Surely Congress did not intend such broad and
open-ended powers. When Congress returns from its
recess, an early and essential item of business is for
lawmakers to clarify what powers they did and did not
intend the president to have in the war on terror. It
is not a good precedent that the president has begun
to attach disclaimers to laws with which he disagrees.
Copyright 2005 Capitol Hill Blue
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/printer_7988.shtml
The man is dangerous.
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:12:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Bush's misuse of Presidential power
From Capitol Hill Blue
Bush Leagues
Bush's misuse of Presidential power
By DALE McFEATTERS
Jan 13, 2006, 06:48
Over White House objections and by convincing,
veto-proof margins, Congress voted late last year to
ban the torture of anyone in U.S. government custody.
When President Bush signed that ban last month, he
added a disclaimer, saying that nothing in the ban
affected his prerogatives in a time of national
emergency to fight the war on terrorism how he chose.
In other words, he reserved the right to torture even
though Congress explicitly outlawed it.
And he used the same justification for bypassing the
courts and ordering the National Security Agency to
conduct warrantless eavesdropping on American
citizens.
Bush also invoked this same authority to assert that
he could hold U.S. citizens indefinitely, without
trial or counsel, simply on his say-so.
Taking an expansionist view of a new law on the
treatment of the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detainees, the
administration insists that it bars federal courts
from any jurisdiction over the detainees, "including
application for writs of habeas corpus." The right to
be brought before a judge is fundamental to civil
liberties, but the administration has decided it can
selectively suspend that right. It has asked the
federal courts to dismiss all detainee lawsuits,
effectively leaving the detainees' fate in the hands
of a legal process effectively controlled by the
president.
The assertion of these powers has its roots in the War
Powers Act of 1973, a controversial law, parts of
which are widely believed to be unconstitutional, and
resolutions on the war on terror and the invasion of
Iraq that Congress passed post-9/11. And the White
House says the emergency powers will last as long as
the war on terror _ in other words, until the
president declares the war on terror over.
Surely Congress did not intend such broad and
open-ended powers. When Congress returns from its
recess, an early and essential item of business is for
lawmakers to clarify what powers they did and did not
intend the president to have in the war on terror. It
is not a good precedent that the president has begun
to attach disclaimers to laws with which he disagrees.
Copyright 2005 Capitol Hill Blue
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/printer_7988.shtml
