President Bush signs the “Military Commissions Act of 2006″ today in the Rose Garden, a bill that will not grant detainees legal counsel. “Also, it specifically bars detainees from filing habeas corpus petitions challenging their detentions in federal courts.” The new law sets the stage for what many analysts believe will be yet another historic showdown between the courts, the president, and Congress.
With the FBI investigating Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA) over “familial influence peddling,” USA Today notes that lobbying groups employed 30 congressional family members last year, who lobbied for $750 million in earmarks. “There are no laws against this brand of nepotism.”
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) is blocking the confirmation of Bush-nominated Judge Janet Neff because she may have “once attended a commitment ceremony for a lesbian couple.”
The number of embedded journalists reporting in Iraq has dropped to its lowest level. “Some journalists blame the decline on Pentagon bureaucracy, the reporting restrictions journalists face, and pressure by some commanders to avoid ‘negative’ coverage.”
Scientists yesterday reported the first direct evidence linking the 2002 collapse of the Larsen B Antarctic ice shelf to human-induced global warming.
The U.S. population surpassed 300 million today. While the United States accounts for just five percent of the world’s population, it consumes nearly 25 percent of the world’s energy.
Lester Crawford, the former FDA chief who resigned two months after being confirmed for the job, “will plead guilty today to charges that he hid his ownership of stock in food and drug companies that his agency regulated.” “[D]uring a period when the Crawfords held shares in Pepsico, a soft drink and snack food company, he was chairman of an F.D.A. Obesity Working Group that among other tasks was reviewing calorie content labeling for soft drinks.”
“Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA) acknowledged Monday that his lawyer, whom he has paid more than $38,000 in the last two months, is talking with the Justice Department about the congressman’s relationship with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.” Doolittle has denied he is under investigation for corruption.
3,000: The death toll for coalition military forces in Iraq, according to a CNN tally.
And finally: Fantasy Congress Tip #1 - Take Bob Ney or Tom DeLay off your draft list. “Some enterprising folks at Claremont McKenna College, who clearly have too much time on their hands, have come up with the wonk’s answer to fantasy football: Fantasy Congress.” Start playing here.
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Where does Republican corruption end ?? Does it have an end at all ??
October 17th, 2006 at 9:02 amFantasy Congress is interesting. But as soon as I saw that Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) was one of the top point earners last month, I knew the site’s metrics used to measure success don’t match my own. C’mon, Ted Stevens??
October 17th, 2006 at 9:05 amFOR THE TEXT OF THE MILITARY COMMISSION ACT OF 2006:
http://thomas.loc.gov/ cgi-bin/ query/ D?c109:4:./ temp/ ~c109n5QoOB::
October 17th, 2006 at 9:07 amScientists yesterday reported the first direct evidence linking the 2002 collapse of the Larsen B Antarctic ice shelf to human-induced global warming.
They have a satellite photo of Jason Hendler with an “urban heat footprint machine” doing his duty. That and a hammer and chisel.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:10 amwith a whip of his pen the Decider will have eliminated Habeas Corpus. Wonderful thing all these Republicans have done to our Republic, kill the very thing that set us apart from the rest of the world. Gutting our Constitution day after day. Why the hell aren’t we in the streets? This is a horrible day in America—habeas corpus died (rip 1215-2006)!!!!
HAD ENOUGH YET? VOTE DEMOCRAT COME NOVEMBER 7TH–LET’S TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:16 amDo I actually see the words “habeas corpus” in a TP item? There may yet be hope. Now, as a follow-up, can they give us a link to the President’s signing statement that will undoubtedly accompany this ceremony? There’s will the real controversy and dialog will begin.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:17 amWith a whip of his pen the Decider will have gotten rid of that pesky Habeas Corpus. Are you proud Republicans? you have gutted our Constitution and killed the very thing that set us apart in the world.
Had enough yet????????
October 17th, 2006 at 9:18 amoops I think I double posted. Sorry…………..
October 17th, 2006 at 9:18 amToday we are all potential Unlawful Enemy Combatants. Our fate will be decided solely, without check or balance, by a president…Who as a young child put firecrackers in frogs and blew them up…Who as a young adult got himself addicted to alcohol and cocaine and has never completely recovered…Who as a governor laughed when he executed a retarded person…Who claims God talks to him and directed him to attack virtually defenseless people who were no threat to us…Who killed up to 600,000 of these people, half of whom may be women and children…and at least a portion of the reason was revenge for an attempt on his father’s life.
This is who will now decide whether you and I are Unlawful Enemy Combatants to be thrown in a far away prison, torturted, potentially forever, with no rights to counsel or to hear the charges or see the evidence against us.
Welcome to the new America, the Year is MCA (MILITARY Commissions Act) Day 1.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:19 amShe may have attended a committment ceremony of a lesbian couple? I wonder if Brownback should resign from Congress because there may be a homosexual living in Kansas. If Brownback hates gays and lesbians so much - and their supporters - then why doesn’t he pass legislation to round them up and put them in concentration camps? I mean after all he beleives they are a threat, right? He should come clean about what he wants to do and we’ll see how his next election goes. Kansas’s red state status of late is becoming lighter and lighter.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:25 amI think the Global Warming problem is being way overblown much like all the concern over population explosion concerns in the 60s and 70s. I believe there is a purpose for political groups to use the fear of environmental distruction to further their goals, whether it is true or not. But is there anyone here with a link with information that shows not only that global warming is happening but that it is caused by man? (i.e. there has been warming and cooling cycles for millions of years and also a warming trend on Mars)
October 17th, 2006 at 9:30 amre: US Population
300 Million, so 99 million blind people following Heir Bush to the end.
Also not in todays Thinkfast, mandatory Anthrax vaccinations are returning for military and contractors. Whats sad is these will probably cause more problems, and deaths than the Anthrax “terrorism act” we last went through. Ahh but to keep the sheeple in fear, and mission accomplished. http://www.anthraxvaccine.org/index.shtml
October 17th, 2006 at 9:37 amThey have been working to this day since before they arrested the New York 8. And they have finally accomplished it. 800 years of legal protection wiped out by the boy king and his rubber stamp parliament.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:38 am#11 - I’m going to go with the Pres. Bush concept of “You have to prove it’s NOT happening”. You know, like Iraq had to “prove” they didn’t have WMD’s or we would attack.
So, rather than prove that global warming is happening, YOU have to prove that global warming ISN’T happening and that humans are NOT contributing to global warming.
If that type of argument is good enough for Pres. Bush, it should be good enough for you too, right?
October 17th, 2006 at 9:39 amThe Military Commission Act is a scary read. Even though`Sec. 948d. Jurisdiction of military commissions’ specifies:
“Sec. 948a. Definitions” places no limit on who an who is a “UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT” actually is. Think this will pass Constitional review?
Any lawyers here read “SUBCHAPTER VII–PUNITIVE MATTERS -> SEC. 7. HABEAS CORPUS MATTERS.” and willing to give an opinion?
PDF Here.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:39 amhttp://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/t2GPO/http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/ cgi-bin/ getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s3930enr.txt.pdf
Marie, “Why the hell aren’t we in the streets?”
“The Privilege of the Writ of Habeus Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public safety may require it.†U.S. Constitution, Article I.
Taking to the streets would be all the excuse Bush needs to arrest you and suspend Habeus Corpus. You could be locked up indefinitely, without access to a lawyer, without a hearing before a judge, without a trial.
There are reports elsewhere about the possibility that Halliburton has built some 800 camps around the country capable of holding tens of thousands of people. And the military has developed a microwave weapon specifically for use on civil populations.
That great experiment, government of the people, by the people and for the people, has failed.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:41 amI think the Global Warming problem is being way overblown much like all the concern over population explosion concerns in the 60s and 70s. I believe there is a purpose for political groups to use the fear of environmental distruction to further their goals, whether it is true or not. But is there anyone here with a link with information that shows not only that global warming is happening but that it is caused by man? (i.e. there has been warming and cooling cycles for millions of years and also a warming trend on Mars)
Comment by paul — October 17, 2006 @ 9:30 am
What an idiot.
Rebuttal to idiot point #1: the Ehrlich’s predictions 40 years ago of environmental disaster were not widely shared in the scientific community. This is nothing but a straw man argument. Give it up, Paul.
Rebuttal to idiot point #2: the world’s scientific community cannot be simply characterized or dismissed as “political groups” using fear to further their alleged political goals. This is another straw man argument.
Rebuttal to idiot point #3: The National Academy of Sciences, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and thousands of qualified scientific experts have conclude that man’s industrial activities are causing greatly accelerated warming of the earth. Look it up yourself, idiot. The information is everywhere around you.
Rebuttal to idiot point #4: Mars? Is this where you have been lately, Paul? Is this why you are completely unaware of the science of global warming? By the way, idiot, the relative climates of Mars, Earth, and Venus demonstrate the powerful heat trapping effects of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. This is why Venus is super hot and Mars is super cold.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:43 amSome enterprising folks at Claremont McKenna College, who clearly have too much time on their hands, have come up with the wonk’s answer to fantasy football: Fantasy Congress.â€
Finally a perfect name for the Republican led Congress. The Do Nothing Fantasy Congress. Wasn’t there a Republican Contract with America written at one time? I wonder how that is going.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:46 amWith the usual pomp and crappy speech, bull shit bush accomplished what he has always wanted, to be king…With out even a shot or wimper he signed the most dreadful bill in our history….I guess that fit’s the worst installed president in our history signing the worst bill…..Blessings, we need them.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:57 am[…] Think Progress: President Bush signs the “Military Commissions Act of 2006″ today in the Rose Garden, a bill that will not grant detainees legal counsel. “Also, it specifically bars detainees from filing habeas corpus petitions challenging their detentions in federal courts.†The new law sets the stage for what many analysts believe will be yet another historic showdown between the courts, the president, and Congress. […]
October 17th, 2006 at 10:05 amJust watched Chimpy sign the detainee bill into law. The scary thing to me is the language “the terrorists this, terrorists, terrorists” The bill assumes everyone being prosecuted is a terrorist. Who the Hell decided who is a terrorist and who isn’t? I’m sure Bush would love to include dissenters as terrorists. This is some scary shit going on in this country.
Also read yesterday Saddam’s trial will reconvene most likely with a verdict NOV. 5th. Nice timing, assholes.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:10 amI pray to the Gods in heaven that George W. Bush someday soon be brought to account for his crimes against humanity.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:11 amJuly 4, 1776 - October 17, 2006
United States of America
Rest in Peace
October 17th, 2006 at 10:17 amWhat does the signing statement attached to the Military Commissions bill say?
Anyone?
Is this an issue that rates a little more attention, now, Think Progress?
October 17th, 2006 at 10:20 amWhat a day…
“A long long time ago
October 17th, 2006 at 10:24 amI can still remember how
the Constitution used to govern us
And I knew if I had my way
I’d protest over rights each day -
to guarantee our freedoms is a must.
But this new bill it made me so sick
I knew we’d have to ditch these pols quick
Bad news for our country
So much sham effrontery
I can’t remember where I was
When I realized our world was “bustâ€
Overwhelming feelings made me cuss
Our rights, are lost to us…”
It says “Terror, terror, terror, terrorist, freedom, terror, terror, terror, terror, no torture, terrorist, terrorist, terror,
October 17th, 2006 at 10:26 am#17 - RealScientist,
October 17th, 2006 at 10:29 amOn point #4, you seem to claim that a lack of CO2 is the reason that Mars is so frigid. Actually, CO2 is a major component of the Martian atmosphere. Distance from the Sun is the primary reason for the frigid conditions there. Also the atmosphere is so thin that the greenhouse effect is minimal and the planet’s core seems to be almost solid at this time.
Today we are all potential Unlawful Enemy Combatants.
Our fate will be decided solely, without check or balance, by a president…Who as a young child put firecrackers in frogs and blew them up…Who as a young adult got himself addicted to alcohol and cocaine and has never completely recovered…Who as a governor laughed when he executed a retarded person…Who claims God talks to him and directed him to attack virtually defenseless people who were no threat to us…Who killed up to 600,000 of these people, half of whom may be women and children…and at least a portion of the reason was revenge for an attempt on his father’s life.
This is who will now decide whether you and I are Unlawful Enemy Combatants to be thrown in a far away prison, torturted, potentially forever, with no rights to counsel or to hear the charges or see the evidence against us.
Welcome to the new America, the Year is MCA (MILITARY Commissions Act) Day 1.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:32 amBushy better have his mommy pack his long underwear when we send his dumb ass to Mars.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:32 amPresident Bush signs the “Military Commissions Act of 2006″ today in the Rose Garden, a bill that will not grant detainees legal counsel. “Also, it specifically bars detainees from filing habeas corpus petitions challenging their detentions in federal courts.†The new law sets the stage for what many analysts believe will be yet another historic showdown between the courts, the president, and Congress
OH here it is, after the fact. Thanks.
October 17th, 2006 at 11:02 amOn point #4, you seem to claim that a lack of CO2 is the reason that Mars is so frigid. Actually, CO2 is a major component of the Martian atmosphere. Also the atmosphere is so thin that the greenhouse effect is minimal and the planet’s core seems to be almost solid at this time.
Comment by WaltTheMan — October 17, 2006 @ 10:29 am
Ummm, not to be too hard on you, but if the atmosphere is “so thin” how can there be much CO2 there? It doesn’t matter in relative terms (i.e. if CO2 is 100% of the atmosphere), only in absolute terms. If Mars had Venus’s atmosphere, it would be much hotter than it is. Likewise, Venus’s temperature cannot be explained solely by its position from the Sun. If it had Earth’s atmosphere, Venus would be much cooler, in fact not much warmer than Earth.
October 17th, 2006 at 11:02 amheard on sam…
today begins “National CHARACTER COUNTS Week”
no shit…
National Character Counts Week Proclamation
By the President of the United States of America
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ news/ releases/ 2001/ 10/ 20011023-23.html
http://www.charactercounts.org/
October 17th, 2006 at 11:09 amWell, he signed it & here’s the AP’s worthless take on it.
By NEDRA PICKLER Associated Press Writer
October 17,2006 | WASHINGTON — President Bush on Tuesday signed legislation authorizing tough interrogation of terror suspects and smoothing the way for trials before military commissions, calling it a “vital tool” in a time of war.
Bush’s plan for treatment of the terror suspects became law just six weeks after he acknowledged that the CIA had been secretly interrogating suspected terrorists overseas and pressed Congress to quickly give authority to try them in military commissions.
“With the bill I’m about to sign, the men our intelligence officials believe orchestrated the murder of nearly 3,000 innocent people will face justice,” Bush said.
Among those the United States hopes to try are Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the accused mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, as well as Ramzi Binalshibh, an alleged would-be 9/11 hijacker, and Abu Zubaydah, who was believed to be a link between Osama bin Laden and many al-Qaida cells.
“It is a rare occasion when a president can sign a bill that he knows will save American lives,” Bush said. “I have that privilege this morning.”
Bush signed the bill in the White House East Room, at a table with a sign positioned on the front that said “Protecting America.” He said he signed it in memory of the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks.
October 17th, 2006 at 11:34 amBush will have all his naval forces in place near Iran, by this weekend, so expect the October Surprise attack on Iran by the end of the month > probably near or on Halloween > Bush acts satanic so he might as well set off WWIII on that day of the dead!
October 17th, 2006 at 11:36 amIf it had Earth’s atmosphere, Venus would be much cooler, in fact not much warmer than Earth.
I worded this very badly. What I meant to say is that Venus would be much cooler than it presently is, to the point where it would be only slightly warmer than earth, instead of the burning inferno that it is. Busy day, fast fingers, slow mind!
October 17th, 2006 at 11:45 amI don’t think that an attack on Iran is the October surprise. Trying this might even backfire on them. They will save the attack on Iran until it appears that Bush will be impeached. Then they will start a full blown war and say “well, you can’t impeach the President now!”
October 17th, 2006 at 11:46 am#15 S.D.,
Actually, the term “unlawful enemy combatant” and “alien” is defined:
`(1) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- (A) The term `unlawful enemy combatant’ means–
`(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces); or
`(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.
`(3) ALIEN- The term `alien’ means a person who is not a citizen of the United States.
October 17th, 2006 at 12:00 pm#31 - RealScientist,
October 17th, 2006 at 12:08 pmMars currently has an atmospheric pressure equivalent to .7% of Earth’s. This is because the mass of Mars is not sufficient to impede the egress of atmospheric gases, even given its distance from the Sun. If Mar’s mass were equal to that of Earth, its surface temperature would be about twice that of Earth, assuming that it maintained the mixture of gases that it contains in its atmosphere at this time. Earth scientists theorize that our planet started out with a density of CO2 about a third of that currently present in our planetary neighbors. Actually all three planets started out on about equal footing. Earth was far enough from the Sun so that the lighter gases were not boiled off and massive enough so that they did not escape. Our neighbors were less fortunate and the lose of these gases created uninhabitable environments. Somehow about 4 billion years ago, a form of self-replicating and self-repairing DNA/RNA either seeded or developed on Earth (To date, I have been able to understand how this event occurred, it is as near to God as I have ever been…). Over eons, these molecular factories created life forms(?) that combined the atmospheric CO2 with calcium and swept sulfur compounds from the atmosphere and about three billion years ago started to construct carbon based life forms that are the basis of life today. The sulfur based life forms that started the process still exist in the areas of mineral springs and volcanic vents.
#17. RealScientist. I appreciate your opinions. However, if you want to prove to me that you are intolerant of people that have opposing views to you, you have succeeded. If you want to convince me to change my mind about global warming, provide me something concrete (i.e. not, most scientists agree, just believe it, you’re an idiot if you don’t get on board, etc.). where is the information that the world is getting significantly warmer, and more importantly, that humans are the cause? If you are so passionate and well versed on the subject, that information should be readily available.
October 17th, 2006 at 12:12 pmRealScientist > Bush never does rational things, so that is why I believe he will launch an attack on Iran before the November election! Rove believes a new war would force Americans to rally for patriotism > worked for Hitler, so Rove believes it will work?!
October 17th, 2006 at 12:12 pm#17. RealScientist. If you want to convince me to change my mind about global warming, provide me something concrete. where is the information that the world is getting significantly warmer, and more importantly, that humans are the cause?
Comment by paul — October 17, 2006 @ 12:12 pm
Paul,
Obviously you are beyond my help. The information, as it has been stated many times here and many other places, is found in a vast scientific literature on the subject, widely available and well summarized in reports by the IPCC and NAS. I am not going to explain to you how to use Google to find it (it would take only seconds). You are not debating here in good faith. You are simply chanting the same anti-reality again and again, and it is an insult to readers at this site. So please shut up already.
What a total jerk.
October 17th, 2006 at 12:34 pmWalt,
While you seem well versed in the subject, you seem to be posing a hypothetical when you say “if Mars had the mass of Earth”. I don’t know the exact level of CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere, but I believe it is around 1%, which is greater than what you say is the density of the Martian atmosphere. Aren’t you really just saying Mars can’t get as hot as Earth in part because of the distance from the Sun (agreed) but also in part because it doesn’t have the mass to hold enough atmosphere? That seems to be essentially the point I was making. The bottom line is that CO2 is a major greenhouse gas wherever it occurs among the inner planets because of its large cross-section for IR radiation.
October 17th, 2006 at 12:38 pmI’m with you Jay, I believe this merry bunch of war mongers will do what ever it take’s to stay in power. Since timing is everything with all these evil doers it will be big….They will make up crap and bomb the hell out of any and all to reach their end, total domination…
Note the short straw bunch have arrived to give us our daily dose of bull shit……Blessings all
October 17th, 2006 at 12:38 pm“President Bush signs the “Military Commissions Act of 2006″ today in the Rose Garden”
Today marks another step followed by the neo-fascist in their plan for world domination, the PNAC plan. A plan which included a “new Pearl Harbor” ( 9/11 ) to start.
Wake up America, we have let the fascists take over out government. They have already killed innocent americans by in the least letting 9/11 happen, I believe they did it themselves. Why are some of the supposed 9/11 hijackers still alive and living in the middle east? We have been lied to.
Now Bush has the tools needed to take care of any dissenters. All they need to dois have another “Diabold” election and they have free reign. Already Bush is calling the Democrats terrorist enablers. Coincidence? I think not…….
We are in deep trouble, we have madmen at the helm of our government.
October 17th, 2006 at 12:39 pm#39 - Paul,
October 17th, 2006 at 12:42 pmGlobal warming is real. I was only pointing out to RealScientist that his premise for the relative temperatures for Venus and Mars were not in line with what actually happened on those two planets.
My Uncle lives in a shore house that has been in thefamily for three hundred years. Starting three years ago, he would have tidal floods about twice a year (But never before.). Over the last year, there were 7. I see a trend.
We could possibly get the entire Military Commission Act thrown out. I’m not talking about bits and pieces of it either.
Simply stated it was unconstitutional for the president to sign this into law today. Because of a little thing in our constitution called the Pocket Veto, the act had actually been vetoed several days ago.
It works like this: If a bill sits on the president’s desk for ten days WHILE CONGRESS IS OUT OF SESSION, the bill is considered to be vetoed!
That’s simple enough for even THIS president to understand.
The bill was vetoed on Sunday, Oct. 8th, and signing it today was illegal.
PLEASE CALL ALL YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND REMIND THEM OF THIS. Thanks.
October 17th, 2006 at 12:44 pmWaltTheMan,
My apologies. I just looked up the CO2 concentration in the Earth’s atmosphere and it is about 0.05%. I was confusing it with Argon, which is 1.3%. In any case, I am not here to debate the fine points of Martian atmospheric dynamics, but to poke my pointy stick at the global warming denialists like Paul who come here to obfuscate and lie about the subject. They make me sick. Global warming is the biggest threat to ever face humankind and these self-appointed fossil fuel industry representatives are doing everything they can to stall critical action needed now.
October 17th, 2006 at 12:44 pmWaltTheMan,
I would like to point out that with respect to Venus, David Goodstein, author of The End of the Age of Oil, makes the same point I have made.
http://pr.caltech.edu/ periodicals/ CaltechNews/ articles/ v38/ oil.html
October 17th, 2006 at 12:47 pmRandy, are you saying it is condiered to be vetoed by default, under law, if not signed in that time frame? Is it business days, or real time days? This is interesting.
October 17th, 2006 at 12:52 pmRandy, while you’re post may be a ray of hope, do you have a link or something to back it up…Please…..Blessings
October 17th, 2006 at 12:59 pmWhat day did the last branch of Congress approve this bill - I cannot remember?
“Pocket Veto
The disapproval of a bill brought about by an indirect rejection by the president. The president is granted ten days, Sundays excepted, to review a piece of legislation passed by Congress. Should he fail to sign a piece of legislation and Congress has adjourned within those days, the bill automatically dies. The process of indirect rejection is known as a pocket veto. (also see “veto”)”"
WOW, now if only “someone” would listen to “us”… that is the kicker.
So, the bill just dies then. Am I reading this correctly? I am astounded!
October 17th, 2006 at 1:03 pmThe bill was not presented to the President until October 10, 2006. Ten days have not elapsed. The Military Commissions Act is now the law of the land.
October 17th, 2006 at 1:03 pmArticle I, Section 7, Clause 2
If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.
From what I recall from another thread or post, this bill was not actually presented to the president until around 10/09/06 (something like that; please correct this date someone if it is inaccurate). If true, then it does not yet qualify as a “pocket veto”. The Constitution does not specify when Congress has to present passed bills to the president. They can hold it as long as they like (or until their session ends.)
Sadly, we’re going to have to rely on the lack of constitutional muster within this bill to get it thrown out. That means that someone who has standing (anyone imprisoned under it) to go into court. The thing is, there is a question as to whether or not they are allowed to challenge this bill (the way this bill is written.) I am pretty sure that Congress cannot pass a “supraconstitutional” bill, so there may be hope for its dismise. Eventually.
October 17th, 2006 at 1:04 pmSharon, here is a link - I just looked it up myself:
http://www.senate.gov/ reference/ glossary_term/ pocket_veto.htm
pocket veto - The Constitution grants the President 10 days to review a measure passed by the Congress. If the President has not signed the bill after 10 days, it becomes law without his signature. However, if Congress adjourns during the 10-day period, the bill does not become law.
I took the other wording in thw above post from one of the other numerous links I opened up, in order to clarify this information.
October 17th, 2006 at 1:06 pmWayne, so sad we all jump at any SHRED of hope of defeat as far as this bill is concerned.
Not to sound too dumb, but I do not have clarity on the issue of when the bill is passed to the president versus when Congress passed the bill… does anyone have any more info on this?
October 17th, 2006 at 1:10 pmKat,
A detailed explanation:
When the bill has been agreed to in identical form by both bodies–either: 1) without amendment by the Senate; 2) by House concurrence in Senate amendments; 3) by Senate concurrence in House amendments; or 4) by agreement in both bodies to the conference report–a copy of the bill is enrolled for presentation to the President.
The preparation of the enrolled bill is a painstaking and important task because it must reflect precisely the effect of all amendments, either by way of deletion, substitution, or addition, agreed to by both bodies. The enrolling clerk of the House, with respect to bills originating in the House, receives the original engrossed bill, the engrossed Senate amendments, the signed conference report, the several messages from the Senate, and a notation of the final action by the House, for the purpose of preparing the enrolled copy. From these documents, the enrolling clerk must meticulously prepare for presentation to the President the final form of the bill as it was agreed to by both Houses. On occasion, as many as 500 amendments have been adopted, each of which must be set out in the enrollment exactly as agreed to, and all punctuation must be in accord with the action taken.
The enrolled bill is printed on parchment paper and certified by the Clerk of the House stating that the bill originated in the House of Representatives. A bill originating in the Senate is examined and certified by the Secretary of the Senate. A House bill is then examined for accuracy by the Clerk. When he is satisfied with the accuracy of the bill, he attaches a slip stating that it finds the bill truly enrolled and sends it to the Speaker of the House for signature. All bills, regardless of the body in which they originated, are signed first by the Speaker and then by the Vice President of the United States, who, under the Constitution, serves as the President of the Senate. The President pro tempore of the Senate may also sign enrolled bills. The Speaker of the House may sign enrolled bills whether or not the House is in session. The President of the Senate may sign bills only while the Senate is actually sitting but advance permission is normally granted to sign during a recess or after adjournment. If the Speaker or the President of the Senate is unable to sign the bill, it may be signed by an authorized Member of the respective House. After both signatures are affixed, a House bill is returned to the Clerk for presentation to the President for action under the Constitution. A Senate bill is presented to the President by the Secretary of the Senate.
October 17th, 2006 at 1:16 pm“It could be argued that the U.S. presents the greatest population problem in the world.” Rev. Debra Haffner wrote that in 1976; she writes today that “surely it is still true that we live heavier on the earth than perhaps any other people in the world.” Read more at http://www.debrahaffner.blogspot.com
October 17th, 2006 at 1:17 pmMany thanks Exley! This is something I have never before researched or studied. I appreciate the help!
October 17th, 2006 at 1:19 pmBush makes up the law however he chooses > if he failed to sign the Torture Bill within 10 days, or not, does not matter because he interprets the Constitution to his liking! Congress members did a bad thing in passing the bill, but they do not care untill some of them get tortured someday!
October 17th, 2006 at 1:21 pm#48 - RealScientist,
October 17th, 2006 at 1:24 pmI searched the article for any mention of Venus and got zero hits.
Back when I was going for my degree, I did a computer simulation that took atmospheric dynamics for each of the planets with the assumption that Saturn represented the mean. Even then, we were able to measure the atmospheric contents of the planets based on defraction experiments. The final result after using a 4.5 billion year timeline proved true for all the inner planets except Earth. For Earth, the only unique dynamic was life itself.
It turned out that Jupiter was a little overdosed with water, but, to this day, I believe that was only a matter of statistics - too many comet impacts. No numbers existed at the time for Uranus, Neptune or Pluto.
#58,
You’re more than welcome, Kat. Nice to know my poli sci degree didn’t go completely to waste!
October 17th, 2006 at 1:28 pmKat, Thank’s, my question is when exactly did the “do nothing good congress” go out of session.?, sorry I forgot. Short term memory loss..Next, just when did bull shit bush get the bill?…..Can’t believe this evil bunch would slip and miss a technocalety like this….After all this is their main reason for everything they do, total control and domination……Blessings
October 17th, 2006 at 1:29 pmOne of the questions presented by Bush’s Military Commissions Bill is whether Congress may pass a law which violates the Constitution and also strip federal jurisdiction to hear the Constitutional challenge. This law does just that.
If the Supreme Court agrees that no court may hear any habeus corpus challenge under this law, then the Legislative and Executive Branch have successfully nullified the Constitution of the United States by passage of a mere statute.
If, on the other hand, the Supreme Court strikes down this law, who will enforce the Supreme Court’s decision? Bush?
October 17th, 2006 at 1:41 pmThank’s for that BnF. Now I am right back where I started this morning as I watched the evil pupett sign this terrible bill…My eyes and heart can’t take any more of this today….Going to run the Bear and hug some tree’s while I still can…Blessings all
October 17th, 2006 at 1:50 pmExley, I majored mostly in business, *sugh*
Sharon, I agree with a previous question of yours… was there a signging statement on this bill? If so, what? I cannot believe they would screw up on this bill siging either, but I have to have SOME hope these days, as we wait, and wait, for what is going to happen, up to and inclusive of, the November elections.
I have to wonder also how a Congress or a President can actually pass a bill that violates the Constitution, after they have taken an oath to uphold, protect and defend it??? Do we truly need to wait for a case that violates the Constitution, via the new bill, to contest this action?
October 17th, 2006 at 1:51 pmThanks BnF, you answered my question as I posted it… Grrrr this all makes me nuts!
October 17th, 2006 at 1:53 pmActually, the MCA does provide for appellate review by both the the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and the Supreme Court.
Moreover, contrary to myth, the MCA does not suspend or terminate habeas corpus for U.S. citizens.
October 17th, 2006 at 1:59 pmA few last question’s, for Exley…Re you’re post #67….As I understand this president and his regime very well, how is a citizen protected.? By his own word’s and those in this bill indicate ( any one believed to be an enemy)….That being said the dictator in charge get’s to say who is an enemy and get’s wisked away to a foreign country and held with out representation for year’s..
It is beyond my intelect to understand how an apparent well educated person as your self can go along with this crap….No need to explain…I’m outta here for the day…But do think of the constitution and the innocent 66,000 plus nearly 2,800 of our own who have died for oil and vendettas under this regime….When will you and this bunch have all you wanted, now that the constitution has realy been made into “a god d**** piece of paper”.? If we win the election’s, what will you do.?…..If we loose, what will the public do when they are rounded up for the camp’s.?……What can be done to right our country..? What do you expect the world to do when they see we are still allowing an insane drunk druggie to run the world..?……….Boom
October 17th, 2006 at 2:21 pm#48 - RealScientist,
I searched the article for any mention of Venus and got zero hits.
Comment by WaltTheMan — October 17, 2006 @ 1:24 pm
Walt,
Sorry again, this wasn’t the best article, just something I grabbed in a hurry to more clearly identify Goodstein and his book. I heard Goodstein make this point in person at a seminar he gave here last year. I have a lot of respect for Goodstein and if he said it I am inclined to accept that he has done the research to back up the statement.
October 17th, 2006 at 2:23 pm67 - Exley - beware of half-truths. Bush’s bill does not allow judicial review of habeus corpus. What review it does allow is limited to review of law, not fact. The scope of review is too complex an issue to discuss on a thread such as this, but suffice to say hearsay evidence, evidence elicited under torture, and secret (classified) evidence may all be used to sentence a person to death in a secret trial. And none of that is reviewable.
October 17th, 2006 at 2:26 pm67, Bush won’t need this bill to suspend habeus corpus for citizens. All he needs is a protest which he can declare to be a “rebellion.”
I’ve posted links on an earlier thread to articles about detention centers being built by Halliburton at various sites around the U.S.
October 17th, 2006 at 2:37 pm70 “Half-truths,” indeed, BnF. Judicial review of habeas corpus writs by U.S. citizens are indeed allowed under the MCA.
Moreover, appellate review is usually limited to searches of the trial record for errors of law, not fact. So, there is no real distinction between the appellate jurisdiction defined in the MCA and that traditionally enjoyed by U.S. circuits courts of appeal.
October 17th, 2006 at 2:42 pmMaria said, “with a whip of his pen the Decider will have eliminated Habeas Corpus. ”
No. That is incorrect, and shows a complete lack of understanding of the law, and the circumstances involved with those being detained in Gitmo.
These are not American citizens, who are granted rights and priveledges un the U.S. Constitution. These are Combatants from various foreign countries who are fighting a war against us. This isn’t even country against country. These people are from all over in what amounts to a gang of terrorists.
If these were Americans, who were taked into custody here in America, then yes, what Bush did would have been so wrong and illegal I would have denounced it with all.
This is NOT the case, and nowhere in the U.S. constitution does it say that someone in a foreign country who shoots at us, when captured is given all rights and priveledges of an american citizen.
October 17th, 2006 at 2:43 pmHopefully Nov. 7th will restore the US government back to the thinking people of this country…
…and then…
…we will be able to use this “Military Commissions Act of 2006″ AND the Patriot Act…
…to go after Bushiva, L’il Dick and their criminal co-conspirators…
…and their racist, inbred supporters in that stubborn 36% too!
October 17th, 2006 at 2:50 pm#68 Sharon,
To allay your concerns, I would suggest you read the legislation instead of relying on the breathlessly inaccurate depictions of the legislation contained here on ThinkProgress and elsewhere. Once you read the legislation, you will find most, if not all, of your concerns are groundless.
October 17th, 2006 at 2:55 pmComment by Exley — October 17, 2006 @ 2:42 pm
And you’ve studied law how long? Your knowledge of the law looks about equal to Mighty Afraudite. You are misstating the traditional scope of judicial review.
Yes, Bush’s Military Commission Bill does not address habeus corpus for citizens. It strips it for aliens. Which means legal immigrants on U.S. soil no longer have the protections of the Bill of Rights, nor of the prohibition against ex post facto laws, nor of habeus corpus. The can be detained indefinitly without a hearing, pending determination of their status as an unlawful enemy combatant. In other words, those Hispanics who protested last May could be rounded up under this law. And they would never get a hearing to challenge their detention.
Sharon - I printed out the text of the Law. I’m using it for my lesson plans the next couple of days as I teach my students about the Constitution, which is part of the 8th grade curriculum. We’re going over portions of the law and comparing it to the relevent portions of the Constitution.
October 17th, 2006 at 3:16 pm75 - “948a. Definitions
‘‘In this chapter:
‘‘(1) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT.—(A) The term ‘unlawful
enemy combatant’ means—
‘‘(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who
has purposefully and materially supported hostilities
against the United States or its co-belligerents who is
not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who
is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces);
or
‘‘(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of
the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006,
has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant
by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent
tribunal established under the authority of the
President or the Secretary of Defense”
Again, that is straight out of the Bill. Where in subsection ii does it say that this ‘unlawful enemy combatant’ status does not apply to United States citizens on United States soil? Looks to me (a non-lawyer) as if the definition of ‘unlawful enemy combatant’ is completely arbitrary
October 17th, 2006 at 3:34 pmBnF,
Actually, my description of the scope of appellate review is quite accurate. Factual determinations are the province of the trial courts. Appellate review is usually limited to matters of law. That is why when an appellate court determines there has been an error of law, it remands the case to the trial court.
I certainly hope you do a better job when teaching your 8th grade students. If you have additional questions, please feel free to ask me.
October 17th, 2006 at 3:35 pm#45. Thanks Walt. #41. RealScientist, it sounds like someone may have pulled the curtain back on the Wizard. If you don’t know or don’t have the information, you should take the advice you give to Bush, and just admit it. I have been Googling and most of the information I’m getting back is that Global warming is a hoax perpetuated by leftists to further their political agendas. I keep looking, but initially I thought you might have some basis behind your arguments. It appears, you do not.
Here’s another thing. Your posting in #69: ‘I am inclined to accept that he has done the research to back up the statement’. Comment by RealScientist —
I wonder if you would be inclined to accept research done by scientists that dispute your conclusions.
October 17th, 2006 at 3:37 pmThis is part of the problem.
Darms, Under the MCA, a U.S. citizen may indeed be deemed an unlawful combatant. This is nothing new in American jurisprudence. Military commissions formed in World War II adjudicated cases against American citizens found to be unlawful enemy combatants (See Ex Parte Quirin).
Under the MCA, U.S. citizens held as unlawful enemy combatants still may file a writ of habeas corpus (The rantings of ESPN’s Keith Olberman notwithstanding).
October 17th, 2006 at 3:41 pmDarms, if you go to Sec. 7 of the MCA (”Habeas Corpus Matters”), you will read:
`(e)(1) No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.’
Thus, as we see, the habeas corpus provision of the MCA applies only to non-U.S. citizens. U.S. citizens who have been determined to unlawfule enemy combatants or awaiting such determination may indeed file for a writ of habeas corpus.
October 17th, 2006 at 3:59 pm80 - “‘‘§ 948c. Persons subject to military commissions
‘‘Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by
military commission under this chapter.”
“948d. Jurisdiction of military commissions
‘‘(a) JURISDICTION.—A military commission under this chapter
shall have jurisdiction to try any offense made punishable by this
chapter or the law of war when committed by an alien unlawful
enemy combatant before, on, or after September 11, 2001.
‘‘(b) LAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANTS.—Military commissions under
this chapter shall not have jurisdiction over lawful enemy combatants.
Lawful enemy combatants who violate the law of war are
subject to chapter 47 of this title. Courts-martial established under
that chapter shall have jurisdiction to try a lawful enemy combatant
for any offense made punishable under this chapter.
‘‘(c) DETERMINATION OF UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT STATUS
DISPOSITIVE.—A finding, whether before, on, or after the date of
the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, by a
Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal
established under the authority of the President or the Secretary
of Defense that a person is an unlawful enemy combatant is dispositive
for purposes of jurisdiction for trial by military commission
under this chapter.”
This reads a bit schizophrenic IMHO - ‘alien unlawful enemy combatant’ reads differently to me then ‘unlawful enemy combatant’: however Padilla, a citizen, seems to have been subjected to the treatment supposedly reserved for ‘alien unlawful enemy combatants’. Would the government be intending to strip the citizenship of someone who, say, sent $50 to EarthFirst, or would that citizen be merely subject to a conventional military tribunal as an normal ‘unlawful enemy combatant’ under the “§ 950v. Crimes triable by military commissions” “‘‘(25) PROVIDING MATERIAL SUPPORT FOR TERRORISM.—” clause?
October 17th, 2006 at 4:05 pmExley, I have read it, in entirety four times now…..And several thing’s stand out, namely this one sentance stated several times through out….The president(insane madman in charge) and or head of defence (rummy) may deem any one a enemy combatent rather alien or citizen….Off to gitmo or any where on earth….I am suprised you, with you’re superior knoledge don’t get it……It is blatently obvious where you stand…….I stand with me first, then my country and constitution…..Argueing with me will not win over what a dreadful bill this is and is only part and parcel of this reich winged bunch of evil doers to take it all….
Back to my original question’s to you in my last post. What are you and you’re bunch going to do if you loose the election.? What do you think the public is goint to do if we loose and are rounded up into camp’s.?….What more do you and you’re deviders want.?..What do you think the world is going to do if we allow this maniac to stay in power.?…..Boom!
October 17th, 2006 at 4:14 pmSharon,
What am I going to do if we lose the 2006 election? Re-group. And start planning for 2008. This country is too strong and too great for the Democrats to do too much damage to it over a period of two years.
October 17th, 2006 at 4:21 pm81 - I read that section as well before adding my § 948c comment. Sure, the law reads one way but it’s the interpretation of the law that matters. I’ve been following the Padilla case fairly closely, all I know to do is wait & see what happens to his habeas corpus case, if it stands & he does have rights, then I am reading the law correctly. But if his case is thrown out, then once again legal words do not say that which they at first read appear to say, at least to a lay-person.
October 17th, 2006 at 4:26 pm#83. Sharon. I wouldn’t be worried about what Exley’s going to do if republicans lose the election. I would be worried about what democrats are going to do it they win the election. You could make the argument, that it is easier to complain about the decisions that are being made than it is to actually make decisions. I’ve been asking alot, but I never get an answer about what democrats actually plan to do to improve things. How about you?
October 17th, 2006 at 4:57 pmWell Paul, I can’t say what the Dem’s as a group would do I can only say what I would like to see them do…First bring our troop’s home, end the war’s and get some good diplomat’s in office to stop this war forever bunch…Second I would like to see several of the dreadful bill’s passed, eliminated. Including the medicare dibacle that is bleeding the country dry for the benefit of the HMO’S and pharmacutical’s…Get rid of the huge pay out’s to big oil companies. And get rid of this bill that was just passed…Then I would like to see an investigation of 9/11 and all that has gone on during this administration. The Dubi port’s deal among many and after all that I want to see Impeachment for this entire administration for war crimes and crimes against our country…I’m sure none of the above meet’s with you’re approval but what the hell, you asked….
October 17th, 2006 at 5:13 pmPaul,
October 17th, 2006 at 5:18 pmI am not disputing the role of CO2 in global warming. While it is a very small part of the Earth’s atmosphere, it has characteristics that make it a freak molecule. RealScientist happened to stumble into the subject of one of my PhD papers on one of the four points of his argument - the temperature dynamics of Mars.
Comment by Exley — October 17, 2006 @ 3:35 pm
Any practicing attorney defering to your legal wisdom would be subject to disbarrment for malpractice. Thanks for the “offer” but I’ll stick to what I learned in law school.
Meanwhile, why don’t you look for any other statutes which restrict judicial review to matters of law only and report back to us?
October 17th, 2006 at 5:37 pm#87. Sharon. I respect that you state what you want for the country. I think your ideas are serious (with the exception of the war crimes). My question: why can’t democrat leadership be as clear as you are?
October 17th, 2006 at 5:44 pmBnF, I certainly hope that you didn’t pay a lot of tuition for whatever law school you claim to have attended….Because if you don’t know that appellate courts generally review for errors of law, and not fact, then you received one poor legal education.
October 17th, 2006 at 5:48 pm[…] Think Progress […]
October 17th, 2006 at 5:55 pmSo if my wife works at the Rice Krispy factory, then I or anyone in my family is not eligable for the PayStation 3 contest, but if she’s a Senator and I work for a lobbyist, there’s no law against, hmm…. JackPot!
October 17th, 2006 at 5:56 pmPaul, I don’t have an answer for that one either, in fact if you have seen many of my post’s you will note I have blasted the Dem’s for their silence and lack of response….Also note, while I will not vote for a neo-con nor a dem enabeler I am on the left and will vote for whom I think is best for the job and our country…Not many incumbent’s meet the test…..Blessings
October 17th, 2006 at 6:34 pm91 - quite spewing talking points and show me the statutes that restrict appellate scope of review.
In fact, your whole talking point is a non-sequiter. Appellate courts review what is brought before them, be it a review of fact or of law. Bush’s Military Commission Bill precludes any possibility of any review of fact. And there are different levels of review when it comes to Appellate review for errors of fact.
So quit sounding like a “know-it-all” because the misinformation and misdirection you are propounding are dangerous. But then, such is par for the course for a fascist.
October 17th, 2006 at 7:18 pmFrom CNN:
The legislation says the president can “interpret the meaning and application” of international standards for prisoner treatment, a provision intended to allow him to authorize aggressive interrogation methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts. … White House press secretary Tony Snow said Bush would probably eventually issue an executive order that would describe his interpretation of the standards, but those documents are not usually made public.
This means that Bush has the power to interpret the Geneva Convention. Prior to this Law, the interpretation of the law was the perview of the Judicial Branch. Now the Executive Branch has been given the authority to interpret the Law it is charged with enforcing.
And, according to Mr. Snow, Bush may issue his interpretation of the Geneva Convention as a secret Executive Order. These interpretations are given the effect of Law under the Military Commissions Act.
To put it all together: Bush can issue an Executive Order interpreting the Geneva Convention. In this, the separation of powers has been obliterated. The Unitary Executive, Commander in Chief can make the Law, enforce the Law, and interpret the Law.
The 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments used to apply to all “persons.” Not any more. All non-citizens, even legal immigrants, are no longer protected by the Constitution of the United States. Even a legal immigrant cannot get a habeus corpus review, nor can she or he claim any rights under the Geneva Convention.
What protections there are in the Law against Torture are unenforceable. Evidence of Torture can be excluded under the classified information provisions in the Law. And that can take place behind closed doors, without the defendant present.
In fact, the entire Military Commission Trial may be conducted in secret, and the defendant executed, based on testimony and evidenced she or he cannot see nor challenge.
These are only a few points about the Law.
THIS is the Model of Human Rights that America is championing to the rest of the civilized world. If there is an analogy to Mordor to be made here, it is that the United States of America is Mordor.
October 17th, 2006 at 7:58 pmFeel safer now?
October 17th, 2006 at 8:19 pmSleep lightly America, the bush regime is watching….Blessings
October 17th, 2006 at 9:34 pmFor what it’s worth:
http://www.v911t.org/911PlaneSite.php
October 17th, 2006 at 9:50 pmBnF,
I wish you luck on your bar exam…Especially when you write things like this: Appellate courts review what is brought before them, be it a review of fact or of law.….That is quite wrong. Appellate courts generally do not review evidence nor do they accept new evidence. Appellate courts do not make determinations of guilty or non-guilty in a criminal law setting. Appellate courts review the record to determine if a trial judge make an error of law.
It’s been awhile since you took Civil Procedure, isn’t it, BnF?
October 17th, 2006 at 9:58 pmExley, you really are clueless, aren’t you? You’ve yet to find a statute limiting judicial review and merely re-iterate an incorrect argument.
Also, Civil Procedure is not the correct class to learn about appellate review; try Constitutional Law. It’s also a theme throughout most law school courses taught in America, as the law is taught through reviewing Appellate and Supreme Court cases. However, Civil Procedure deals primarily with getting a case into court in the first place, not the appellate procedure. For learning the proper Appellate procedure you should take Appellate Advocacy. If you had a catalogue from a Law School you would have known the correct course to cite.
When did you go to law school, if ever? If you’re taking a correspondence course from Mighty Afraudite, I suggest you stop payment on your check. With your knowledge of the law, the only Bar you’ll be admitted to is one which serves alcohol.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:24 pmHeh.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:35 pmBnF,
I can tell you are embarassed by your embarassingly incorrect statement that appellate courts make determinations of fact. That is quite false. As all people with even a rudimentary understanding of the appellate process know, courts of appeal limit their review of trial court proceedings to determining whether or not the lower court judge made an error of law. Again, I wish you luck on that bar exam. It is quite obvious you will need it.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:35 pm#97
Absolutely!
October 17th, 2006 at 10:41 pm103, and you went to law school when? I ask, again, because you lack even a rudimentary knowledge of that in which you claim to be an expert.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:43 pm104 - either you’re setting yourself up to be able to claim a diminished capacity defense, or you already are institutionalized.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:45 pmExley is clueless, in more ways than one, Briseadh na Faire. But you knew that…
October 17th, 2006 at 10:47 pmyes, Zooey. I was posting for the benefit of others, not Exley. He has more in common with the symbol for the Democratic Party than the Republican’s elephant.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:55 pm#105, Ah, BnF, you suffer the problem suffered by so many recent law school graduates….You think you understand the law, but because you have no practical experience, you make many amatuerish errors….And there is no more amateurish and incorrect statement that your claim that appellate courts make factual determinations of guilt and non-guilt. No, my friend, factual determinations are made at the trial level. I certainly hope you never make go to the appellate court with only a claim that the finder of fact incorrectly analyzed the evidence. You will be laughed out of court….Seriously, though, I really hope you don’t think that appellate courts make factual determinations of guilt or non-guilt. If you do, I would suggest you sign up for another bar review course. Because there is no way you passed the bar if you believe that.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:57 pmYou forget, Briseadh na Faire, the universe revolves around Exley.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:58 pmZooey, No, I know because you admire me so much that you believe that. But I am just a regular guy…who understands how the judicial system works….And knows that appellate courts limit their review to questions of law and do not usually make factual determinations. Factual determinations are the province of the trial courts.
October 17th, 2006 at 11:06 pmGoogle the f*cker, Exley. For f*ck’s sake….
I’m glad you agree you’re a pompous ass, because that’s the least anyone could say about you.
October 17th, 2006 at 11:17 pmComment by Exley — October 17, 2006 @ 10:57 pm
Once again, your ignornace is showing. Look at the above posts and show us where I said that appellate courts make factual determinations of guilt and non-guilt. You won’t find it, because those are your words, not mine.
Appellate courts can, and do, review for errors of fact as well as of law. However, under Bush’s Military Commissions Act, they will be precluded from reviewing for errors of fact.
October 17th, 2006 at 11:26 pmignornace = igorance (dyslexic fingers)
October 17th, 2006 at 11:28 pmZooey……..Shhhhhhhhhhhh….Read and learn. I already got BnF to admit he was wrong when he claimed the U.S. citizens could not file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under the MCA. Similarly, he will have to admit that he is incorrect in his embarassingly misguided contention that appellate courts in the federal judicial system make factual determinations of guilt or non-guilt or convict individuals.
October 17th, 2006 at 11:28 pm110 - and Exley is the planet Uranus.
October 17th, 2006 at 11:29 pmBriseadh na Faire - #116 - We all know it…
Exley - Oh, for f*ck’s sake….back to ignoring you.
October 17th, 2006 at 11:41 pmZooey, you know you can’t stay away from me. You are infatuated with me.
BnF, I wish you well on that bar exam — despite your inability to understand the role and function of the federal appellate courts. But your willingness to admit you were wrong when you initially claimed the U.S. citizens could not file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under the MCA gives me some hope that you can learn from your mistakes, rookie.
October 17th, 2006 at 11:49 pmRight, Exley, I’m infatuated with you — like I’m infatuated with having a hot poker rammed into my eye.
Question: What time of year is it, Exley. What time of year do law school grads take the bar exam? I would think you’d know that…
October 18th, 2006 at 12:20 amAlthough I find no silver lining here it must be remembered that the same American consitution that enshrined the bill of rights including the long standing english tradition of habeus corpus also enshrined slavery. None of our rights are ever any more secure than the electorate of any given age wishes. That we are at a low point is beyond debate, but I’m still not convinced it is the lowest point. From the three fifths rule to the alien and sedition acts to the leftist purges of the 20th century that periodically persecuted any opposition that those in power wished, America has never had universal freedom.
October 18th, 2006 at 1:34 amWe do not need despair or fatalistic cynicism, we need consistent and unceasing resistence. That is what has preserved what is left of our freedom and it is the only thing that we can depend on.
[…] Original post by Think Progress […]
October 18th, 2006 at 10:37 am#119 Awww, Zooey…I knew you couldn’t stay away from me, despite your earlier pledge to ignore me….Face it, Zooey, you can’t get enough Exley.
As for bar exam schedules, different states have different dates. Many of them are held in July and February, with the results posted sometime in the Fall. So, if BnF took his bar exam (if her took it at all) this summer, then he should expect his results some time in the next few weeks.
Here’s wishing him luck….He’s gonna need it!!!
October 18th, 2006 at 2:19 pm[…] ThinkFast: October 17, 2006Think Progress, DC - Oct 17, 2006President Bush signs the Military Commissions Act of 2006? today in the Rose Garden, a bill that will not grant detainees legal counsel. … […]
October 20th, 2006 at 9:01 amLaw Distance Learning
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
March 16th, 2008 at 4:50 pmLesbian Sex Lesbian Anime Teenage Lesbian
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 20th, 2008 at 10:54 amchild custody attorney for kansas
Interestingly, this was on CNN last week.
March 20th, 2008 at 10:03 pmLesbian Sex Free Lesbian Sex Videos Lesbian Sex Videos
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 24th, 2008 at 8:25 pmStewart
Nice article.
March 25th, 2008 at 4:04 pmLesbians Black Lesbian Sex Lesbian Girls Licking
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 26th, 2008 at 8:03 amLesbians Lesbian Girls Lesbian Twins
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 27th, 2008 at 6:23 am