Sen. Whitehouse Reveals Secret DoJ Legal Memos: Bush Determines What Is Constitutional
Sen. Whitehouse Reveals Secret DoJ Legal Memos: Bush Determines What Is Constitutional
This morning, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) delivered an impassioned floor speech to help frame the debate over FISA reform. Using his privilege as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Whitehouse said he has “spent hours poring over” secret opinions issued by the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) — and he took notes.
Whitehouse is a lawyer, a former U.S. Attorney, a former legal counsel to Rhode Island’s Governor, and a former State Attorney General. He said he sought and received permission to have his notes declassified because he wanted to show the public “what the Bush administration does behind our backs when they think no one is looking.”
“To give you an example of what I read,” Whitehouse said on the Senate floor, “I have gotten three legal propositions from these secret OLC opinions declassified. Here they are, as accurately as my note-taking could reproduce them from the classified documents”:
1. An executive order cannot limit a President. There is no constitutional requirement for a President to issue a new executive order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous executive order. Rather than violate an executive order, the President has instead modified or waived it.
2. The President, exercising his constitutional authority under Article II, can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the President’s authority under Article II.
3. The Department of Justice is bound by the President’s legal determinations.
Watch it:
Emptywheel has the full statement and more commentary.
UPDATE: Marty Lederman calls Sen. Whitehouse’s speech “misdirected outrage” and argues that the “statements in question are boilerplate, and fairly uncontroversial.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
So Dubby has declared himself Dictator, for all practical purposes, and anyone who genuinely cares about patriotism and the Constitution should be pissed about it.
You Frank, don’t genuinely care about those things, and it’s painfully obvious, so I’m not surprised you fail to see the importance.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:13 pmThese are dark times and no one seems to notice.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:14 pmWow. So we’re now to address Dubbie as “your majesty”…?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:15 pmCan we arrest Bush now? Any police near him who can throw on some handcuffs and read him his ACTUAL rights?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:16 pmSo much for the three branches of government.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:17 pmFU Frank – hysterical war-whore
December 7th, 2007 at 1:17 pmI’m sure the good people of 1930’s Germany thought just like you, Frank.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:17 pmAnd Dreamcrusher last night were doubting about Iran’s democracy.
Maybe a part of “separation of powers” doesn’t fit in his idea of democracy.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:17 pmthere isn’t even a real “war” in progress
if you had any historical or military knowledge that would be obvious to you.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:18 pmStreamlined chain of command is essential when we’re at war. That’s what the President and DoJ are doing.
Comment by Frank M
YAWN.
Go find the WMDS, moron, and get back to us.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:18 pmtom @ 12:
The “war” is just an excuse for a massive power grab.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:19 pmFU and your “time of war” BS. This country has been waging one war or another for the last 50 years. We’re tired of it. We’re tired o what it has done to this nation, its citizens and their collective standing in the world. You idiots who think that you can just go out a kill anyone who doesn’t agree with US or give US what we (yeah, its a government by the people for the people remember?) are the biggest traitors to this nation.
We’re at war. Perhaps, but it’s only with ourselves.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:20 pmOh. Okay. So a non-lawyer president, trained in business (and not very well trained at that, if his record in business is any indication) can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the president’s authority under Article II.
Then why does the president even need legal counsel? Why do we even need a constitution? Can someone explain that? Maybe Frank can explain it, since he seems to find this no big deal.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:21 pm15 – I agree – Frank doesn’t.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:21 pmSomebody ask Mukasey about that last part. Does he believe that the Justice Department is bound by the President’s determinations of legality? Oh that’s right–he was confirmed already. Where in the F’in hell are all these documents when there is actually a chance to do something with them?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:22 pmCan we get better trolls, please? Frank M is just not cutting it.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:22 pmModifying executive orders by action is an example of terrible governance. Now, to determine the legality of an action we must examine not the federal register, but the the day to day actions of the President and other officials who have been granted the power to modify executive orders by fiat. The result is an environment where nobody is sure what executive orders are active, which have been rescinded, etc.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:23 pmtom @ 18:
I know. I’m in complete agreement with you.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:23 pmFrank: “So?”
People like Frank can’t be bothered with little details like our constitution. Frank, you must have been napping or pleasuring yourself when they covered this in Civics Class, but here it is again: The Legislative Branch makes law; The Executive Branch executes the law; The Judicial Branch decides whether or not the law or the execution thereof is constitutional.
The President has no authority to unilaterally decide what is constitutional or not. That’s the way the system is supposed to work, Frank. Do you have any respect at all for our constitutional system?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:23 pm“Where in the F’in hell are all these documents when there is actually a chance to do something with them?’
Comment by Menehune — December 7, 2007 @ 1:22 pm
Do you really think those documents would have made a difference to Feinstein?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:25 pmSo …this is American “democracy” today:
“If the President does it, it is not illegal.” (Richard Nixon)
And
“Because I said so”…?
Oh man, we’re so screwed.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:25 pmStreamlined chain of command is essential when we’re at war. That’s what the President and DoJ are doing
with whom are we are war? the 19 hijackers from 9.11 are currently dead, and their enablers are unassailable. and even if we were at war with the 19 hijackers, that does not permit the president to unilaterally usurp or transgress the rule of law.
i recall no other act of “war” against the united states since……pearl harbor, and that is a bad example because hawaii was still a colony at that time.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:26 pm“If the President does it, it’s not against the law”…..Richard M. Nixon.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:27 pm…must be bush’s hero…..
if we are “at war,” then where is the battle happening?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:27 pmComment by Frank M — December 7, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
W has violated all of our rights by wiretapping our phones in violation of FISA law. I (or Frosty) could have had my phone tapped, in which case it would directly affect me and my 4th Amendment Constitutional rights.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:28 pm25 Frosty…no…but it would have been nice to have that question asked directly. Get a little more of his dissembling into the public record. Diane and Chuck have to go, it’s becoming clear. They are either bought or blackmailed.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:28 pmThe Department of Justice is bound by the President’s legal determinations.
I guess they agreed on this after Ashcroft gave Gonzo the foxtrot oscar from his hospital bed.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:29 pm“Have you been dragged away in the middle of the night? Have you lost your job?”
Comment by Frank M — December 7, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
No, those were the Jews, oh wait. . .
December 7th, 2007 at 1:30 pmThis is the Mission Statement directly from the Dept. of Justice:
To enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law; to ensure public safety against threats foreign and domestic; to provide federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime; to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior; and to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans.
Nowhere does it state that it will follow the President’s legal determinations.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:31 pm“Have you been dragged away in the middle of the night? Have you lost your job?â€
Comment by Frank M — December 7, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
When we actually are it will be a little too late to complain, wouldn’t you say?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:33 pmTo your question, then, Frank, about “who has had their freedoms taken away”………kinda makes me have to ask
how many times have you, personally, been attacked by a muslim
-try to be honest, even though I know it will cause you pain to be
December 7th, 2007 at 1:33 pmFrank – Have you, personally been attacked by a an islamic radical????
Have you?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:34 pmSo Frank M, when a future administration decides that asskissing yes men who allowed the law to be broken and advocated it on the internet (there’s a thought crime bill making its way through Congress at the moment with bi-partisan support) and they find you and take you away is that what it will take to make you realize that a nation of law, not men, is what the USofA is all about and that laws are there to protect citizens from the arbitrary acts of men.
It’s done in your name and as if the law allows it. It doesn’t. S
December 7th, 2007 at 1:34 pm#28 Not yet.
But what is to prevent them from doing so if they so choose?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:34 pmMenehune @ 29:
Yeah, Feinstein is a disgrace. Don’t know that much about Schumer.
And I don’t doubt for an instant that the Cheney WH has extensive files on everyone that can be used to get the desired result.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:34 pm#27: How exactly has it affected you in a concrete way? Have you been dragged away in the middle of the night? Have you lost your job?
Comment by Frank M — December 7, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
I posted a response to this yesterday, but it would have required you actually learn to read. Here’s another on the same case.
Yes, it happens. Yes, this administration has been steadily chipping away at our rights for years. And, yes, people like you will be in utter denial until the very day that you’re thrown under the jail.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:35 pmFrank: “How exactly has it affected you in a concrete way? Have you been dragged away in the middle of the night? Have you lost your job?”
Completely irrelevant and clueless. We the People live under a set of rules set forth by our constitution. You either support that system or you don’t. If you don’t support our constitutional system you are, by definition, un-american.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:35 pm#13,
Absolutely!
This is such an obvious trend for Republic666an presidents, war is always the best platform to dictate and to do so with impunity for the sake of “national security”. I’ve seen this gambit over and over again but never better than now because an open ended war, one that never ends, provides an endless opportunity to dictate with impunity.
This has our forefathers turning over in their graves, look what we have allowed.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:35 pmFrank, how soon will the Islamo-fascists sweep into power in America?
I mean Muslims make up around 1% of the population of the US. Are you quaking in fear of that 1%? Seeing that the percentage of radicals that take up the mantle of Bin Ladenism is a small percentage of Muslims you are quaking in fear of an American takeover by a fraction of 1%.
This is a chickenshit philosophy pushed by weak minded people.
-GSD
December 7th, 2007 at 1:35 pmStreamlined chain of command is essential when we’re at war. That’s what the President and DoJ are doing.
Comment by Frank M — December 7, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
We’re not at war.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:36 pmThanks for breaking it down Colonel. It’s surprising how some people out there still don’t “get” the three EQUAL branches of government and how they are supposed to work.
May I remind all readers that Article II Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States reads, “The President, the Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, and other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.â€
H.Res. 333, the resolution to impeach Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors has been introduced in the House of Representatives and is now being considered in the House Judiciary Committee. Under this resolution, the Vice President stands accused of manipulating intelligence regarding Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and openly threatening aggression against Iran. In my humble opinion, the President has also committed these acts and ought to be taken to task over the matter.
I would suggest to everyone out there that they contact their Representatives and demand that they support H.R. 333. It’s a start. You may also want to push them for Impeachment proceedings against the President under Article II Section 4 of the US Constitution. Don’t assume everyone else is so you don’t have to. Take the time to contact your Representatives and Senators.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:36 pmFrank, have you personally been raped? If not, why do you think we need laws against rape?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:36 pm#24: We are at war with islamofascists or, if that term offends you, militant muslims who intent to forcefully convert you and everyone else to Islam or – if you refuse – kill you. But I know you don’t want to admit that, because you feel that as a good progressive you cannot make such sweeping statements based on a category such as religion or race. Yet, deep inside you must know the truth.
Comment by Frank M — December 7, 2007 @ 1:31 pm
And those few militants are delusional if they think this will happen, Frank, just like you’re delusional to believe it could.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:36 pmignore Frank – he’s just another lying righty, here to lamely attempt sowing seeds of doubt among real Patriots.
what a pathetic lot in life.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:37 pmThanks, bpg131313. Never hurts to review the basics.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:38 pmNo, dipsh(ts, you’re at war with Islamofacsists (whatever the hell those are). We’re at war with an administration which:
doesn’t believe in the rule of law
repeatedly violates the law
uses terror as a political weapon
repeatedly lies to the american public and its allies
and is bankrupting this country in favor of its corporate friends and our communist enemies.
YOu keep fighting that fight from somewhere in the good ol’ USofA. The real warriors are fighting someone else’s civil war in some desert town W probably can’t locate on a map or pronounce the name of.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:38 pmWho died and made that bastard king? Oh yeah.. Mr. Democracy…
December 7th, 2007 at 1:38 pmmy bad.
#27: How exactly has it affected you in a concrete way? Have you been dragged away in the middle of the night? Have you lost your job?
Comment by Frank M — December 7, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
oh, I’m sorry, I guess I’m supposed to wait until the governement sends me to Gitmo and denies me all of my Constitutional rights before I get upset.
I am an American and I stand up for the rights of ALL Americans. If W’s violations have affected any other American than they have affected me.
Here is the President’s Oath of Office:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
While I understand “best of my ability” isn’t saying much when it comes to Bush, he still has a duty to defend the Constitution, which begins “We the People of the United States”
We the People. Thats ALL of us. Not just the select few.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:39 pmFrank, this goes way beyond fighting “islamofacism”. Did you even read item #3? This gives the President (not just GWB, mind you, but future Democratic Presidents, too) the power to declare to the Justice Dept. what is lawful and what is not. You’re comfortable with that?? Seriously??
December 7th, 2007 at 1:39 pm.
FISA is a farce!
When did warrantless become legal that Congress has to go make it illegal…
… AGAIN?
I borrow from Rainbow Sally
Ladies and Gents, the Fourth Amendment HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED… Just usurped. Sure FISA protects you and I, but didn’t the good old Fourth?
Congress is busy remaking laws because the old ones got broken!
Think about that!
.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:40 pmFrank M,
Let’s not forget Pastor Niemoller.
First they came for the Jews.
Just because it hasn’t affected you doesn’t mean it is not wrong.
-GSD
December 7th, 2007 at 1:40 pmYeah, when Hillary’s first act is to declare the GOP a terrorist organization, how y’all gonna feel about that one, Frankie Frank? The Unitary Executive needs to keep this country safe and right now the GOP is about the biggest threat to our Constitution there is.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:41 pmWe are at war with islamofascists or, if that term offends you, militant muslims who intent to forcefully convert you and everyone else to Islam or – if you refuse – kill you.
Comment by Frank M — December 7, 2007 @ 1:31 pm
Perhaps in Ann Coulter’s fantasy world, but on this planet al-Qa’ida only seeks regional domination without Western interference.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:41 pmFrank, you sad little puppet. Your blatherings about a “war” that has no clear definition does not give the president and his administration the right to circumvent our laws. We are a nation of laws that won’t fall to the “islamofascists” or anyone else outside. Our greatest danger is complacency and allowing our leaders to rewrite the game and our constitution.
The truth is there will always be “others” that wish us harm or destruction. To allow that to scare us into giving up freedoms is the real danger. Any real attack against this country will be retailiated with swift and deadly force. Something I fully support. To constantly use the unseen boogeyman is complete BS.
You have a right to believe all what this administration shovels. I have a right, and a duty to question it. You go ahead and continue to be a sheeplican while the real wolves are herding you.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:42 pmStreamlined chain of command is essential when we’re at war. That’s what the President and DoJ are doing.
“Dark times� How many of your precious rights have you lost to this “dictator†and how has it affected you directly and in a concrete way?
Comment by Frank M — December 7, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
“When we’re at war”??? Oh, how convenient! All Bush had to do in order to set himself up as dictator was to invade another country — one that never attacked us.
Please convince me that you would be defending Hillary with equal fervor if she were in the Oval Office doing exactly the same thing.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:42 pm“Streamlined chain of command is essential when we’re at war.”
Frank M
Gee Frank, I guess that makes a great case why we’ve had perpetual conflict in Iraq with no end in sight and NO EXIT STRATEGY. If Bush declared “war over” him and his criminal mob might actually have to comply with American laws. Pretty sick excuse for sending endless streams of American soldiers into battle, so you can maintain all the powers you’ve stolen and continue to hide all those pesky laws you’ve broken. Aside from all the money they’ve been making for their corporate buddies at the expense of American blood, that’s just the cherry on the cake I guess.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:42 pmRightarded individuals such as Frank seem to think waves of Islamofascists are crashing against fortress America and being beaten back a bunch craven pussies in the basement of the RNC typing away furiously at their keyboards. Ooh I’m so scared. Evil Islamofascists could behead me when I walk out my front door! Protect us dear leader! I have never seen such cowardice in the American people before. God help us all.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:43 pmSouthern man, don’t forget what the Good Book said.
-GSD
December 7th, 2007 at 1:43 pm#6: Streamlined chain of command is essential when we’re at war. That’s what the President and DoJ are doing.
As Whitehouse makes absolutely clear, the Bush administration has done much more than “streamline the chain of command.” They are asserting that the President has the authority to (secretly) interpret the law in whatever way he wishes, and to force the Department of Justice to back him up.
#33: We are at war with islamofascists or, if that term offends you, militant muslims who intent to forcefully convert you and everyone else to Islam or – if you refuse – kill you. But I know you don’t want to admit that, because you feel that as a good progressive you cannot make such sweeping statements based on a category such as religion or race.
Do you think that the so-called War on Terror authorizes the President to break and/or ignore the law? That’s what Bush is asserting. I for one am not so frightened of the “Islamofascist” boogeymen that I’m willing to allow the President–any President–to operate outside the law. And I doubt you would either, if the President were a Democrat.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:43 pmA lying Righty who won’t answer the same kind of question he expects us to…..WEAK, REALLY WEAK
Frank – have you, personall, been attacked by Islamic radicals????
Have you??
December 7th, 2007 at 1:43 pmStupid people. There are *always* going to be stupid people who don’t see the bus until they’re actually underneath it.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:44 pm61 – Bullsh*t!!!!!!
You’re even dumber than I thought, cracker.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:45 pm#61, no your probably just watched in horror on the TV. Last I checked, none of the events of 9/11 happened south of the Mason Dixon line.
Wait, my pet goat was being read by W in FL.
With your logic, I guess we all got injured in that Omaha mall shooting. Or what about Tim McVeigh? Are all angry, white, ex-military folks now suspected terrorists?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:45 pmAnd – if we wanted to follow your rusty, crooked logic tracks, then we’d have to say that every time someone was arrested at a Bush event for wearing the wrong tshirt was an attack on all of us, and respond accordingly, by declaring “a war on Righty”. Believe me, you don’t want that happening. (see Helot uprising, decline of Sparta)
December 7th, 2007 at 1:47 pmSouthern Man…we were jumped by 19 guys (Saudis and Qataris–our allies) who got lucky because our leadership was asleep at the wheel. Yes-it was horrible–I watched it with my own eyes happening in real time. I never want to see it happen again, believe me. But why is it that NYers f’in hate GWBush’s ass worse than anyone? Because he dropped the ball once—and then fumbled it again when he could have scored the guy who planned the attack.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:47 pm“The Department of Justice is bound by the President’s legal determinations.”
The hell? This explains a lot about what happened a year ago today- DoJ shit canned 7 US Attorneys on 12/7/06, & who made up that list to be fired? Now we get why no one would fess up on the witness stand they did it, including Gonzo.
Looks like the effing Rove/Cheney/Addington Bush braintrust made the firing list. They usurped all the power @ DoJ unto themselves via these secret OLC statements.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:48 pmMax-1, you hit the nail on the head there. The 4th Amendment is rather solid language designed to ensure that search and seizure didn’t happen without probable cause. There’s no reason to have any other law about the matter. There are no loopholes written into the 4th Amendment and I believe that FISA is an abomination of liberty and stands against everything the Founding Fathers framed the Constitution to protect.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:48 pmFrank – Have you, personally been attacked by a an islamic radical????
Have you?
Comment by tombaker — December 7, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
We all have. 9/11
Comment by Southern Man — December 7, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
——————————–
Southern Man: you were PERSONALLY attacked on 9/11? I wasn’t, so I guess that’s why I don’t piss my pants every time BushCo tells me I need to be afraid and give up my rights.
What do you think about cars, which pose a threat about 1,000,000% more dangerous than terrorists.
I declare a WAR ON CARS. We must stop these AutomoFacists!
December 7th, 2007 at 1:49 pm.
Frank M,
When has warrantless EVER been legal?
When has torture EVER been legal?
Your aologies withstanding, I have to ask:
WHAT ARE YOUR PRINCIPLES?
DO YOU HAVE ANY?
What does it mena to be an American?
.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:50 pmPO…technically DC is south of the MD line, which is the PA/maryland border.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:50 pm9-11 happened on the watch of:
Republican president
Republican vice-president
Republican controlled Senate
Republican controlled House
In a city run by a Republican mayor
But, yeah, those are the guys we should, you know, trust with everything.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:50 pmWar has never been declared. Quit using the word out of context.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:50 pm68 – they’re not, but probably ought to be, because of all the completely untreated PTSD cases coming home from Iraq – it’s going to be a bloody and disgusting decade or 3 while we live though the sorry spectacle of psychiatrically shattered, drug addicted, homeless, vets going off like misplaced ordnance. If the Dicktater gave a genuine pinch of shit for them, it wouldn’t have to happen, but he doesn’t.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:50 pmGuido; Bush should have the same rights he deigns for others….absolutely NONE!
Remember, this administration deems there is NO Constitutional right to habeas corpus, no right to attorney, no day in court, can be held indefinitely without charges, secret evidence that can’t be revealed to the prisoner, hearsay evidence as fact, can be legally tortured, and no court, Congress, or any other body can challenge, and the Geneva Convention is “quaint”.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:51 pmWe were not attacked on 9/11 by islamic radicals? I’m dumd, popcorn?!
Comment by Southern Man — December 7, 2007 @ 1:50 pm
Does the word “personally” mean nothing to you? The question was raised in response to Frank’s moronic query about whether anyone here had “personally” had their rights violated. Do try to keep up. I know you’re finding it difficult, but please try.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:52 pm#75. I think they were isalmic; not so certain about “radicals.” What I do know, however, is that Bush’s friends, the Sauds, taught them to hate the West and instilled in them their terrorist fervor. So, we of course, invaded Saudi Arabia, right? Oh, yeah, instead we invaded Iraq, our former puppet and like Grenada before it, an envisioned easy target that would allow Cheney to invade Iran. Too bad they suck at post-war planning and swallowed whole the shaft Chalibi shoved down their throat.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:53 pm…and, as a fellow southern man–there are enough reasons to attack “Southern Man” other than the fact that he’s a southern man. Crumble your crackers over some other soup.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:54 pm#27: How exactly has it affected you in a concrete way? Have you been dragged away in the middle of the night? Have you lost your job?
Comment by Frank M
And the response yoiu’ll have for someone who gets dragged away in the middle of the night is “well you should have spoken up when the policy was instituted.” nazi scum.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:54 pm81 – thanks Gum – you can lead a Righty to logic, but ya can’t make’em infer correctly.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:55 pmSouthern Man: “We were not attacked on 9/11 by islamic radicals? I’m dumd, popcorn?!”
We were also attacked by a member of the “Christian Identity Movement” who blew up the Oklahoma City Federal Building killing 163 men, women and children. Are we all “at war” with the right-wing christian crackpots in the “Christian Identity Movement?”
December 7th, 2007 at 1:55 pmOhferKreissaches, can we just impeach this Constitution shredding maniac now??
December 7th, 2007 at 1:55 pmIt’s like having a herd of mules around who can type.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:55 pmsouthern man, frank, chl et al are just regurgitating Whitehouse talking points, they are not engaging in honest debate. ignore them until they say something original.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:56 pm2. The President, exercising his constitutional authority under Article II, can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the President’s authority under Article II.
So he’s the sole arbiter of which presidential actions are lawful ???
I thought we had a packed court to do that?
December 7th, 2007 at 1:56 pmFrank – Have you, personally been attacked by a an islamic radical????
Have you?
Comment by tombaker — December 7, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
We all have. 9/11
Comment by Southern Man — December 7, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
Yes, the United States in general was attacked, but more specifically New York and DC were attacked. Where exactly do you live? Why is it those farthest away from New York and DC are the ones most scared and ready to support a president whose policies make those of us who actually live in New York less secure? Never could get my mind around that, but maybe it’s best not to try to understand the stupid.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:57 pmWe were not attacked on 9/11 by islamic radicals? I’m dumd, popcorn?!
Comment by Southern Man — December 7, 2007 @ 1:50 pm
Have you read any of Usama bin Laden’s fatwas? They use Islam as window dressing. His grievances against the U.S., Saudia Arabia, and other countries are overwhelmingly political.
If we are at war with anyone, it’s al-Qa’ida – a loose network of mafia organizations with a common religion and differing objectives. They cannot be defeated militarily. They can only be defeated by police work and addressing the root causes of terrorism.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:57 pmWe were not attacked on 9/11 by islamic radicals? I’m dumd, popcorn?!
Comment by Southern Man — December 7, 2007 @ 1:50 pm
The question is: did islamic radicals run into your home or office, screaming to Allah and blowing themselves up in your kitchen? Did they blow up a car bomb in your own garage?
No, they didn’t. It happened to other people. Yet you feel personally attacked by islamofascists.
Same case here with the restriction of personal rights of other people.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:58 pmSomeone explain why usurpation of constitutional powers is *not* grounds for impeachment.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:00 pmWe are at war with islamofascists or, if that term offends you, militant muslims who intent to forcefully convert you and everyone else to Islam or – if you refuse – kill you.
Comment by Frank M — December 7, 2007 @ 1:31 pm
Lemme get this straight. You are perfectly willing to accept the scenario of a small band of terrorists forcibly converting everyone here to Islam or killing us without being stopped, but you regard the scenario of Americans losing their constitutional rights as preposterous.
What have you been smoking?
December 7th, 2007 at 2:00 pmNo one is attacking SM for being Southern. In fact, I doubt he’s from or in the South at all. I believe he uses it so that the hillbilly jokes will fly and he can complain about them.
But even if he is, geographically, he was a long way away from most of the carnage that day.
Me, I’m in the South. And, DC is the nation’s capital. It ain’t one of the states and, if memory serves correct, it wasn’t included in the tit-for-tat slave state / non-slave state introductions. If it was, my apologies.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:00 pmWhat we have here with Frank is your typical, coward, bed wetting republican who follows lock and step with what Rush and Co. tell him, and can never deviate from that “brain lock”.
1st clue, he says “have you personally had any of you liberties taken away?” Ummm, when the constitution is blatantly ignored, as well as the Geneva convention, yes, I take it personally! As should all true Americans.
2nd: “Islamofacials want to convert you or kill you!” Your inner Ann Coulter is so friggin’ transparent. Most Muslims don’t want to convert us. In fact, the Koran even teaches to tolerate and respect the people of the “good book” (Christians). Unfortunately, there are a fanatical few who will twist the words of what is written to meet their needs (sound familiar). Of course, with this dum bass war in Iraq, that “fanatical few” has increased exponentially!
Frank, do you wear diapers? Cause I’d be amazed if you weren’t pissed soaked all the time.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:01 pmIf we are at war with anyone, it’s al-Qa’ida – a loose network of mafia organizations with a common religion and differing objectives. They cannot be defeated militarily. They can only be defeated by police work and addressing the root causes of terrorism.
Comment by toasterhead
Who were organized, trained and armed by reagan and bush 1. Good work rebublican trolls.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:01 pm9/11. Quit it with 9/11. You dishonor all who died that day with BS. No Iraqis attacked us on 9/11. If this was truly a “war” with “islamofascism” (dumbass term by the way) then we would have already bombed Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, Syria, Iran, Pakistan and several more. It’s not that conflict at all. This current mess has been an attempt to place a western leaning govt. in place in Iraq. But it wasn’t well thought out and wasn’t well executed. Bush has blood and fecal matter all over himself because of this.
Republicans are on life support and america is about to pull the plug because of his myopic views.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:03 pmWhat *is* “islamofascism” anyway?
Sounds like someone just tried to put two scary sounding words together to frighten people.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:03 pmMe, I’m in the South. And, DC is the nation’s capital. It ain’t one of the states and, if memory serves correct, it wasn’t included in the tit-for-tat slave state / non-slave state introductions. If it was, my apologies.
Comment by po — December 7, 2007 @ 2:00 pm
The Pentagon is in Virginia, not DC (though technically it uses DC zip codes). And though most Arlingtonians do not consider themselves part of the South, it is a southern state.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:03 pmWhat *is* “islamofascism†anyway?
Sounds like someone just tried to put two scary sounding words together to frighten people.
Comment by Frosty Cupcake — December 7, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
It sounds like that because it is exactly that.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:04 pmGestaporepublicanism
December 7th, 2007 at 2:04 pmneofatalist
December 7th, 2007 at 2:05 pmIf we’re at war with Islamic terrorists who blew up the WTC, why are we NOT at war with right wing christian wackos who blew up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. After all, they’ve got a book they read which advocates the overthrow of our government and they’ve carried out terrorist acts against our government and our people. They’re terrorists.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:05 pmrepublodestructionist
December 7th, 2007 at 2:05 pmBusholoonism.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:05 pmmaking up words are fun. and meaningless.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:05 pmWho were organized, trained and armed by reagan and bush 1. Good work rebublican trolls.
Comment by Bobwurst — December 7, 2007 @ 2:01 pm
Details, details….
December 7th, 2007 at 2:05 pmWhat rights have we lost?
Privacy!
And the right to speak without fear!
Go to Hell Frank!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:06 pm“What *is* “islamofascism†anyway?”
It’s a phony word constructed by neocons to spread mindless fear. The word makes no sense. A more appropriate term would be “Islamotheocrat” because the tiny percentage of Muslims who we’re talking about favor a world-wide Caliphate, which is NOT a fascist system, but a Theocracy.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:08 pmevilocheneyism
December 7th, 2007 at 2:08 pmmaking up words are fun. and meaningless.
Comment by hellinabucket — December 7, 2007
Exactly! That’s why I’ve always countered a poster’s “Islamofascist” with “Islamofacial”. Both are silly word plays, and are completely nonsensical, but fun to type!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:09 pmSouthern Man: “We were not attacked on 9/11 by islamic radicals? I’m dumd, popcorn?!â€
We were also attacked by a member of the “Christian Identity Movement†who blew up the Oklahoma City Federal Building killing 163 men, women and children. Are we all “at war†with the right-wing christian crackpots in the “Christian Identity Movement?â€
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper
Yup, and we were attacked with anthrax, a wmd, right after 9-11 yet those who did this have been forgotten, why is that? Is it because the perps aren’t a readily demonized group? or is it becuase it would involve actual work to find the perps?
December 7th, 2007 at 2:09 pm#110. Details?!? WTF? Have you not been paying attention. AQ is the direct descendent of the Mujahadeen Reagan and Bush 1 created to fight the terrorists in Afghanistan during the 80s. When the Soviets left, so did we, leaving, as we always do, all of our military equipment in their hands. We trained them in counterinsurgency. We financed them. And then left.
Afterwards we set up shop in Saudi Arabia and, well, seems OBL didn’t like that any more than the Soviets in Afghanistan. The rest is history.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:09 pmLets hope Sheldon got what he needed for surely they will not let him near anymore “classified documents”.
Rhode Island is proud of your determination to get our Constitution back.
Go Sheldon!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:09 pmI think those of us who feel the constitution is being usurped by Bush should continue to point out that our next president, who will be a democrat, would also retain the rights Bush has stolen.
I sincerely believe that everyone of us on the side of the constitution would also take a democratic president to task, unlike these right wingers who foolheartedly support Bush, if we believed the constitution was being torn to shreds.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:09 pmColonel @ 112:
Yeah, I know. The word just irritates me and then people (OK, morons) pick up and run with it. Ugh.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:10 pmconservofacists.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:11 pmneotrollites.
draftdodgingprojectionists
po @ 116:
toasterhead was being facetious.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:11 pmA more appropriate term would be “Islamotheocrat†because the tiny percentage of Muslims who we’re talking about favor a world-wide Caliphate, which is NOT a fascist system, but a Theocracy.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — December 7, 2007 @ 2:08 pm
And even that I find dubious. I consider their use of Khaliphate to be more a term of art than a concrete goal. A big theme of al-Qa’ida is anti-colonialism, and I see their use of the term more symbolically – a breaking down the borders imposed by European colonial powers and uniting Sunni Muslims as one people.
It’ll never happen in the real world, cause tribe and ethnicity far outweigh religion in terms of loyalty in the greater Middle East.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:13 pm“draftdodgingprojectionists”
Comment by Bobwurst — December 7, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
Oooo! I like that one! :D
December 7th, 2007 at 2:13 pmdraftdodgingprojectionists
Comment by Bobwurst — December 7, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
Hey! I was a projectionist for awhile. Pay was awful but no one minded the ponytail.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:15 pmInteresting. Essentially he is unbound by the constitution…in his mind. I wonder how this administration feels about Supreme Court Decisions that don’t go their way. Do they use the logic, it is a time of war so we will do this regardless of the courts say?
What Frank and his kind don’t understand, or probably don’t care about is that when one persons rights are restricted, all people rights are restricted. How so? Even if you are not subjected to the loss of rights directly, the possibility is always there. As long as it is always someone else Frank is OK with it, never imagining that one day it could be him.
#53 Frank is comfortable with GW having those powers, but I would bet you the house that from 1992 – 2000 he would argue exactly the opposite position.
#61 Southernman using your logic we all have also had our rights taken away if the feeling of emptiness and despair and anger we felt on 911 means we all were attacked then the feeling of emptiness, despair and anger over the trashing of the constitution constitutes my personal damage. Frank take note of the southernman’s note.
#74 that’s easy…now apparently.
Today Frank = Willing piñata
December 7th, 2007 at 2:15 pmHey Po–sorry about getting hot about the cracker shit. In NYC one always has to stick up for the South because its citizens are responsible for so much b.s. in this country. Anyhow, you know what they say–NYer by choice, Southern by the Grace of God.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:19 pmFrank, have you personally been raped? If not, why do you think we need laws against rape?
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper
Excellent rebuttal.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:20 pm#110. Details?!? WTF? Have you not been paying attention. AQ is the direct descendent of the Mujahadeen Reagan and Bush 1 created to fight the terrorists in Afghanistan during the 80s.
Oh, I know. Just FYI – I have a permanent tag around all my posts, as they tend towards the snarky. Sorry for the confusion! :)
Afterwards we set up shop in Saudi Arabia and, well, seems OBL didn’t like that any more than the Soviets in Afghanistan. The rest is history.
Comment by po — December 7, 2007 @ 2:09 pm
Actually, it was when UBL offered to have his Maktabat army protect the Kingdom after Saddam invaded Kuwait and the Saudis said “no thanks, we’re going to use the Americans instead” that REALLY set him off. The presence of U.S. troops on Saudi soil and his exile to Sudan were just more salt in the wounds.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:20 pmStop discussing.
Wahabbites.
That’s the word to describe Al-Qaeda members. It is an insult in the Muslim world.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:22 pmThis is not democracy; this is fascism. Hooray for Sheldon Whitehouse to use his juris prudence experience and education to “out the rats” once and for all.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:24 pmLooks like Frank M has been wetting his pants here again.
Poor Frank.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:25 pmA more apt name for trolls would perhaps be: Neotroglodytes-Trollites which covers both bases. They’re uneducated, unresourceful, and uninitiated and they spew their blabber over these threads making quintessential fools of themselves.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:26 pmOf course I speak of piss-soaked Francine who has his cross-dressing knickers in a twist because the SS Bush is diving faster than the Titanic.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:28 pmUGH! So not only was the DOJ subject to the whims of “I don’t know” Gonzo, it was subject to the great legal mind of Shrub !
December 7th, 2007 at 2:28 pmSounds like someone just tried to put two scary sounding words together to frighten people.
Comment by Frosty Cupcake — December 7, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
fat-free cupcake
December 7th, 2007 at 2:28 pmThis is some truly scary shit people. This is basically saying that he can do anything and everything he wants to do without fear of repercussions.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:29 pmHats off to Whitehouse sniffing around on the changing of law broken by the President. I wish more lawmakers will step up to the plate. This is interesting catch:
Executive Order 12333 in 1981:
1.4 THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY
(a) Collection of information needed by the President, the
National Security Council, the Secretaries of State and Defense,
and other Executive Branch officials for the performance of their
duties and responsibilities;
Now Executive Order 13355:
Sec. 6. Technical Corrections. Executive Order 12333 is further amended as follows:
(c) Subsection 1.4(a) is amended by, after “needed by the President”, inserting “and, in the performance of Executive functions, the Vice President
In other words, Bush switched powers to Office of the VP.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:29 pmComment by rockwilder — December 7, 2007 @ 2:09 pm
Lets face it, as soon as a Dem becomes president is when the Republicans will “wake up,” realize the Constitution has been trampled, and will promptly blame the Democrat president for usurping Federal power and ignoring state’s rights.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:31 pm“fat-free cupcake”
Comment by dim wit — December 7, 2007 @ 2:28 pm
:D
Yeah, it’s all in how you promote it.
Islamofascism: Now with more evil
Frosty Cupcake: Now with more sprinkles
December 7th, 2007 at 2:36 pmStop discussing.
Wahabbites.
That’s the word to describe Al-Qaeda members. It is an insult in the Muslim world.
Comment by Juan C. — December 7, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
And even the connection between followers of ‘Abd al-Wahhab and the militant theology of al-Qa’ida is disputed among Muslim scholars. Salfism or Wahhabism is an orthodox brand of the religion that does not necessarily advocate violent activity. It is more focused on social change, combating secularism and moral decay. Similar to many Christian groups I can think of.
An appropriate analogy would be Wahhabism is to Usama bin Laden as the 700 Club is to Fred Phelps.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:36 pmI think a number of Democratic candidates including Hillary Clinton and John Edwards have already pledged to review every new “right” the Bushies have taken for the Executive Branch and probably reverse them. That’s something.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:40 pmI like it frosty,
How about bush: now with more sprinkles!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:41 pmI just love all the Republicans who could care less about Bush giving himself Dictatorial Powers.
I’d love to see their faces if Hillary got elected and decided to keep doing the same things that Heil Bush has been doing.
Guess Heil Bush learned real well from his grandfather, who helped Hitler rise to power.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html
December 7th, 2007 at 2:47 pmHeh – I know what I’d like to sprinkle Herr Bush with.
:o/ Let’s just say it wouldn’t be pretty …or edible.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:55 pmHey, Frank, about that streamlined chain of command; Who gave the orders to move those six armed nuclear-tipped cruise missiles from Minot to Barksdale via a B-52 on Aug. 30?
For a hair-raising read, check out http://www.willthomasonline.net
December 7th, 2007 at 2:59 pm“What *is* “islamofascism†anyway?â€
It’s a phony word constructed by neocons to spread mindless fear. The word makes no sense. A more appropriate term would be “Islamotheocrat†because the tiny percentage of Muslims who we’re talking about favor a world-wide Caliphate, which is NOT a fascist system, but a Theocracy.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — December 7, 2007 @ 2:08 pm
And don’t forget one of the main reasons WHY such a word had to be made up — the neocons needed to find a way to connect 9/11 and Saddam Hussein in the minds of Americans so they could invade Iraq. Since the only connection between OBL’s Al Qaida and Saddam was Islam (and even they had wildly divergent interpretations of it), all that had to be done was to invent a term that would effectively demonize all Muslims and presto! — over half the country readily believed that Saddam Hussein masterminded the 9/11 tragedy.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:00 pmBobwurst @ 141:
Or Cheney: Now with 50% More Evil
Giuliani: Lies Supersized
:)
December 7th, 2007 at 3:02 pmFrank wrote:
#27: How exactly has it affected you in a concrete way? Have you been dragged away in the middle of the night? Have you lost your job?
Just like 9/11 affected us all, this lawlessness, secrecy and lying affects all of us.
Because we have written civil LsTE, participated in anti-Administration marches (locally & in DC), signed on and posted to sites such as this, we are afraid to try to cross a border, try to make plans to fly and be denied at the airport gate.
Did you ever stop to consider, that because you post to TP, YOU are on someone’s “watch list”?
And yes, Frank, the chief breadwinner in this household lost a 40+ yr job a year ago, because the economy tanked under these warmongers and one must keep a low profile to be considered for another.
Perhaps you are too young to remember Joe McCarthy – but this once 5 year old DOES!
From October of 2001, people in this household saw how this was going to play out. We were wrong-it was worse than we ever could have imagined.
Please get educated – Rush, O’Leilly and Tweety should not be your teachers in either substance or style.
We will continue to work to restore DEMOCRACY and the CONSTITUTION to this country, by voting & working for a candidate who will remove our pandering Congress-critter from office.
We will continue to let our light shine!
December 7th, 2007 at 3:04 pmmissmolly:
Yeah, the Right is very good tactically, I’ll give them that.
The Left really needs some help in the sloganeering department. We have good ideas, but somehow the Left, in general, is bad at communicating them.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:05 pmneo cons love to twist the constitution. DON’T TOUCH the second one, the right to bear arms….however every other one is fair game. ..how they love to maniputate the truth. Who cares? I care! I have two Grandsons and I want them to have a future. G** D*** you neo cons and losers like Frank. Go to hell…
December 7th, 2007 at 3:07 pmSo, according to Frank M., I shouldn’t think an act is illegal unless I am personally affected by it? Frank M. has never been murdered, but I’ll bet he thinks murder should be illegal. Or maybe he doesn’t, being the nitwit that he is.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:10 pmTrollphuck, now with more lies!
December 7th, 2007 at 3:13 pmComment by missmolly — December 7, 2007 @ 3:00 pm
Just wanted to say thanks, missmolly. I always enjoy your pithy (no, not lisping) comments.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:22 pmAnd don’t forget one of the main reasons WHY such a word had to be made up — the neocons needed to find a way to connect 9/11 and Saddam Hussein in the minds of Americans so they could invade Iraq. Since the only connection between OBL’s Al Qaida and Saddam was Islam (and even they had wildly divergent interpretations of it), all that had to be done was to invent a term that would effectively demonize all Muslims and presto! — over half the country readily believed that Saddam Hussein masterminded the 9/11 tragedy.
Comment by missmolly — December 7, 2007 @ 3:00 pm
The term itself goes back to the early 90s, but I don’t recall it being in widespread use in 2003. I think it found its resurgence once the war in Iraq started going badly – 2004/05ish – and the perpetrators needed a reason to convince the public to continue supporting it. Hence the myth that the terrorists will “follow us home.”
The Saddam-9./11 connection as I recall was less a demonizing of Muslims than it was a deliberate effort to link Saddam and 9/11 in rhetoric as much as possible – in every speech, every talk show appearance, every editorial, every doctored NIE, etc.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:35 pmThe Left really needs some help in the sloganeering department. We have good ideas, but somehow the Left, in general, is bad at communicating them.
Comment by Frosty Cupcake — December 7, 2007 @ 3:05 pm
We don’t have enough marketing majors on our side — they all vanish into the corporate business world.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:47 pmneocon monkeys like to throw their feces around and make simian noises.
impeach convict incarcerate
this imperial unitary chimp rant must come to an end before 1.20.09
December 7th, 2007 at 3:48 pm#68 ~Are all angry, white, ex-military folks now suspected terrorists?
Comment by po — December 7, 2007 @ 1:45 pm
Uh, oh po. If this is the case, then I am really pissed about this Constitutional usurpation, yeah white (with a tiny bit of first nation blood) and a Viet Nam vet.
I must be a terrerisst.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:49 pmComment by toasterhead — December 7, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
You’re right, of course. Connecting Saddam to 9/11 was the priority. However, the blatant conflation of “Islam” and “fascism” has had the effect of demonizing all Muslims in the eyes of many Americans, even if that might not have been the primary intent.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:53 pmMcVeigh had at least 2 co-conspirators, and represents thousands more just like him in militias and white power groups all over this country – homegrown terrorists, each and every one. All have proclaimed their righteous, godly, white desire to overthrow what they feel is a “liberal” government.
Stop your lying. No one here is fresh from the turnip truck, Dixie.
December 7th, 2007 at 3:57 pmNeoConstitutionShredders…
December 7th, 2007 at 3:57 pmWhen is the damn War on Drugs going to be over?
December 7th, 2007 at 3:58 pm[days of our lives, soap opera intro]:
“Like the spam in our inboxes… these, are the “trolls of our lives”
December 7th, 2007 at 4:01 pmSen. Whitehouse Reveals Secret DoJ Legal Memos: Bush Determines What Is Constitutional
And how much coverage of this will be shown on the network news tonight or over the weekend? My guess is zip, zilch and nada.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:10 pmWow. This is really crazy. If Congress goes along with this bullshit, impeach ‘em all.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:11 pmYes, the United States in general was attacked, but more specifically New York and DC were attacked. Where exactly do you live? Why is it those farthest away from New York and DC are the ones most scared and ready to support a president whose policies make those of us who actually live in New York less secure? Never could get my mind around that, but maybe it’s best not to try to understand the stupid.
Comment by Blue Stater — December 7, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
I live in DC and I’ve often wondered about that myself. More that likely the residents in those 2 cities are much more enlightened than the rest, except for Bush and his minions still renting space here for another year.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:16 pmIt is amazing to see FACISM happening inside the USA! I grew up under a murderous military dictatorship that was financed, supported and backed by the USA. Now North Americans are having just a little taste of what they have given us for many decades! I can only pray for the people of USA! For what is there now is not DEMOCRACY. Congress is not doing their job! They are not representing the people!
December 7th, 2007 at 4:24 pmBUSH & Co. HAGE 2009!
December 7th, 2007 at 4:25 pmThat these commie-hating trolls don’t see the Sovietization of the US is stupefying. Why, you’d think they’d be the first ones to recognize it.
Oh, and it’s against the “law” for anyone who’s been affected by bu$hler the asscoverer’s Constitution-shredding to speak about it.
The ones who’ve been carted away can tell their stories through their lawyers, witnesses, or the ICRC, or wait till their day in court. Or, maybe not.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:28 pmSouthern Man: “Mc Veigh acted alone Col. Just because onee reads a book does not designate one a member of any organazation.”
So, is your position that there are NO right wing christian organizations which publically say they would like to overthrow the government by force? Because there are. Why are we not at war with these organizations?
December 7th, 2007 at 4:39 pmSo I guess it is Constitutional to cover-up the fact that Most Wanted Terrorists were captured in Florida on 5/29/2004 & 7/??/2004 as a result of my finding them so that the rewards will not be paid…
I also imagine that it was Constitutional to release Fazul Abdullah Mohammed after holding him in U.S. custody for like 30 months & then dumping him in Somalia – 1/2007…F.A.M. was under a U.S. FEDERAL INDICTMENT stemming back to 1998 from his alleged participation in the 1998 african embassy bombings…
By the way mr. president U.S. FOREIGN NATIONALISTS WERE KILLED AS A RESULT OF THIS PERSONS’ ACTIONS & YOU RELEASED HIM…
AHMED KHALFAN GHAILANI WAS SPOTTED BY ME IN FLORIDA ON 6/6/2004 & ON 6/8/2004 I CALLED A FBI FIELD OFFICE & NEXT I HEAR HE IS CAPTURED BUT SAID IN PAKISTAN = HE WAS FLOWN TO PAKISTAN FOR PAKISTAN TO SAY THAT THEY FOUND HIM TO GET
OUT OF PAYING THE REWARDS…
PLUS once their laptops were compromised MANY MORE WANTED TERRORISTS WERE CAPTURED IN THE FALL / WINTER OF 2004 AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE 5/29/2004 & HIS LAPTOP…
Obviously this criminal president does not understand
THE 14TH AMENDMENT SECTION 4 + PUBLIC LAW 98-533 — IN WHICH HE CHANGED TO THE REWARDS FOR JUSTICE PROGRAM — THAT DOES NOT HAVE ANY
OVERSIGHT OR ACCOUNTABILITY TO ENSURE THAT THE REWARDS ARE PAID…
These rewards ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED TO BE PAID & ARE CONGRESSIONALLY APPROPRIATED
BY U.S. TAX-PAYERS FUNDS TO SOME EXTENT…
READ ALL ABOUT THE CRIMES OF TREASON IN WHICH
MANY IN HI-LEVEL GOVT. POSITIONS COLLUDED & CONSPIRED TO VIOLATE EVERY LAW IN THE LAND — INCLUDING VIOLATING NATIONAL SECUIRTY THAT THEY CLAIM TO BE SO HIGH & MIGHTY ON…
Here is the press conference of 5/26/2004 & this link I got a hold of on 12/6/2004 & the 3 in black & white are
the 3 in QUESTION…
http://www.fbi.gov/page2/may04/bolo052604.htm
ALL OF THE PARTICULARS / FACTUAL EVENT + THE
ACTION TAKEN BY ME — (LAUGHS) — THROUGH THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEES OF BOTH THE HOUSE & SENATE JUDICIARY & INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEES CAN BE READ AT:
http://360.yahoo.com/caspereraser1
THESE CRIMINAL ACTS & THESE CRIMES WARRANT IMMEDIATE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS + THE SWIFT REMOVAL OF ALL THOSE INVOLVED WHO STILL POSSESS NATIONAL SECURITY CLEARANCES AS WELL AS BADGES & GUNS…
December 7th, 2007 at 4:39 pm172 – thanks for admitting you were wrong.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:18 pmSouthern Man: “ Just because onee reads a book does not designate one a member of any organazation.â€
Sounds to me like Dixieboy doesn’t believe strongly enough in the Patriotic Act, cause it says if you read the wrong book, you’re a member of AQ, and we can throw you in a hole for as long as we want.
Don’t quite square up, do it, Dix?
December 7th, 2007 at 5:29 pmLooks like the Bubble Boy is doing what Tricky Dick only dreamed of…
“Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal.” — Richard M. Nixon, during interview with David Frost, aired on television on May 19, 1977.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:42 pmHe is the Decider Guy branch of the U.S. branch of government after all.
December 7th, 2007 at 6:15 pmAl Capone would be proud of Dick n Dubya, but oh …. too bad …. Al died in Alcatraz.
December 7th, 2007 at 6:23 pmOK, Southern Man, I’m glad you agree that there are terrorist groups out there of all stripes, but my point is that this is a matter for law enforcement. There is no “War on Terrorism” any more than there is a “War on Drugs.” Those labels are marketing. Terrorism is a matter for law enforcement agencies with the cooperation, where necessary, of national intelligence agencies and/or the military. Terrorism is a tactic and, as such, cannot be attacked by conventional military force. So, we’re not really “at war.” We are conducting the limited military occupation of a foreign country we attacked a few years ago and terrorist organizations have carried out lethal attacks against our military during the last 10 years, but we’re not at war.
December 7th, 2007 at 6:31 pm“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
December 7th, 2007 at 6:47 pmJohann Wolfgang von Goethe
They Thought They Were Free
              Â
by Milton Mayer
Â
But Then It Was Too Late
“What no one seemed to notice,” said a colleague of mine, a philologist, “was the ever widening gap, after 1933, between the government and the people. Just think how very wide this gap was to begin with, here in Germany. And it became always wider. You know it doesn’t make people close to their government to be told that this is a people’s government, a true democracy, or to be enrolled in civilian defense, or even to vote. All this has little, really nothing to do with knowing one is governing.
December 7th, 2007 at 6:48 pmPowers of the Executive during a time of war? I’m still waiting for Congress to declare war (although I will concede that an AUMF is functionally the same, we are still not actually AT WAR until Congress says we are AT WAR, so Bush is NOT a “war President”.). They actually are not constitutionally allowed to relieve themselves of their specifically delineated constitutional powers of a) declaring war, b) deciding how the military is structured, c) deciding how the military is funded, d) deciding ALL of the RULES under which our combatants are legally allowed to fight. All of these are quite specifically listed under Article I, Section 8. You know, this:
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
The President is the Commander in Chief. That means, he decides the tactical and the strategic, he determines where and how the military are used…and here is the key point that the fanatics always ignore…SO LONG AS HE (or she) FOLLOW THE RULES THE LEGISLATIVE HAS LAID OUT for government and regulation of the military.
James Madison himself SPECIFICALLY said that the president’s powers DON’T include “the rights of war and peace”. Other framers likewise made such a case quite emphatically, specifically wanting to keep overly aggressive Presidents in check (you know, half of that whole “checks and balances” thing?). The fact that Congress has repeatedly given up their constitutional powers, powers they are constitutionally NOT ALLOWED to give up without an amendment saying as much, does not make it OK. In fact, it shows simply that the Judicial is not doing its job, and is instead caving in pathetically to political pressure, when they are in fact supposed to be impartial, and beholden only to the Constitution and the laws of the land that are constitutional.
When the President does it, it’s not illegal? Really, because I’m pretty sure the last president to assert such nonsense was forced to resign in disgrace, and the courts said that he was, essentially, full of sh!t when he made such a ludicrous claim.
December 7th, 2007 at 7:21 pmFrank you profoundly misunderstand the mind of the progressive. We are not chickenshits with authoritarian personalities who have to blindly follow any bigger monkey who comes along. We do not spend our nights cowering under our electric blankets because the night light is on the blink. Deep inside we know you are really not well.
December 7th, 2007 at 7:35 pmNow wait. I kind of like Frank M’s philosophy – Bush’s power grab hasn’t affected any of us directly and we haven’t lost our jobs.
Well, the same goes for 9/11. Most of the USA wasn’t directed affected and we haven’t lost our jobs. So I guess the war on terror isn’t even important.
Thanks, Frank. You made me see the light.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:35 pmDon’t be distracted. There’s one question that needs answering.
What did Iraq and Saddam Hussein have to 9/11?
Frank?
December 7th, 2007 at 10:43 pmExcuse me, but many of you, trolls and libs, don’t recognize greatness when you see it. Sheldon Whitehouse is one of the greatest lawyers and Senators I have ever seen in action. He is building a solid case against this president (if you can call him that). Sorry, trolls. Whitehouse is a lot smarter than you smarky sophomores. Go home and do your homework. You don’t deserve the time of day.
It’s always war, war, and more war with you people. Because I didn’t die on 9/11 and because I don’t have a family member in Iraq, you seem to think this doesn’t effect me? What is so urgent is that Bushco is violating every law and the Constitution he swore to: “preserve, protect, and defend.” Just because this particular president believes the Constitution is just a god damned piece of paper doesn’t make it so. It is the basis for our government, and if you children don’t understand that, please go to some nice dictatorship of your choice.
This is my country and the law is on my side. It is my turn to say “Your country–love it or leave it.” Impeachment is the only answer.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:47 pmThe war against Iraq ended 4 years ago. We met our war goals and Chimpy McFlightsuit declared victory more than once.
December 8th, 2007 at 12:16 amThe war against the guys who supported the guys who attacked us on 9/11 goes on, I guess. It’s only been 6 years, do we know who the enemy is? Who supported the 9/11 attackers?
The war on terrorizing you, announced by President Irrelevant but never declared by Congress (not even an AUMF), is unConstitutional and Bush should be impeached for usurping Congress’s war-making powers.
So which war is Frank-o talking about?
BTW, there are approx. 30-40,000 Jewish people living in Iran who don’t seem to be having problems with ‘islamo-ineedabogeyman’.
islamo-ineedabogeyman-ism. Hope I didn’t confuse Frank-o.
December 8th, 2007 at 12:18 amRe: comment #182 — Substituting a few words in Frank M’s statement would produce the following result:
“We are at war with christofascists or, if that term offends you, militant christians who intent (sic) to forcefully convert you and everyone else to Christianity or – if you refuse – kill you.”
Flash back to September 13, 2001 — Ann Coulter (darling of the MSM, the Christian Reich, chickenhawks and neocons all) wrote the following words in the National Review:
“We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren’t punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That’s war. And this is war.”
Frank M — Please explain to us all how Ann’s statement constitutes some form of moral high ground.
December 8th, 2007 at 2:00 amI appreciate Frank standing up in the middle of this, but you gotta realize Frank that while it’s true that there are some forces out there that would like to to get us, there is a BALANCE that is truly american to it’s core that allows to fight wars, meet our enemeis and do so wihtout trashing the constitution. This kind of abuse was not necessary to win WWII was it? You could argue that the damage to the US by the imperialization of the presidency, turing the judiciary into a political arm, and the weakening of the Congress is a much greater threat to our country than islamic fundametalism. I do not need to to go the middle east to hear the words of hatred and bigotry embraced and endorsed by Fox news, ann coulter et al. When progressives are considered terrorists, and that day is not far off as we are already called godless traitors by many – and Mit Romeny just said that “freedome requires religion”. This is not far off from what the isalmofacists believe.
If you think we are fighting a war for democracy in Iraq, you need to read their constitution. The enitre war is nothing but a distraction. You’ve been duped into believing that very real problem, terrorism, is the biggest threat to you. It’s not – it’s the loss of reason.
December 8th, 2007 at 2:51 amFrank M. when I see comments like yours regarding abuse of power “not affecting me” I immediately think of the poem attributed to the Rev. Martin Niemoller:
First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.
You’ve already been culled from the herd.
Oh, also the Patriot Act has provisions in it which make it a felony to tell anyone that you’ve been searched or arrested during a “terror” related investigation. The FBI agent gets to decide if the investigation is “terror related.”
December 8th, 2007 at 8:15 amwhen was the last time the white house was burned? like with fire, i mean. not just shown to be completely wrong or stupid. that stuff happens all the time. and does anybody know a good store for pitchforks and torches? bulk rates, please.
December 8th, 2007 at 9:17 amso is there anyone out there that has the huevos and power
to send the Marines into the White House and arrest both
Dumya and Vader?
let’s just get this over with!!!!!!!
December 8th, 2007 at 11:22 amSo the Chimp and his boss, Dick(head) Cheney, are succeeding in turning the American president into a Roman-style dictator, and all the Dems can do is quiver in their boots and cave in to a “leader” with a 25-percent approval rating. But many Americans don’t care as long as they can drive their SUV’s and watch American Idol and Monday Night Football.
December 8th, 2007 at 1:51 pmIn those long gone days when Nixon was claiming that if the President does it it’s not illegal, when petty abuses of power were enough to consider impeachment, when our President was merely a paranoid not a full blown psychopath, when loss of support and credibility could still lead to resignation I was in law school. I am by this administration reminded of a limerick penned on a restroom wall there fitting here. Alas while I remeber the salient point I have forgotten the exact rhyme. Perhaps someone who knows it more exactly can post but it was roughly as follows –
There was a young God named Mohunkit
He thunk a rock so large he could not chunk it,
He commanded therefore
I have never thunk it
So is it with Bush. When he doesn’t like something he simply declares it not so. If facts, law are too inconvenient they are by him declared away.
December 8th, 2007 at 4:04 pmIt is really amazing that in the short span of seven years we have become the country we were raised to fear and despise. The nation that invaded other countries, tortured other human beings, and dictated what the rule of law was to be. The only real difference is that our guy gets his marching orders from God. The real God of course, not the God of those who we are so eager to kill everyday.
December 8th, 2007 at 5:20 pmI’m worried about Frank. I think I saw him being dragged away at the airport – shirtless and shoeless – with the officer holding an orange suit with the monogram GITMO on it. He had been busted for having an extra ounce of mouthwash in his possession. Poor guy. Didn’t he know where such blatant disregard for the law would land him????
December 8th, 2007 at 6:06 pmGood question Frank. Let me think.
The Bill or Rights:
Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Our Administration listens into my conversations without writ or warrant.
I can not peaceably assemble without a permit which can be denied. If I am allowed to assemble, I am forced into a quarantine far away from the leader I wish to petition. http://www.amconmag.com/12_15_03/feature.html .
Even walking to a so called “free speech zone”, I’m subject to illegal detention if I’m perceived to be unfriendly to the views of the Administration and, of course, if I’m wearing black.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/02/AR2007040201568.html
Article 4
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Did I mention that the Government now listens to my phone calls?
The Government can enter my house for a sneak-and-peak.. enter my house and do what ever they want, without telling me.
The government captures all traffic through internet POPs. They are reading my electronic ‘papers’ without warrant. This is explicitly illegal since even warranted searches require affirmation of what and where the search pertains to.
Not long ago, the SCOTUS affirmed that Imminent Domain covers blight. If the government feels that my neighborhood is “blighted”, whatever that specifically means, they can take my property away from me then sell it to Private interests if they can expect greater tax revenues. I’d call that NOT being safe in my home when the government can take my home nearly at will.
Amendment 5
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
If I am deemed an enemy combatant, I can be arrested at home or abroad and detained without indictment, without charges, without due process. Luckily, the courts have so far stated that Bush’s DOJ’s actions were illegal. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/11/AR2007061101135.html
This process has already proven to have swept up innocent people, particularly when they were casting a wider net with forigners. We held innocent foreigners even though we KNEW they are innocent. Up until 2006 we held Chinese Muslim refugees scooped up in Afghanistan. They’re not Afgani so we couldn’t send them there. They would be persecuted in China so we couldn’t send them there. We wouldn’t let them into the US so we just didn’t free them for years. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4979466.stm Some world example of law and order we’ve built here.
Oh, and did I mention how low the bar now is for Imminent Domain? You better hope the township doesn’t think they can increase their tax revenues by taking your property.
Amendment 6
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Do I even need to go into this? See above.
If my government just says I’m a terrorist, I can be held forever without every seeing a court. At least that’s the theory of our President.
Amendment 11
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
The Terry Schiavo legislation violated Amendment 11. Who’s to say the next law won’t be written to provide for one person over my or your interests?
Amendment 12too long to post, re: electoral process
My vote for president has been stolen by corrupt machinations.
Amendment 14
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
I could write a book on this. Most of my comments so far have touched upon section 1 article 14. My liberty and the liberty of countless Americans has been deprived without due process of the law. The President has claimed these rights in Signing Statement.. Signing Statements that have been made during the signing of laws.. statements that contradict the letter of the law in question.
Do I really need to go over every one to make a point?
December 8th, 2007 at 6:33 pmFrank – Have you, personally been attacked by a an islamic radical????
Have you?
Comment by tombaker — December 7, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
We all have. 9/11 — Southern Man
********************************************
Let me tell you something, fella…I LIVE IN NEW YORK CITY and was doing so long before 9/11. Don’t you even think about trying to lecture me about the impact of 9/11 because I WILL NOT stand for it. I was not at the Twin Towers that day, but I was nevertheless here in the city when it happened — where, if I may be so bold, were you? I personally saw and smelled the smoke in the weeks following 9/11, and I know people who lost several close personal friends on that day. For weeks if not months afterwards, I was quite literally unable to stop myself from looking up at the sky when I heard a plane fly overhead. Can you say the same? Your moniker suggests that the answer to that is a resounding NO.
For eighteen months — albeit over a year after 9/11 — I got on the subway every morning and every evening to get to and from my job only a few blocks away from Ground Zero. Can you say the same? Your moniker suggests, once again, that your answer to that is a resounding NO.
Did it ever occur to me that there might be another terrorist attack — perhaps in the subway station, or on the train? Actually, yes — and I’d be lying if I said that it doesn’t sometimes occur to me still. With all due respect, however, is it really terribly likely that there’s going to be a terrorist attack where you live? If I lived in even half as much fear as you apparently do, I’d either have left New York a long time ago or I’d be barricading myself inside my apartment twenty-four hours a day with a gun trained on the door. Just because I know that there could potentially be another terrorist attack on this country — possibly even one in which I could personally be deprived of loss or limb — does not mean that I’m willing to live in fear or let everything that our Founding Fathers fought for be slowly eaten away from within simply because of people like you who have let this tragedy turn you into such yellow-bellied cowards that you practically see enemies lurking in every shadow and would rather sacrifice every single last civil liberty that you have in order to be “safe”. Safe from whom, exactly? If you’re willing to sacrifice most of your civil liberties for the sake of safety, what in the name of all that’s sacred makes you cling to the naive belief that you’ll really be safe — since you’ll potentially be in just as much danger if not even more so from the people who are ostensibly responsible for defending you as you might be from whatever legitimate enemies the country might be facing. Juvenal said it best — quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Translation — if the need arises, who will defend us from those responsible for defending us?) If people like you were to have it your way, the answer to that question would be NO ONE.
One of our Founding Fathers (the quote is attributed to Ben Franklin by some, to Thomas Jefferson by others) that those who are willing to give up their freedom in order to gain security do not deserve and will gain neither one. That sentiment was written with people like you in mind. Let me tell you something, fella…if this country is ever defeated, the odds are much greater that it will be because of people like you allowing this country to gradually disintegrate and degenerate little by little into something which is the exact opposite of that which our Founding Fathers intended and become something which hardly seems worth defending. As I see it, if you’re one of those naive people who believe that the terrorists are attacking us solely because they despise freedom, then you’re practically helping them to destroy us by allowing the government to chip away at the freedoms which you claim you want to preserve! Good grief…don’t you think that the terrorists want you to be afraid of them? If so…why play into their hands? Other countries suffer far more from terrorism than we do, but they also know one thing that you apparently do not — LIFE GOES ON.
December 9th, 2007 at 2:17 amFrank M., when I see comments like yours regarding abuse of power “not affecting meâ€, I immediately think of the poem attributed to the Rev. Martin Niemoller:
First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.
You’ve already been culled from the herd. — Joe T.
********************************************
I’m not quite certain that I follow your line of reasoning, Joe T. — and since I agree with your basic premise wholeheartedly, I’m virtually as certain as I can be that it’s gone waaaaaaay over Frank’s head if I’m having trouble with it. As far as I can tell, unless you intend “culled from the herd” as an implication that Frank is being groomed (whether he realizes it or not) to potentially become one of the “they” who will be coming to take people away, then I really don’t see the logic in your statement. If and when an authoritarian government should ever succeed in seizing power in this country — and as I told Southern Man, the people of the United States have nobody but themselves to blame if that ever happens — it seems rather unlikely that Frank will be one of those who’s “culled from the herd” and taken away because the odds seem highly in favor of him being one of those marching mindlessly in unquestioning lockstep behind the government, believing that the basic laws of mathematics have miraculously been suspended and/or superceded by Presidential decree so that two plus two now equals five (and yes, that was intended as a literary reference…).
December 9th, 2007 at 3:34 amWell, if Bushboy has decided to play the role of king of all three branches, I think it might be up to the “usurped” government bodies to raise hell and put him in his place. Buuuuuut…Nancy and the demo gang of pleasers and wimps have done nothing. The Supreme Court apparently does nothing until somebody gives them the elbow to make some noise when they’re not in “recess.” Does anybody know how many hours, days, weeks out of the year these puffed-up ex-lawyers actually work? So, if Georgie takes over and nobody has the nutz to fight him, he’s king. So march along y’all to the “eyes of Texas are upon you,” and just go along to get along. We wouldn’t want to mess up our earmarks for such trite shit as our free nation and our constitution.
December 9th, 2007 at 5:05 amMarty Lederman’s analysis that Whitehouse’s extemporaneous summaries are reveal nothing but boilerplate and are “fairly uncontroversial” (sic) is naive. The OLC provides legal justification upon request of the President in support of activity contemplated or previously undertaken. They are not in the business of restating the obvious. The OLC opinion that the president determines legality of the office under Title II and the further analysis that the Justice Department must act on that determination is an assertion of legal lawlessness. One can only wonder what crimes they’ve committed to seek such sweeping powers of absolution. If they want immunity from everything, it’s probably a safe bet that they intend to break most laws.
December 9th, 2007 at 11:44 pmThis is a very brave man. All of our Congresspersons and their families should receive Secret Service protection. The reason for many of the bad votes by Dems is threats by the bush crime family and i-s-r-a-e-l’s thugs.
Why do you suppose Rep. Stark withdrew his criticisms of bush playing with toy soldiers crying? Stark and his family were threatened.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:00 amIt humbles and satisfies me to see others waking up. However, it is also unsettling to hear the media saturated comments of people like Frank.
December 10th, 2007 at 4:19 pm