Reining In an Out-of-Control Executive
Our Founding Fathers created three separate but co-equal branches of government to check and balance each other so no one branch would become all powerful. Indeed, James Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers, "The preservation of liberty requires that the three great departments of power should be separate and distinct." Madison warned, "The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands... may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." The American colonists were reacting against a police state.
More than 200 years later, we have another King George. In the last six years, George W. Bush has sought to accumulate all governing powers in the same hands -- his. In the Declaration of Independence, the framers charged that the King "refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good." Bush has repeatedly violated the Constitution's command that the President "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," by breaking some and refusing to enforce others. The Constitution grants Congress the power to make laws; after both houses pass a bill, the President can only sign it or veto it. Bush, however, takes a different tack. He has vetoed just three bills, then quietly attached "signing statements" to more than 1,000 congressional laws, indicating his intent to follow only those parts with which he agrees.
In an end run around Congress and the courts, Bush secretly authorized the Terrorist Surveillance Program to conduct electronic surveillance without a judicial warrant, in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the Fourth Amendment. Although two judges on a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the dismissal of a lawsuit challenging the legality of Bush's spying program for lack of standing, the only two judges ever to rule on the merits declared the program illegal.
The Bush administration lied to Congress to get authority to invade Iraq. Long before the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Bush and his officials were planning to attack Iraq and change its regime. Dick Cheney's secret energy task force drew up maps of Iraq's oil fields to divvy up the black gold once we occupied that country. They then devised an elaborate scheme to convince the American people that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the United States, notwithstanding overwhelming intelligence to the contrary. Since Bush launched "Operation Iraq Freedom," more than 3,600 American soldiers and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis have died; many thousands more have been wounded. This invasion is a war of aggression, which violates the UN Charter, because it was neither executed in self-defense nor approved by the Security Council.
During the war, U.S. troops have been acting under rules of engagement -- free-fire zones -- that have led some to commit war crimes. For instance, the killing, execution-style, of 24 civilians in the Haditha Massacre, the execution of a disabled man, and the shooting of a wounded unarmed Iraqi in a mosque violate the Geneva Conventions which prohibit willful killing of civilians. Commanders, all the way up the chain to the commander-in-chief, could be convicted of war crimes if they should've known their subordinates would commit them and the commanders didn't stop or prevent it.
Bush's legal eagles, particularly David Addington and John Yoo, concocted elaborate "legal" arguments to justify the torture of prisoners. Never mind that international and American law forbid torture under all circumstances. Pursuant to a common plan to violate the Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, prisoners in U.S. custody are being tortured and abused. Prisoners have been subjected to water-boarding, attacks by dogs, sexual humiliation, and excruciatingly painful force-feeding.
The Bush administration has secretly rendered prisoners to other countries to be tortured. One former CIA agent observed, "If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear -- never to see them again -- you send them to Egypt."
Shortly after 9/11, the Bush gang set up a prison camp in Guantánamo, intending to create a legal black hole where they could hold prisoners for the rest of their lives without any judicial oversight. But the Supreme Court didn't buy the administration's argument that U.S. courts have no jurisdiction over Guantánamo because it's in Cuba. And the Court struck down Bush's original military commissions since they violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Conventions.
The Supreme Court said in Berger v. United States that a prosecutor's job is to see that justice is done, not to politicize justice. But Bush's Department of Justice, the chief law enforcement agency in the government, has been seriously compromised. Several U.S. attorneys who refused to bring frivolous charges that would further Bush's political agenda, or who brought charges that didn't, were purged.
The White House is resisting congressional subpoenas that call for testimonial and documentary evidence about the U.S. attorney firing scandal. The deadline for Bush, Cheney and the Justice Department to produce documents in response to Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenas about the warrantless surveillance is July 18. In 1974, when the House Judiciary Committee passed three articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon, Article III charged refusal to comply with subpoenas during the Watergate hearings.
Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and President of the National Lawyers Guild. Her new book, Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law, was just published. Her articles are archived at http://www.marjoriecohn.com.
© 2007 Huffington Post
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
25 Comments so far
Show All"May i remind you that blair did to britain what bush did to the usa on iraq. Even though bush and cheney and evidently most of the republican party would probably vote "to save that tea!" most americans would still vote to throw it into boston harbor all over again."
Hey, Bugsy.... Moooooooo!!
It's so heartening to know that the old revolutionary spirit still lives on amongst most Americans. Who'd have thought, then, that it's nearly tea-timarchy?
Y'all keep casting those votes now! Hahahahaha!!
Concrete evidence backing up points. Possible solutions. Interesting comments. Thanks for getting it started neoconned.
Email your senators and representatives to support impeachment of bush & chaney. Watch last Friday's Bill Moyers' Journal online. It was an education for me.
to the above poster who said we should start impeachments with supreme court justices, I disagree..
Start with pres & v.p. first so Bush does not immediately declare martial law & a state of emergency.
Once those two are dealt with I'd wager that the justices, senators & representatives will snap out of their ripvanwinkle stupor & even the media might get back to a "democratic program", at least give them time to explain themselves before collecting their heads in a basket.
There will be no "reining in." If there were, Congress would have acted. It did not and it has clearly demonstrated that it will not. Our only hope is the up-coming election, which, if it does take place, might help a little. However, given what I see and read in what laughingly passes for the news media in the U.S. I have become increasingly pessimistic.
Congress is the only branch of government that can do anything against this travesty of government. Polosi and Co. I believe are afraid of the repercussuions from Bush and Co. along with the Pentagon. The Pentagon is in the killing business and Polosi might be afraid that she could be a statistic if she brings up impeachment. She's a disgrace to the Democratic party and i predict she will not be re-elected for going against her own party and the power of the people.
NEOCONNED: thanks for a compelling case in your apt and needed "ODE to JUSTICE" and the restoration of US governmental checks and balances...
I have some questions. I've just watched a CNN piece from Iraq regarding the use of sunni militia in Anbar province. The piece showed disturbing violence by the militia on al quaeda suspects and a summary execution. There was a cutaway to Bush proclaiming success in this province as the militia were now working with the US military rather than fighting against them. The tone of voice of the reporter clearly showed his distaste for what he was showing.
My questions are these:- Is this the beginning of a media backlash against Bush? I don't recall seeing similar pieces previously.
OR Is this merely fodder for supporters of the war who see surrogates doing the kind of thing (other than the execution) which US troops do (but which wouldn't be shown)? Kicking butt, hitting those scum. Shown on the basis that no one is going to stop the current administration anyway.
These are genuine questions that I'd like some response to.
curiousobserver - There is already a MOUNTAIN of concrete evidence to support articles of impeachment. All of it is in the Presidential records (signing statements), the Congressional records and Supreme Court rulings and all is available to the public in the Library of Congess among other places (like ALL over the internet on Government run web pages).
Part of the real legal problem against impeaching the Executive though is that through the PATRIOT ACT's 1 & 2, the Iraq War power resolution the Congress has actually abdicated its own Constitutional responsibilities regarding acts of war.
Then you the Supreme Court, while legally correct in it's Gore v. Bush 2000 ruling that the citizens of FL DO NOT have a Constitutional guarantee to vote for Presidential Electors (It's called the Electoral College folks!), it also overstepped its own Constitutional authority intervening in a State Supreme Court's case, before the matter had been ruled on. they did this specifically to prevent the FL State Legislature from exercising their own constitutional guarantee/responsibility TO VOTE FOR Presidential Electors. the Electoral College again. The Supreme Court did this explicitly to prevent exposing just how the Electoral College works for all to see in plain view!! FL Legislature would have been operating within the bounds of our Constitution had they convened a special session.
Mineta v. Alexander, also before the Supreme Court in 2000, pre Alito and Roberts mind you, ruled that the "citizens of the Dictrict of Columbia, do not have a Constitutional guarantee to have representation for taxation." DC is a Federal City and not part of any State so it's citizens do not have a vote in Congress. The one elected position representing DC in Congress is allowed only to speak on issues on the House floor but cannot vote on Bills before the House.
So what in effect we really have is not just an out of control Executive Branch, but all 3 Branches are operating outside the boundaries of our Constitution. The 'Constitutional Crisis' being trumpeted in the corporate media today is nothing more that a different act in the same circus like the act last night that had these "elected" idiots marching around DC at midnight. I wonder, did they ever think of marching in Anacostia that late?
So the real quandry is that who do we impeach first? I would start with each Supreme Court justice that voted for intervening into the FL State Supreme Court's case in 2000. Good news for the 'cons, Alito and Roberts are not among them. Worse news for the Dem's since Bush would appoint many replacements. Even worse for the rest of us getting screwed by both parties each day on the way to work to pay their salaries, health care (best in the nation - better than the troops they all clamor to support in their campaigns), retirement (full govt pension for 1 term served), Secret Service details and Limo drivers, and on and on and on...
After the fallout there we can impeach all the Representatives and Senators that voted for the PATRIOT ACT's and the Iraq War resolution. Then maybe we can hold special elections to replace these criminals with people who will then impeach Cheney, Bush Rice, and also jail all of those responsible for war crimes. But alas, this would take the next 30 years to get through the courts and we would all have died of the stench of our govt by then.
OR... we can go through this country district by district county by county and remove the private run elections that have taken hold of our Republic (there NEVER was a Democracy folks!). Demand that education be funded by the number of students in each school rather than by the property taxes of each school district and that ALL US citizens get a free 4 years at ANY college or university in their own State. Demand that elections no longer can be funded by lobbyists. direct petitioning to Congress by individuals can remain legal but cannot invole ANY from of financial transactions, no lunches, golf games, nothing. Meet at the Congress persons office face to face and that's that. Equal access for all. Get in line with the rest of us K street. Declare political parties illegal and move FORWARD. No more MoveOn's or PNAC's or AIPAC's and no more voting for dollars in every election in the country.
I have been perusing this site for a little while. Does anyone else feel the need for more concrete documentations to back these arguements? And instead of complaining with your comments, does anyone have any possible, realistic ideas to these problems that are being presented in a somewhat biased way. Again, if you have a point back it up with evidence to build credibility. Then come up with positive solutions. Talk is cheap as the saying goes. Time for action. If its the right one. And lets keep an open mind to all sides of an arguement so that we can come up with intelligent solutions that are based on logic instead of emotion. Thanks. Looking forward to peoples ideas.
EVERYBODY LOVES BUSH (a poem of sorts )
Everybody loves Bush
Â
I mean Everybody
Everybody
Everybody
Â
Mobil, Shell, and Exxon
love Bush
Â
Off shore drilling companies
and defense contractors
love Bush
Â
Dictators, Unelected Interim Governments
and other anti-terrorists
love Bush
Â
Afghanistani Freedom Fighters
with their soon-to-be-new pipelines
love Bush
Â
NAFTA, World Bank
and other global monetary financial institutions
love Bush
Â
Arms dealers, weapons manufacturers
and other suit-and-tie businessmen
love Bush
Â
Hugh Hefner loves bush
The FBI, CIA and Homeland Security
with their 300 billion dollar budget
love Bush
Â
Millionaires, Billionaires, and Zillionaires
and people who think they should be
millionaires, billionaires, and zillionaires
love Bush
Â
Politicians on the take
and on the make
love Bush
Â
Insurance, logging, and mining companies
and others not so friendly
to the people or the environment
love Bush
Â
Chemical and genetically-modified-food companies
brought to us courtesy
of Monsanto
love Bush
Â
Even my father loves Bush
Â
I'm telling you
Everybody loves Bush
I mean everybody
everybody
everybody
Â
But me.
http://www.wordsareimportant.com/poemandpoetics.htm
HR 333 Impeach Cheney NOW
Congress apparently wants a king. Their actions show that they can't be trusted to protect the power of Congress. The Founding Fathers did not anticipate one branch committing suicide.
The Court has also failed to really stop Bu$h the inferior's power grab choreographed by Shotgun Dick.
The REPUBLIC will end here unless both of the other branches drop all party loyalty and philosophy and do what is necessary to hold the power in their branch to avoid becoming rubber stamp irrelevancy.
Another fine summary of Cheneybush crimes against the universe, but the title of this piece is, "Reining In an Out of Control Executive," and there is not a single suggestion on just how such a seemingly impossible feat might be accomplished, say, ASAP. Contempt of Congress? Seriously? Did you miss the part about the whole ignore-all-laws theory in play? Not to mention the f-you to Congress generally?
Only one way to rein in this band of neocrazies: immediate arrest and removal from our White House. The charge? Felony violation of the FISA Act, which specifically states a sitting president can be arrested and prosecuted for said violations. Especially one who confessed to the crime and vowed to continue to commit it. Open and shut case. It's the "Al Capone" attack - can't get 'em on the murders, get 'em on the taxes. Or, in this case, the FISA.
"More than 200 years later, we have another King George. In the last six years, George W. Bush has sought to accumulate all governing powers in the same hands — his."
Is there anybody out there who thinks there's going to actually BE a presidential election come 2008?
Hunter S. Thompson's appraisal of Nixon as ..a brute in need of extermination applies equally well to the Current Occupants.
Make that Cowboy Republic; Outlaw Republicans.
I'd love nothing more than to see a crazy eyed Nancy weild a leash and spiked studded dog collar round and round at a news conference; explaing that IMPEACHMENT IS NOW ON THE TABLE.
Time is long past due to reel in the mad dog bush/cheney and put them in a cage.
dear semi-moist bovine from redcoat britain, a country whose citizens are apparently are noted for being reluctant to eat their own cooking...ahem!
May i remind you that blair did to britain what bush did to the usa on iraq. Even though bush and cheney and evidently most of the republican party would probably vote "to save that tea!" most americans would still vote to throw it into boston harbor all over again.
Reining them in has been a serious problem since 2000 when the Supremes gave Bush the presidency after a corrupt election.
Jumping off from the GOP fascist rally outside of Miami-Dade Election HQs to STOP the vote counting . . . they headed right to secret energy meetings --
and I'll say to planning 9/11 --
We already have Dictatorship, Inc. in the White House --
and an underarmed Democratic Party still not coming to terms with the reality of fascism in America.
The strength of the Democratic Party has been destroyed over years by "targeting" of stronger candidates/incumbents and by the co-option of the rightwing/corporate "Democratic Leadership Council" within the Democratic Party--!!!
As I understand it, the 2006 vote for a Democratic Senate/USHR was much larger. As Greg Palast relates his reasoning for this conclusion . . . he notes that unlike what the GOP usually does, they did not challenge the many razor-thin Democratic victories in 2006 and he feels this is because behind those races there was so much Republican stealing going on that an investigation would be too dangerous for them.
Is there anyone who doesn't think that our elections are now frauds subject to black box voting under control of private firms with Republican sympathies -- "purging and caging" . . .
Also, because of the still present Electoral College system there is the increased opportunity for stealers to lean on areas where small changes can shift the Electoral College votes.
We need to return to paper ballots with guarantees of all votes being counted.
We're very much looking forward to our July 23 official homecoming at this end of the Atlantic.
Now, get with the programme America!
The Republic would at last appear to be, in all but name, gone. In its place a corrupt oligarchy speeding headlong toward outright autocracy, perhaps even timarchy ("FOR," spit, "SPARTAAA!" spit, spit). But with whom pulling the strings? GHB? GWB? Cheney? You may never know.
What you ought to know by now is the answer to your current predicament. All you must do is walk up to your Majesty's door and give it a gentle nudge. Inside you'll find that the most splendid reception awaits you on your own homecoming. The only thing that could possibly spoil it would be that you forget to bring the goods for one's favourite beverage (no, not bourbon – wrong palace!). Expectations, of course, will be low, so that filthy Earl Grey will do. If vigorously stirred and squeezed to mulch, however, it will just about substitute for China's Finest…but not really.
One thing you certainly won't need to bring is your collection of guns. The 2nd Amendment is an absolute no-no in your mother's house, and what good use you could possibly have for it anyway one really cannot imagine. The suspicion is that y'all don't even know yourselves. Shooting-up old coke cans on the back yard fence, perhaps? Yes, of course, that'll be it.
In any case, once finally reconciled with your family in the royal household your cosiness and safety would be, as always, guaranteed. So just forget about all of those ghastly guns, and don't even mention your quaint little revolutionary constitution – it was hatched a long time ago and just look where it got you!
It's getting close to teatime, Old (has) Beans. Pip pip!
Now is the time for all good men and women to come to the aid of their country. We have the fight of our lives before us.
If everything else fails to rein them in, how about using a leash? They're only 99 cents at 99-cent stores.
I've always disliked it intensely to hear people say, "I told you so." On the other hand, I've been writing for years, only to find that few people listen to or care about others' ideas until they are ready to do so, at which point they will claim to have been the first to discover a gem of truth. It sort of gives me a feeling for what the Indians must have felt when Columbus "discovered" America.
For those modern-day prophets, I re-post an earlier journal entry at www.raycarlson.com about the Declaration of Independence. Regardless of who discovered it when, I'm glad that the ideas I've articulated are finally catching on.