Countdown: The Unitary Executive
By Heather Tuesday Mar 03, 2009 12:00pm
You Tube
Keith talks to John Dean about the release of nine Bush era memorandum. From The New York Times:
The secret legal opinions issued by Bush administration lawyers after the Sept. 11 attacks included assertions that the president could use the nation’s military within the United States to combat terrorism suspects and to conduct raids without obtaining search warrants.
That opinion was among nine that were disclosed publicly for the first time Monday by the Justice Department, in what the Obama administration portrayed as a step toward greater transparency.
The opinions reflected a broad interpretation of presidential authority, asserting as well that the president could unilaterally abrogate foreign treaties, ignore any guidance from Congress in dealing with detainees suspected of terrorism, and conduct a program of domestic eavesdropping without warrants.
Login or Register to post comments.
As usual, not a thing on ANY of the 'news' programs this morning, unless they talked about it after I turned the set off....I listened to as much of Washington Journal I could before I turned that off too.
What the people (who don't listen to KO or RM) don't 'hear' they won't even begin to listen to.....
*sigh*
CNN has more important Frontpage news:
" Spit happens: Saliva's mysteries revealed
Michael Jackson to make announcement
Apple unveils upgraded desktop computers
'Hyper' kitty stuffed into smoky bong Video
Dreaming dog lumbers into wall, wakes ..."
Naw the "Dreamin dog lumbers into wall " sounds like it may be about Bush.
perhaps one of the most amazing aspects of the history of america was washington stepping down from power--no wars, no strife, etc.
quite an amazing thing for someone with that much power--in the 18th cen--to willingly give it up. amazing. and, had he not, the country would be a different place today, imo.
now, my point: will obama reign in the expanded executive powers that the bush admin foisted in the country? will obama be washingtonian and deny himself power that he could claim? so far his record has been mixed, yet some would argue he is leaning towards retaining the bush-like powers. i hope he completely rejects the theory of the unitary executive.
George III upon hearing that Washington was voluntarily relinquishing power (which he actually did twice) said:
Or something to that effect.
Giving up power voluntarily was not something that Monarchs had ever done.
Next question. How much does Obama rescind Bush's power grabs.
Consider the FISA vote.
The server at movies.crooksandliars.com is taking too long to respond.
[Thanks. I e-mailed the powers that be about this. Site Monitor]
Or it's not responding at all (in my case.)
John Dean: Bush terror memos close to 'unconstitutional dictator'
Just an extension of the media blackout.
I have heard zero about this on tv today. Not a word. Why is the media afraid to discuss this and enlighten people about this? I did read about it this morning in the Palm Beach Post.
With the power bush gave himself, I would say he was the most dangerous man America has seen in a long time if not ever.
the media feel themselves to be the new-era electoral college. us stoopid ah-mer'kuns would git too scared an confused if they told us the whole truth... better the media tell us what to think abut in these dangerous times! let the big boys carry the responsibility of truth, e'll give you the rest so your pretty head doesn't get hurt tryin' to think there, lil' girl.
As to the scariest man in Ah-mer'kuh, its not Bush but the man who thinks to wield such powers effectively, after him, if Obama does not outright renounce them.
Sad, and lame. those two words could describe all facets of our current state of the union. :(
I'm pretty sure memoranda is plural, memorandum is singular. Although anything out of the Bush administration were memorandumbs anyway, so whatever.
although, one could also say "memorandums"
I hope it's okay with you if I use that. Priceless!!!
There are a whole lot of differences between bush and Pres. Obama. For one thing the Pres. has not failed at everything he has ever done. He doesn't have a spoiled frat boy background. He is intelligent. We do not have to worry that he will embarrass us when he visits other countries. He knows what living the way you and I do is all about. For these and so many other reasons, I cannot picture him taking advantage of the office to harm Americans the way bush did and tried to do. The Pres. is a constitutional lawyer, he is not a so called business major.
Bush gathered lawyers around him who would tell him what he wanted to hear. The Pres. knows the laws and I sincerely believe he will not follow in bush's foot steps on critical issues as well as others. I know there are going to be others who will doubt him, but as of now, I do not.
Exactly.
They BOTH have degrees from Harvard !!
Okay, one learned something and the other one didn't.
GW learned (again, I am certain) he wasn't going to be held responsible for his stupidity, callous disregard for facts or history, etc.
I don't think he learned those things in Harvard. I think his mother was his teacher when it came to character.
Is that no one at Harvard had the balls to fail him.
Several years ago one of his profs came out and said as much.
Then years later bush failed himself for all the world to see. I doubt seriously he is on the wagon these days. Even as dense as he is, he has to know that he failed at the biggest opportunity of his life. His name has become a joke and the only time it's mentioned in the news is with a negative story. Were I in his shoes, they would need to put me on suicide watch.
.. you mention shoes!!
Perhaps the MOST memorable recent moment of the Bush pResidency.
For sure one of the funniest memories, but sadly not funny for the guy who threw the shoes.
The difference between Obama and Bush? Obama can form a complete sentence.
But seriously, I don't see Barack and Joe moving into DictatorLand. With both of their backgrounds, I don't see it in them.
They both have a tough job ahead of them.
doesn't he have an extra one now that a press corp guy forcefully loaned him one?? LOL.
In the most critical moments of his life, all of this colostomy bag's decisions were that of a natural born loser.
He's the guy who always misses the bus, the elevators close on just him, sane women tell him to fuck off, prostitutes charge him extra, never funny, yet expects everyone to laugh at his stupid comments, thinks people who work hard are suckers, etc.
Or to put it more succinctly, he's a prick.
that's the catch, neither of those institutions are about "learning"... they are about ruling.
Makes sense. My Dad went to Yale. I hadn't thought of it that way before. Of course, there they call "ruling", "leadership" and it makes it so much better.
Bush went to Yale, not Harvard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush#E...
I would have never thought he had an MBA.
He had trouble spelling MBA, but Poppies money helped Harvard spell it for him.
Somethings never change.
Whichever president is on the throne, can do just about anything he wants, if he gathers the "right team" around him.
I think it's more about the man than it is about the powers (at his disposal). Obama is in no way as crooked as Bush-- the spoiled frat boy, raised in privilege, and as POP says (below), tutored by his dreadful elitist hag of a mother (babs): 'Ma Barker in pearls'.
Obama does not seem to surrounding himself with sycophantic yes men.
Is it just me or is the video not playing for anyone else?
John Dean: Bush terror memos close to 'unconstitutional dictator'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stI499BzZLg
Download from C&L is way sluggish today ..
Maybe there's snow in the internet tubes?
relinquish any of the bushevik power grab?
.. says he no longer claims these powers ..
A spokesperson for Obama said that He does not hold to these powers that bush claimed were legal.
Is Obama Embracing the Lawless, Omnipotent Executive?
by Glenn Greenwald
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/03/03-5
...President Obama implemented any of the Bushevik war crime transgressions? Your continuous and obsessed search to link Obama to Bush is becoming a travesty.
publically, assuredly, and unequivocally rescind all the excesses that Cheney wrought on the office of the presidency (sorry, * isn't bright enough to think these things up himself)
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/02/27/wa...
Court Rejects Obama Bid to Stop Wiretapping Suit
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration has lost its argument that a potential threat to national security should stop a lawsuit challenging the government's warrantless wiretapping program.
A federal appeals court in San Francisco on Friday rejected the Justice Department's request for an emergency stay in a case involving a defunct Islamic charity.
Yet government lawyers signaled they would continue fighting to keep the information secret, setting up a new showdown between the courts and the White House over national security.
The Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, claimed national security would be compromised if a lawsuit brought by the Oregon chapter of the charity, Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, was allowed to proceed.
Now, civil libertarians hope the case will become the first chance for a court to rule on whether the warrantless wiretapping program was legal or not. It cited the so-called state secrets privilege as a defense against the lawsuit.
''All we wanted was our day in court and it looks like we're finally going to get our day in court,'' said Al-Haramain's lawyer, Steven Goldberg. ''This case is all about challenging an assertion of power by the executive branch which is extraordinary.''
A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment.
But hours after the appeals court made its decision, government lawyers filed new papers insisting they still did not have to turn over any sensitive information.
''The government respectfully requests that the court refrain from further actions to provide plaintiffs with access to classified information,'' said the filing, suggesting the Obama administration may appeal the matter again to keep the information secret and block the case from going forward.
The decision by the three-judge appeals panel is a setback for the new Obama administration as it adopts some of the same positions on national security and secrecy as the Bush administration.
Earlier this month, Attorney General Eric Holder ordered a review of all state secrets claims that have been used to protect Bush administration anti-terrorism programs from lawsuits.
Yet even as that review continues, the administration has invoked the privilege in several different cases, including the Al-Haramain matter.
The case began when the Bush administration accidentally turned over documents to Al-Haramain attorneys. Lawyers for the defunct charity said the papers showed illegal wiretapping by the National Security Agency.
The documents were returned to the government, which quickly locked them away, claiming they were state secrets that could threaten national security if released.
Lawyers for Al-Haramain argued that they needed the documents to prove the wiretapping.
The U.S. Treasury Department in 2004 designated the charity as an organization that supports terrorism before the Saudi Arabian government closed it. The Bush administration redesignated it in 2008, citing attempts to keep it operating.
The 9th Circuit eventually agreed that the disputed documents were protected as state secrets. But the court ruled that the Oregon chapter of Al-Haramain could try to find another way to show it had standing to sue the government over domestic wiretapping.
A number of organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, tried to sue the government over warrantless wiretapping but were denied standing because they could not show they were targeted.
Ann Brick, a lawyer for the ACLU of Northern California, said the court has now crafted a way to review the issue in which ''national security isn't put at risk, but the rule of law can still be observed.
.. that Obama et al are holding these positions so that the courts can turn them down .. as they should.
hope...
where Obama could be in a sticky spot with allowing trials over this wiretapping dilemma, or other powers of the executive. IF, by illegal means, they found serious and true seditious or treasonous crimes or similar (or if there is very very VERY serious crimes blatantly made by the US that regardless of who did them would not help anyone here to release info on now) then maybe Obama would not want to broach the subject at all if he can. Not to say it's right per se, but that I could understand being stuck between a rock and a hard place there.
You never know... when you inherit the task of cleaning a house that wasn't yours, some things you find ya just throw away and choose not to talk about it, or you end up having to get a different house cuz your hubbie/wife won't sleep there anymore. LOL.
not sure that analogy fits here, but it makes you wonder -- exactly how MUCH crap is Obama cleaning up that he is thankful never came out at all?
i see what you are saying
yet, there is something so, for lack of a better term, unamerican about the govt claiming state secrets to stymie an illegal warrantless wiretap investigation.
not to mention the horror of the current DoJ defending some disgusting bush DoJ positions...
at some point in time (like yesterday) the country needs to know the extent of the illegal warrantless wiretaps bush employed against the citizens.
And maybe in the interest of actual National Security. I think they know more than I do. I want the truth also, but I won't assume culpability.
.
...he wanted...and he's going to walk.
Ya gotta wonder why the MSM is holding back this story if they do, because it directly affects their jobs and their businesses... if they didn't get the NEWS about the first ammendment today then what good are they - if they did hear about it then i'm positive they will be doing specials on it because the freedom of their MSM programming is at stake. Once again i'm positive the MSM will light up on this story. Of coarse if they don't run the story then what are we to think? [hint - there's a bigger news story they don't want to get out]
Search for "bush memo" now and you'll see 911 articles returned.
911 articles.
I'm not kidding.
911.
They don't report news anyway, so why should they care? It's info-tainment: just make it up as you go along, you know.
DOJ Announcement:
Department of Justice Releases Nine Office of Legal Counsel Memoranda and Opinions
Memos here:
Nine Office of Legal Counsel Memoranda and Opinions
Does anyone honestly believe the DOJ would release this information if Pres. Obama intended to continue to do the same thing that bush was doing?
i'm going to take a 'wait and see' position
It's more efficient for them to release information automatically than be inundated with Freedom of Information Act requests. Remember, President Obama encouraged the American people to file such requests if necessary.
I have been saying for a long time now that the Right Wing has about 98% control over all of the media in this country and if we were to have full investigations, full trials, and full punishment for the Bush Crime Family it could very well triger a fall into full Fascism. They have the people now right were they want them, without more than 2 dimes to rub together. Working to long and hard to pay 100% attention to all of the nuances that lead to a lost right here and a lost path to appeal there. That said I say go for it full blast.
Are you talking about a 'surge'? Fortunately this crime family is not worth it. Bush and the bushies may go under the bus.
its hard to imagine obama doing away with fisa the patriot act ect ect since he voted to give these powers to bush, why would he feel that they are now wrong for him to keep?sorry i forgot , must not ask the hard questions!
Washington Post, Dan Frookmin, White House Watch:
Posted at 12:52 PM ET, 03/ 3/2009
Bush's Secret Dictatorship
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/white-house-...
keep passing it 'round, Edwin!
why did Bush have all these things put in writing? He could certainly have operated his murky government out of sight as he did anyway without leaving all this evidence lying around.
What IS it in Bush that makes him believe that he can do anything he wants, violate the Constitution, violate the laws of the US, and be arrogant enough to put these matters into WRITING? (I'd pull Dick Cheney in to stand beside him under this cloak of hubris.) This kind of arrogance is stupendous.
Though I don't know much about Dick Cheney's psyche, I keep harking back to GW's earlier history. He's never suffered consequences for his actions but just kept on going to higher and higher "levels" of incompetence. I can only think his parents guaranteed that he'd always have Yes-men and women surrounding him as he bludgeoned his way through life.
It is a measure of his hubris that he apparently never thought he should toe any legal line and could even brag about it, and maybe people would even admire him for it.
Someone like that in the average population of any country would have had the tar beaten out of him many times and surely would have been imprisoned long ago.
Quite often, the bullies and closed-minded blithering idiots of the world are the captains of the football team, the most popular cheerleaders, the most well-admired people in your public schools in whatever they do. Why? because they have the gaul to do what others are -=afraid=- to do. To be the hunters, not the hunted. There are very few people indeed who choose to be the Hunters of life AND who choose to do what is right, continually.
Besides, tar-beatings to people like that mean nothing, because they lack scruples. It might shame them for a little bit, until they find a way to get back at the one who was mightier than they. "It's not over till I win" is the key mentality, and you'd be suprised how that mentality makes up for lack of skills, lack of education, lack of morality, lack of anything. Simple ruthlessness and the drive to achieve your goals (not what others expect of you) makes a king. Not a wise king, not a noble king, not a fair President. But a king-maker nonetheless.
It's because of people like that, few as they are, that we absolutely need democracy. Notice how republics call it the democrat party instead of the democratic party. That's to cover up the republics decidely un-democratic approach.
But really, we are not children. (even though some act like it)
We will need to be on guard for years to make sure that everything bush put into place has been discovered and stopped. And the only way to do that is to make all known that the DoJ and the President know.
I don't like secrets when it comes to what the government has done in THIS COUNTRY. It concerns us all in one way or another.
until i see the dictator hauled from his comfortable hidey-hole in dallas into a courtroom to be prosecuted for his crimes against the constitution, will i beleive that we are indeed still, a nation based on the rule of law.
Hmm...shouldn't that be the Urinary President?
He did such a piss poor job of it.
That bastard traitor to the Constitution, John Yoo needs to be sentenced to life in prison for the harm he did to the Constitution, and to our civil liberties. What is it about democracy, and civil liberties that John Yoo hates so much? He was more than happy to do everything he could to help Bush, and Cheney turn America into a dictatorship. Bush joked about it, laughed about it before the 2000 election. Only to Bush it wasn't a joke, it was his goal. John Yoo wasn't a pawn in those actions, he was a very willing participant in all of it. My hopes, and prayers are that someday he is called before a court, charged, and found guilty of crimes against the Constitution, and as a war criminal.
As much as I deplore all the scum that was and is the Bush administration if only one person were to go to prison for what they did, I hope that person is John Yoo!And if treason rears it's ugly head, I further hope Yoo gets the death penalty!Either way I'd like to add" ADIOS YOO MUTHA FUCKER,YOO!LOL!
[Deleted. Spam-Sitemonitor]
Login or Register to post comments.