B.S. conservative legal theory on display again.
Top Bush administration officials in 2002 debated testing the Constitution by sending American troops into the suburbs of Buffalo to arrest a group of men suspected of plotting with Al Qaeda, according to former administration officials.
Some of the advisers to President George W. Bush, including Vice President Dick Cheney, argued that a president had the power to use the military on domestic soil to sweep up the terrorism suspects, who came to be known as the Lackawanna Six, and declare them enemy combatants.
Mr. Bush ultimately decided against the proposal to use military force.
I thank goodness every day those jackals get further and further away from their time in power.
None of us can understand the anger and confusion felt by rich, powerful people when some one tells them they cannot do whatever they want to do. It really puts their brains in knots. And they are surrounded by sycophants whose job it is to come up with justifications for whatever they want to do.
We can’t really do anything to remedy this. The only hope for humankind is to erect and maintain institutions that are antagonistic to concentrated power. In the United States of the last thirty years, nearly everything has been moving in the opposite direction. So long as they are given access to consumer goods, even at the cost of all of their income present and future, Americans do not seem to mind.
Ask yourself this: in the months following 9/11, if the US had held a national plebiscite to suspend the constitution and give emergency powers to Bush, how would that vote have come out? What would the corporate press/media have done?
I am willing to admit that I am too cynical and that I often focus on the negative, but I have watched the trends in this country over the last thirty years, and I frankly do not hold out much hope for American constitutional democracy.
OMG, Bush DIDN’T violate the Constitution!!! Wait … what?
Your desperation for a scandal to distract from the stinkbomb that is health care reform is showing.
OMG, Bush DIDN’T violate the Constitution!!! Wait … what?
Which didn’t stop wingnut lawyer types for advocating for it.
Your desperation for a scandal to distract from the stinkbomb that is health care reform is showing.
Yes, that’s clearly why I’ve been writing about it for the last 2 days – and taking Democrats to task for their poor behavior. You see, on our side we critique our guys when they don’t do the right thing. Y’all would be more believable nowadays if you had done the same for 8 years beyond “Whatever George Wants”.
But really, this is impressive. In the air right now are accounts of two (TWO (2, count them, 2) things that Bush did right, or rather refused to do when Cheney told him to. One has to give him credit for them. This will raise his standing in history, if never to the level of the President who gave us the EPA and diplomatic relations with China.
Aw, heck!
If Bush had sent troops into Buffalo, then it would be no sweat for Obama Hussein X to use troops to impose Sharona law. Now he’ll have to be sneaky.
Yes, time to say something nice about GWB: GWB is not as evil as Cheney.
Your desperation for a scandal…
Sounds more like you guys and your bitter clinging to the OMG OBAMA HATEZ COPPZ AND WHYTE GUISE!!!! scandal.
I thought it was Shania law.
You see, on our side we critique our guys when they don’t do the right thing.
Cmon man! Now I have to wipe iced tea from my computer screen because I couldn’t hold back my laughter.
This is a story how? Obviously Bush made the right decision.
Some of our presidents have done some crazy shit during war time (I.E. Lincoln, FDR). Glad the right decision was made. Would’ve been going too far.
Picking Cheney was perhaps the biggest mistake of the Bush presidency. Along with picking Rummy as SOD. Bush campaigned as a small government conservative, and I think Cheney and Rummy are definately on the neocon side of things..
Jay,
I see criticism on this page of Harry Reid. Doesn’t that count?
But, subject at hand, as Rachel Maddow points out, this is all based on anonymous but well-informed sources WITH AN AGENDA. It is designed to burnish the Bush legacy at the expense of Cheney’s. There may be truth in it, but until someone takes the stand under oath, I take it with a truckload of salt.
Cheney and Bush are settling their differences the way Real Men ™ do, by having anonymous surrogates snipe at each other with the help of willing stenographers.
I hope my kids have an America that I would have recognized.
Rob Port of Say Anything has an interesting take on this:
One of the reasons Bush didn’t do it was lack of legal authority. That’s now no longer a concern, thanks to a Democratic congress, so President Obama has one less obstacle should he choose to do that himself.
J.
“The Democrat Congress passed in 2006 the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007.”
Was it passed in 2006? Because that was a Republican Congress, not a “Democrat Congress.” And both Bush and John Warner are Republicans.
Was it passed in 2006? Because that was a Republican Congress, not a “Democrat Congress.” And both Bush and John Warner are Republicans.
DOH!
No worries though…Jay will just put a (D) next to Bush and Warner’s names and fix the problem.
You see, on our side we critique our guys when they don’t do the right thing.
Spending
Harriet Myers
Dubai Ports
Campaign Finance
Spending
Immigration
Medicare D
Spending
Meanwhile, this blog has been silent on…
Indefinite Detention
Signing Statements
Secret Meetings on Health Care
The Entire Democratic Party of New Jersey arrested on Corruption charges
Jobs “created or saved”
Keeping Gitmo open
anything and everything Joe Biden
Yep, you sure are keeping ‘em honest.
Sounds more like you guys and your bitter clinging to the OMG OBAMA HATEZ COPPZ AND WHYTE GUISE!!!! scandal.
Who was the one who made it a scandal in the first place? Blue Blogs like Oliver’s!
Who was it who ramped up the visibility of the scandal? Barack Obama!
If Oliver and other blogs hadn’t tried to use this as Example A of “Racism is Alive and Well in the USA” and Barack had simply “No Commented” at his press conference, this would have been nothing more but a story on B-16 of the Boston Globe. You’ve got noone to blame but yourselves.
Pinochet would be proud
You’re so right Farris. If teh black people would just shut the fuck up about teh racism it’ll just go away!
John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for 2007
Signed into law by President Bush (R) Oct. 17, 2006
Composition of the 109th congress at the time of passage:
Senate R: 55, D: 44, I: 1
House: R: 232, D: 201, I: 1
And actually, the provision for domestic deployment is expressly limited to times of emergency so dire that the state and local governments are not capable of functioning. It has nothing to do with declaring a certain set of US residents enemy combatants and sweeping into an area with functioning local authorities to round them up.
I’m disappointed Jay, normally your bullshit is of higher quality.
Here’s a tip: never take seriously anything you read that contains the phrase “Democrat Congress”. Usually works for me.
Apparently Jay Tea has gone back to bed and pulled the covers over his head rather than defend his bullshit about a “Democrat Congress” setting a precedent that may now be abused.
Hope he didn’t drink a lot of liquids first.
Picking Cheney was perhaps the biggest mistake of the Bush presidency. Along with picking Rummy as SOD. Bush campaigned as a small government conservative, and I think Cheney and Rummy are definately on the neocon side of things..
Right. Because Captain Dress-Up “picked” Cheney. Or made any other decisions. Bush, Jr. was a figurehead and nothing more (like Ol’ Dutch). Get over it.
Who was the one who made it a scandal in the first place? Blue Blogs like Oliver’s!
Perhaps I’m wrong but I don’t remember it becoming a 24-7 cable news phenomenon until after certain quarters started treating Obama’s incautious statement in response to a press question as proof that he was “one of them”
I’m trying to remember if there was ever a response of this magnitude to something dumb that Bush said. Like for instance when he made that joke about looking for WMD’s under the couch, I remember we liberals gave him a hard time for a while, but did it become a viral news phenomenon for a week on the major networks?
Wilbur, did Bush do that during a primetime news conference, or did he do it as a skit during the annual Press Club roast? Oh wait, I forgot that the “far right wing conservative” MSM would treat Republicans telling jokes as their actual policy. (”Bomb Bomb Iran”…)
Speaking of being intellectually honest, I await Oliver’s screed tearing Obama to shreds for going on vacation. Not to do so would be prima facie evidence of Oliver being a hypocritical hack.
This is a story how? Obviously Bush made the right decision.
Admit it: you would have posted that if Bush had said, “Oh, what the heck? Go get ‘em!”
You see, on our side we critique our guys when they don’t do the right thing.
Spending
Harriet Myers
Dubai Ports
Campaign Finance
Spending
Immigration
Medicare D
Spending
Wow, you stood up to “Spending”. That sure took some cajones. Kudos to you and yours.
Wow! That’s an impressive list! And yet, you still managed to endorse, somehow:
The Iraq Invasion
Outing a covert CIA agent (who worked on Iran WMDs no less) for political cover and nothing more
Massive, regressive, unpaid for tax cuts for the Haves and Have Mores (Bush Jr.’s “base”)
The PATRIOT Act
“Mission Accomplished”
“OK you’ve covered your ass now, you can go…”
Torture in our name
DOJ abuse
Karl Rove and the Lee Atwater school of politics
Fox News
Sarah Palin
Rush Limbaugh
Glenn Beck
Gabriel McKee
Who could have predicted…?
Yes SF, Bush’s was a premeditated and scripted joke that, some said, showed both callousness toward the troops dying in Iraq and lack of contrition toward his own blunders.
Obama’s was an unscripted remark in response to a question at a news conference that was mostly about a completely different topic. Some said that it showed Obama being an angry black man with a chip on his shoulder against the beleaguered white race.
Guess which “some” got all the press.
treat Republicans telling jokes as their actual policy.
Massive, regressive, unpaid for tax cuts for the Haves and Have Mores (Bush Jr.’s “base”)
Thank you for proving my point!
Thank you for proving my point!
Are you suggesting that Bush, Jr.’s tax cuts did not favor the wealthy and ultra-wealthy? There’s a Nobel Prize winning economist who begs to differ. And that’s the only nit you pick? Also.
treat Republicans telling jokes as their actual policy.
No, SF, we treat what Republicans see fit to tell jokes about indicative of their character and thought processes. If you think we’re the only ones who do that, consider the Kerry Joke, which you all still considered a big deal long after it was explained to you that Kerry botched the joke that he intended to tell.
But we owe you a debt of thanks, SF, sometimes it does pay to click your links. Re Obama’s horrible horrible vacation planned for later this month:
While it may seem elitist in mid-recession to turn up at an exclusive resort, consider this: The Secret Service rejected some 20 other vacation spots before Blue Heron Farm got the seal of approval.
And you don’t get to put that up against Bush’s permanent state of vacation until the Obamas start going there every other weekend.
Thanks for proving my point that most republicans are cloth-eared planks.
You can’t cut taxes on people who don’t pay taxes. With the top 2% paying 50% of all income tax revenue, if you want to cut income taxes you don’t have any choice BUT to cut taxes on the top 2%, otherwise known as the “job creators”.
Oh, and that “Nobel Prize winning economist” doesn’t even know how to divide properly. So in Oliver’s world of “if you’re wrong once on anything, you’re wrong forever”, we can no longer use Krugman as an authority.
P.S.: Richard Armitage.
and I think Cheney and Rummy are definately on the neocon side of things..
What? Really? Come on, you’re joking.
So in Oliver’s world of “if you’re wrong once on anything, you’re wrong forever”, we can no longer use Krugman as an authority.
Sounds like you lot re: Andrew Sullivan. Anyhow, Krugman is far from infallible, but I think it’s pretty safe to say that he’s been wrong less often than right-wing economists have been right about anything over the past eight years.
Right. Because Captain Dress-Up “picked” Cheney. Or made any other decisions. Bush, Jr. was a figurehead and nothing more (like Ol’ Dutch).
dutch was nowhere near the puppet Bush Jr. was. At least with Reagan, the puppeteers hid behind the curtains.
You could practically see Cheney’s hand up Bush’s ass to make his lips move.
I remember we liberals gave him a hard time for a while, but did it become a viral news phenomenon for a week on the major networks?
More proof of the “liberal MSM media.” *rolls eyes*
dutch was nowhere near the puppet Bush Jr. was. At least with Reagan, the puppeteers hid behind the curtains.
I actually heard one of the Fox News ‘experts’ the other day claim that Axelrod and Rahm were Obama’s puppeteers. Just getting Dems back for the focus on Rove and Cheney, I guess.
With the top 2% paying 50% of all income tax revenue,….
Here we go.
Rahm and Axelrod got some pretty big shoes to fill.
P.S.: Richard Armitage.
How does this help your point, exactly?
Rob Port of Say Anything has an interesting take on this …
Oh, gee, and is “take” is completely one hundred percent factually wrong. Who could have guessed.
Jay Tea, you will buy anything, absolutely anything, that anyone says, regardless of its veracity, so long as it comports with your ideological view of the world.
Like he did when he made W. pardon Scooter Libby just as he was leaving office, Duros. Cheney could make that man, I mean, puppet, do anything.
Exactly, Dennis. I think this is the first time you have agreed with me.
“Right. Because Captain Dress-Up “picked” Cheney. Or made any other decisions. Bush, Jr. was a figurehead and nothing more (like Ol’ Dutch). Get over it.”
Ahhh…the all knowing “Indeed”. How do you gain access to such scandalous information from your mom’s basement? Must be pretty tough.
That’s another dumb left wing talking point. Cheney was more influential than most VP’s but Bush ultimately made the decisions. He went against Cheney’s wishes on a number of fronts, especially throughout his 2nd term.
He went against Cheney’s wishes on a number of fronts, especially throughout his 2nd term.
That explains why most of the fucked-up stuff happened in the first term. It doesn’t explain why Bush let Cheney lead him around by the nose in the first term, as your post suggests.
Which guy was president? Can you see Joe Biden telling Barack Obama what to do?
By the way, didn’t Bill Clinton use troops at Waco??
didn’t Bill Clinton use troops at Waco??
No. The FBI was in charge, and used unarmed Bradley armored troop carriers to patrol the perimeter and combat engineering vehicles to flatten fencing around the compound. They used these vehicles, which were obtained from the US Army, to breach the wall for a CS gas insertion.
I looked it up online. Why didn’t you do that before you made the accusation?
Interesting. Didn’t know.
There was that one time you told me ‘Well played, Dennis” and I agreed with you on that, Duros.
How does this help your point, exactly?
Well, I figured since it was *HIM*, not Bush, Cheney, Rove or Libby who leaked Plame’s status, I figured it was relevent. Guess I overestimated the “reality based” community.
It is interesting to watch movement conservatives pushing the line towards government authority, and liberals push back towards individual rights.
But of course, this is a contextual thing. Most conservatives respect/prefer military, police, religious and corporate authority, while liberals prefer governmental authority “on behalf of the little guy”.
I’m seeing the same old class struggle going on behind the scenes. The rich and powerful can buy or push their way in or out of many military, police, religious and corporate issues that impacts the regular guy, and then the regular guy tries to unify in order to pressure government (or somebody else with power or influence) to push back on their behalf.
Like he did when he made W. pardon Scooter Libby just as he was leaving office, Duros. Cheney could make that man, I mean, puppet, do anything.
Um, Ol’ Scooter got his sentence commuted in wicked short order. He didn’t get the full pardon, but he never really had any punishment, and Dick and Bunnypants got to cover their asses. If you want to pretend that George Bush, Jr. was an awesome, free-thinking, cowboy (as Junior no doubt does), that’s your prerogative. But we reality based life forms know better. I wonder why we’re not seeing much of the Elder Statesman Captain Dress-Up these days. Hmm…
I can’t wait for next week’s “scandal”: OMG! Bush’s team drew up contingency plans about Iran!
I can’t wait for next week’s “scandal”: OMG! Bush’s team drew up contingency plans about Iran!
Yes, and ten to one they’ll find one that involved fighting Iran by invading North Korea.
Kinda touching to watch SF defend the indefensible so earnestly and passionately. PS, SF: The fact that Armitage was the first to leak, does not mean that Libby, Rove and Cheney were innocent. You think Libby lied to protect Armitage?
Well, I figured since it was *HIM*, not Bush, Cheney, Rove or Libby who leaked Plame’s status, I figured it was relevent.
If Scooter Libby hadn’t obstructed justice, maybe we could have nailed him, but as we know from the conviction. Scooter took the fall for all his pals, possibly thinking a presidential pardon would be his reward. But that pardon would have relieved him of any Fifth Amendment protection related to testimony about those events, and perjury would have again been an option. No pardon, no testimony. Hmmm.
The practical effect of no pardon for Scooter is that he can’t be forced to testify about what Bush or Cheney knew. I suppose you think that even though a doofus like me knows that, the president’s lawyers might not have thought of it. But even the article mentions that the president sought the advice of his personal attorney on the subject rather than the staff lawyer who would usually handle such matters. Why would he do that if he had no personal exposure?
Oh well, as we know from Bill Clinton, lying under oath, NO MATTER WHAT IT IS ABOUT, is a crime, so Scooter definitely deserved the conviction.
Right?
Oh by the way, ‘Zilla ( http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/07/25/military/index.html ):
(And yes, Greenie correctly calls out Obama for endorsing this garbage:
)
The practical effect of no pardon for Scooter is that he can’t be forced to testify about what Bush or Cheney knew.
Indeed. And the practical effect of a (near immediate) commutation of Scooter’s prison sentence is that Scooter got off scot-free. What a bunch of bastards the Cheney Administration was.
the practical effect of a (near immediate) commutation of Scooter’s prison sentence is that Scooter got off scot-free.
Not quite, and here is wy Scooter wanted the pardon. With the conviction still in place, Scooter can’t practice law, which cramps his style a lot.
Not quite, and here is wy Scooter wanted the pardon. With the conviction still in place, Scooter can’t practice law, which cramps his style a lot.
Meh, I just think he and Cheney wanted he name cleared for appearances sake. The “woe is Scooter, he can’t practice law” pitch is conceivable, but I’m not buying. I be he can still consult, still hang out with the Cheney crew, and if necessary will be well compensated by the Vast Right Wing Shitweasels.
Whats this I hear about us gonna be put under the rule of Shania Twain?
I suppose there could be worse things.
and I think Cheney and Rummy are definately on the neocon side of things..
What? Really? Come on, you’re joking.
Come on Duros62, he’s really trying … hard.