George Bush to leave a troubled legacy

Author Topic: George Bush to leave a troubled legacy  (Read 48409 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bigron

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,124
  • RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT 2012
Conyers seeks probe of Bush crimes
« Reply #80 on: January 08, 2009, 08:45:30 AM »
Conyers seeks probe of Bush crimes 

08/01/2009 11:53:00 AM GMT
http://aljazeera.com/news/articles/39/Conyers_seeks_probe_of_Bush_crimes.html
 
 The UN Security Council did not approve military action against Iraq, forcing Bush to assemble an ad hoc multinational force that he called the 'coalition of the willing'.


By Jason Leopold


Conyers proposed legislation to create a panel of experts to probe the policies pursued by the Bush admin .


In one of the first acts of the 111th Congress, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers proposed legislation to create a blue-ribbon panel of outside experts to probe the “broad range” of policies pursued by the Bush administration “under claims of unreviewable war powers,” including torture of detainees and warrantless wiretaps.

Conyers’s proposal for a National Commission on Presidential War Powers and Civil Liberties also signals that Congress will devote significant time this year to investigating the Bush administration’s most controversial actions with an eye to rolling back its expansion of executive power.

Many civil liberties and human rights groups feared that the Democratic-controlled Congress and Barack Obama’s administration would duck any sustained inquiry into wrongdoing by George W. Bush and his subordinates, to avoid angering Republicans.

While Conyers’s plan falls short of the criminal probe that civil rights groups have sought, neither would it prevent a criminal investigation by Obama’s Justice Department if the new administration moves in that direction, said two aides on Obama’s transition team who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Obama has been ambivalent about how to proceed regarding wrongdoing by the Bush administration. He said during the campaign that willful criminality should be punished because “nobody is above the law,” but also expressed concern that an investigation might get bogged down in recriminations and could be viewed by Republicans as “a partisan witch hunt.”

Obama also has suggested he might support some form of truth commission as a way of ascertaining the facts, which would be in line with Conyers’s plan.

The proposed blue-ribbon panel would consist of nine members, with no more than five from the same political party. Appointed by the President and congressional leaders, the panel would have a budget of about $3 million and subpoena power to compel testimony from high-level members of the Bush administration.

The panel would file an initial report to the President and Congress within one year and a final report six months later. The report would include “any recommendations the Commission considers appropriate.” lt is unclear if criminal prosecution could be one of the recommendations of the panel.

Mukasey's stand
Last year, amid disclosures about White House approval of brutal interrogation tactics used against “war on terror” detainees, Conyers called on Attorney General Michael Mukasey to appoint a special prosecutor to determine whether these actions constituted war crimes. But Mukasey didn’t act.

In a roundtable discussion with reporters on Dec. 3, Mukasey revealed his thinking, arguing that there is no legal basis to prosecute current and former administration officials for authorizing torture and warrantless domestic surveillance because those decisions were made in the context of a presidential interest in protecting national security.

"There is absolutely no evidence that anybody who rendered a legal opinion, either with respect to surveillance or with respect to interrogation policies, did so for any reason other than to protect the security in the country and in the belief that he or she was doing something lawful,” Mukasey said.

Regarding Justice Department legal opinions sanctioning these actions, Mukasey said he feared that second-guessing of those opinions would send “the message … that if you come up with an answer that is not considered desirable in the future you might face prosecution, and that creates an incentive not to give an honest answer but to give an answer that may be acceptable in the future.”

The war-crimes issue surfaced again when Vice President Dick Cheney gave media interviews last month in which he talked unapologetically about his role in approving harsh interrogation tactics, including the simulated drowning of waterboarding which is widely regarded as torture.

Conyers’s proposed legislation was introduced on the same day that the Senate Judiciary Committee gave reporters three previously unreleased Justice Department legal opinions pertaining to Bush’s authority to declare war with Iraq.

The legal opinions were written by Jay Bybee and John Yoo, former Justice Department attorneys who also drafted the infamous August 2002 “Torture Memo” that authorized CIA interrogators to waterboard high-level prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

The Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility has spent the past four years investigating the genesis of that memo, specifically whether Bybee and Yoo provided the White House with poor legal advice.

In Bybee’s newly released Oct. 23, 2002, 47-page opinion, he stakes out broad war-making powers for Bush, claiming the President "possesses constitutional authority for ordering the use of force against Iraq to protect our national interests.”

The memo was drafted about two weeks after Congress approved a resolution authorizing Bush to "use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq.”

In the memo, Bybee reaffirmed an earlier opinion that Bush possessed the necessary war-making powers regardless of what Congress did.

"This memorandum confirms our prior advice to you regarding the scope of the President's authority. We conclude that the President possesses constitutional authority for ordering the use of force against Iraq to protect our national interests," Bybee's memo said.

“This independent authority is supplemented by congressional authorization in the form of the [1991] Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution ..., which supports the use of force to secure lraq' s compliance with its international obligations following the liberation of Kuwait, and the [2001] Authorization for Use of Military Force ..., which supports military action against Iraq if the President determines Iraq provided assistance to the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

"In addition, using force against Iraq would be consistent with international law, because it would be authorized by the United Nations Security Council, or would be justified as anticipatory self-defense."

As it turned out, the UN Security Council did not approve military action against Iraq, forcing Bush to assemble an ad hoc multinational force that he called the "coalition of the willing." UN Secretary General Kofi Annan later acknowledged that the US-led invasion of Iraq was a violation of international law.

There also has been no credible evidence indicating that Iraq provided any assistance to the 9/11 hijackers.

Another newly released legal opinion, written by Bybee’s successor, Jack Goldsmith, authorized Iraqi prisoners be moved to other countries to be interrogated — a practice known as rendition.

The existence of the three new legal opinions were first reported Tuesday by McClatchy Newspapers, which added that “Yoo supplements those arguments [on presidential powers] in two other memos dated Nov. 8, 2002 and Dec. 7, 2002.”

Conyers’s legislation for the blue-ribbon commission was co-sponsored by Democratic Reps. Maxine Waters, Jerrold Nadler, Linda Sanchez, Bill Delahunt, Luis Gutierrez, Bobby Scott and Steve Cohen.

-- Jason Leopold is an investigative reporter and the author of News Junkie. His website is pubrecord.org.

ConsortiumNews




-- Middle East Online

 

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,136
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
Re: Conyers seeks probe of Bush crimes
« Reply #81 on: January 08, 2009, 09:13:18 AM »
In one of the first acts of the 111th Congress, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers proposed legislation to create a blue-ribbon panel of outside experts to probe the “broad range” of policies pursued by the Bush administration “under claims of unreviewable war powers,” including torture of detainees and warrantless wiretaps.

Oh puh-leeze! This is the same guy who openly resisted Dennis Kucinich's patriotic effort to impeach Bush and Cheney last Summer:

     http://www.prisonplanet.com/do-not-name-names-do-not-accuse-do-not-say-impeach-do-not-applaud.html

Does anyone honestly believe that this "proposed legislation" is anything more than a symbolic gesture on his part?

A clever way of scoring cheap brownie points with his anti-Bush constituency without actually accomplishing anything?

What a slimeball!
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,616
Re: Conyers seeks probe of Bush crimes
« Reply #82 on: January 08, 2009, 09:14:26 AM »

Great. How far are they willing to go. or is this a pony show when Bushy and Cheney and the gang are free and on top of the mountain.

One other aspect, if this new rigime (supposedly new) wants to lay blame , point fingers, they will have a reason to instigate whatever they want, blaming the prior regime for the BS.

Where was he when the abomination began, where were 85% of our congress.
Nah, sounds good, but in reality, these showman play the people.  tell me, now that Bush has accomplishd all he was set out to, he is free as a humming bird, will they put him in chains.. UH,UH.
They will grandstand this, anyone think they have the intesinal fortitudue to do the right thing after all thats happened to this nation dometically and globaly. Their position is elite, they will not sacrificce their brass ring,highly profitable & income of various natures..

I beleive i heard this fake say something allong these lines before, and include our dear Mrs. Pelosi in that.

Offline ES

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,640
  • Old Iron Sides: Enemy of Tyrannical Scum
Re: Conyers seeks probe of Bush crimes
« Reply #83 on: January 08, 2009, 10:07:39 AM »
Wow this is bold, there going to take a year and a half and then make some recomendations. Man the Bush gang must be shaking in their boots.
"My heroes are people who monkey wrench the new world order". - Jello Biafra

Offline Revolt426

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,190
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123241445616196157.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

History Will Remember Bush Well
Iraq looks good compared to the Korea that Harry Truman left behind.


In August 1951, with a little more than a year left to Harry S. Truman's presidency, historian Henry Steele Commager published an essay in Look magazine with this prediction: "By all normal standards, [truman's] Administration has been one of almost . . . unparalleled success . . . the verdict of history will not be the same as the verdict of contemporary critics."

At the time, Truman's popularity hovered in the low 20s and most Americans considered his presidency a failure. Look's editors even published a note declaring "doubts" about "whether history will accord Harry S. Truman as generous a place as Professor Commager assigns him." History eventually sided with Commager.

Today, President George W. Bush leaves office with approval ratings only slightly higher than Truman's. And I will make this prediction: The verdict of history on the Bush presidency will not be the same as the verdict of contemporary critics.

While Mr. Bush made mistakes during his time in office, like Truman he racked up a record of unparalleled success that will be increasingly appreciated in the years to come.

Like Truman at the start of the Cold War, Mr. Bush set our nation's course at the start of a new and unprecedented war. And like Truman, he responded by laying out a clear doctrine to guide America through the conflict. Mr. Bush created the institutions necessary to prevail in this struggle. He created the Department of Homeland Security and a new director of national intelligence. He transformed the FBI and the Justice Department to fight terror. He established new military commands. And he transformed NATO from a defensive alliance into an expeditionary alliance that is now leading the fight in Afghanistan.

Mr. Bush signed the Patriot Act, breaking down the walls between intelligence and law enforcement. He created a terrorist surveillance program. He directed the CIA to detain and question captured terrorist leaders. He drove al Qaeda from its Afghan sanctuary and put America on the offensive. As a result, more than seven years have passed since 9/11 without another attack on our soil. That's an achievement few thought possible when the rubble of the World Trade Center was still burning.

Like Truman in Korea, Mr. Bush imperfectly fought an unpopular war in Iraq. Yet just as most Americans now see our success in Korea as essential to our victory in the Cold War, it will one day be clear that our success in Iraq was essential to our victory in the war on terror. And the success Mr. Bush delivered in Iraq is far more complete than the stalemate that endures on the Korean Peninsula.

As Mr. Bush leaves office, Iraq is a unified and free country, and our enemies there have suffered a devastating defeat. If his successor does not squander that victory, a free Iraq will one day be to the Middle East what a free South Korea has been to Asia.

Like Truman, Mr. Bush made a first, failed attempt to solve difficult domestic challenges. Truman failed to get Congress to approve national health insurance for the elderly. But two decades later, President Lyndon Johnson invited Truman to join him as he signed legislation creating Medicare.

Similarly, Mr. Bush failed to get Congress to pass immigration and Social Security reforms. But years from now, Congress will have to act on these issues. When it does, I predict a future president will invite Mr. Bush to watch as the reforms are signed into law.

When President Truman left office, his fellow liberals blamed him for handing the White House to the Republicans. Today, Truman is a liberal icon.

Similarly, many conservatives who are angry with Mr. Bush today will take a better view of his presidency with the passage of time. While he took actions that dispirited some conservatives -- from bailing out the auto industry to taking North Korea off of the list of state sponsors of terror -- Mr. Bush did more to advance conservative priorities than any other president.

Mr. Bush enacted sweeping tax cuts. And he has the best record on judges of any Republican president -- his appointments of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito will be judged favorably over time compared to Justices Anthony Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, David Souter and John Paul Stevens (all put on the high court by Republican presidents). Mr. Bush enacted free-trade agreements with 17 nations, more than any president in history. He created Health Savings Accounts -- the most important free-market health-care reform in a generation. And he defeated Democratic efforts to use the State Children's Health Insurance Program (Schip) to nationalize health care.

.Mr. Bush won a Supreme Court ruling declaring school vouchers constitutional and enacted the nation's first school-choice program in the District of Columbia. He has been the most pro-life president in history, securing passage of the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, and the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. He refused to fund the destruction of human embryos for research -- and was vindicated by the scientific breakthroughs that followed.

Mr. Bush increased defense spending by nearly 73%, the largest increase since the Truman administration. He unsigned the International Criminal Court treaty, withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, and fulfilled Ronald Reagan's promise to deploy defenses against ballistic missiles. This is a conservative record without parallel.

In his final months, Mr. Bush confronted a challenge Truman never faced -- a massive financial crisis. It is hard for many Americans to appreciate the magnitude of the economic collapse the president averted. But history will show that Mr. Bush's actions in the fall of 2008 rescued our economy and saved our financial system.

Mr. Bush often told his staff that a president's job is not to chase popularity, but to do what is right. His insistence in following this philosophy is why he has low approval ratings, and why he has been a great president. Mr. Bush has led a history-making presidency and, like Truman, history will be kinder to our 43rd president than the polls indicate as he leaves office.


"Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate … It will purge the rottenness out of the system..." - Andrew Mellon, Secretary of Treasury, 1929.

Offline larsonstdoc

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,341

Quote
In his final months, Mr. Bush confronted a challenge Truman never faced -- a massive financial crisis. It is hard for many Americans to appreciate the magnitude of the economic collapse the president averted. But history will show that Mr. Bush's actions in the fall of 2008 rescued our economy and saved our financial system.


  It ain't over yet.  If the truth about 9/11 ever comes out completely, that's what he will be remembered for.
I'M A DEPLORABLE KNUCKLEHEAD THAT SUPPORTS PRESIDENT TRUMP.  MAY GOD BLESS HIM AND KEEP HIM SAFE.

Offline Revolt426

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,190

  It ain't over yet.  If the truth about 9/11 ever comes out completely, that's what he will be remembered for.

Truman was evil... he dropped 2 A bombs on Japan after they surrendered. But to compare him to the Cheney/Bush Syndicate is a joke.
"Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate … It will purge the rottenness out of the system..." - Andrew Mellon, Secretary of Treasury, 1929.

nofakenews

  • Guest
Leahy proposes 'truth commission' probe of Bush era
« Reply #87 on: February 09, 2009, 03:17:35 PM »
In a Monday forum at Washington, D.C.'s Georgetown University, Sen. Patrick Leahy, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, proposed the Congress form a "truth and reconciliation commission" to seek out alleged Bush administration "misdeeds."

"There are some who resist any effort to investigate the misdeeds of the recent past," Leahy said in a report by Huffington Post. "Indeed, during the nomination hearing of Eric Holder, some of my fellow Senators on the other side of the aisle tried to extract a devil's bargain from him in exchange for the votes -- a commitment that he would not make... That is a pledge no prosecutor should give and Eric Holder did not give it. But because he did not it accounts for some of the votes against him."

"We need to come to a shared understanding of the failures of the recent past," the Vermont Democrat said. "Rather than vengeance, we need a fair-minded pursuing of what happened."

"The truth commission should have subpoena power and witnesses would not face charges except if they commit perjury," reported the Wall St. Journal.

"Leahy said he wanted to find a 'middle ground to find the truth' and thus positioned himself in the center of the ongoing debate among Democrats about whether to investigate the Bush administration’s decisions," reported CQ Politics. "President Obama has signaled he doesn’t necessarily want to delve into the actions of his predecessor while Leahy’s counterpart in the House, John Conyers Jr. , D-Mich., has introduced legislation (HR 104) to create a more narrowly focused commission to examine presidential war powers and civil liberties that could lead to prosecutions."

"Sen. Patrick Leahy said Monday the commission's primary goal would be to learn the truth rather than prosecute former officials," reported the Associated Press.

"Leahy said the commission could be modeled after a similar panel that investigated apartheid in South Africa."

Leahy said he had not yet discussed his proposed commission with President Obama.

This video is from CNN.com, broadcast Feb 9, 2009.

http://216.87.173.33/media/2009/0902/cnn_live_leahy_questions_090209a.flv
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Leahy_proposes_truth_commission_to_probe_0209.html

Offline Ford

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
Re: Leahy proposes 'truth commission' probe of Bush era
« Reply #88 on: February 11, 2009, 12:36:57 AM »
I just wrote an article on why this plan is unacceptable.

http://mercurysgarden.blogspot.com/2009/02/why-leahys-truth-commision-plan-is.html

Why Leahy's "Truth Commision" Plan is Unacceptable
 
I was shocked today to learn of democratic senator Pat Leahy's plan for exposure of crimes that may have been committed by the Bush administration. The plan calls for granting immunity in exchange for testimony in the areas of warrantless wiretapping and torture.

We don't need these people to admit the truth under oath, we pretty much know the truth already. Granting immunity in exchange for testimony is a cop out, plain and simple.

Under the constitution of the United States of America, we have the right to be secure in our homes and our person and such things cannot be searched without a writ of Mandamus. If someone in a position of power violates this right, and is then granted immunity, then we really don't have the right. In fact, we don't have any rights, because if a situation dictates that one right is to be taken away, they can all be taken away. No one is above the law.

In fact, torture and warrantless wiretapping is just a tip of a very large iceberg. What is lurking under the surface of the water? Were voting machines tampered with in 2000 and 2004? Was intelligence faked in the lead up to the Iraq war? And if so, to what purpose was it faked? And why did building 7 fall at free fall speed due to fire? Why were vaccine companies granted immunity in the Patriot act?

Our economy is in a free fall, our water isn't fit to drink and our food isn't fit to eat. I demand answers, and I demand people be held accountable for their actions.The first three letters to the preamble of the constitution is "WE THE PEOPLE". Take note that it is not we the republicans, we the democrats, we the corporations, or even we the politicians. It is We The People. Our representatives are in congress to represent US. Not the banks, not the special interests, US. It is their solemn duty to investigate possible crimes committed against American citizens and prosecute when evidence is evident. A "Truth Commission" will only serve to provide a few soundbites where a few low level officials admit to wrong doing and ask forgiveness. If we are to remain a country of rights and laws we must have an investigation and prosecution if clear evidence of the violation of constitutional rights emerge. 

Offline Revolt426

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,190
Re: Leahy proposes 'truth commission' probe of Bush era
« Reply #89 on: February 11, 2009, 12:43:27 AM »
I can understand your opposition to certain aspects but i am sure Leahy has his own opposition and can only do this a certain way - I would think Leahy of all people in the US Senate would love to expose 9-11 considering he was targetted with the Antrax attack and was very overtly Anti-Bush during the Bush Administrations reign. Sometimes we dont quite understand the forces politicians face behind the scenes, and expect them to do certain things they are unable to do (death threats happen, amongst other things).

They have proven they are very willing to murder anyone in their way, And even people in the Legislative branch such as Senator Wellstone (Murdered). 

We need a new Peroca Commission for Wallstreet as well, Richard Shelby recently called for a Pecora like hearing on the Senate Floor.
"Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate … It will purge the rottenness out of the system..." - Andrew Mellon, Secretary of Treasury, 1929.

Offline oyashango

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,524
  • 43 Trillion and counting
Bush Administration Memos Claimed Vast War Powers
« Reply #90 on: March 03, 2009, 07:45:35 PM »
                      Bush Administration Memos Claimed Vast War Powers


03-03-2009
Source: IHT

The secret legal opinions issued by Bush administration lawyers after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks included assertions that the president could use the nation's military within the United States to combat people deemed as terrorists and to conduct raids without obtaining a search warrant.

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 showed a broad interpretation of presidential authority, asserting as well that the president could unilaterally abrogate foreign treaties, deal with detainees suspected of terrorism while rejecting input from Congress and conduct a warrantless eavesdropping program.

Some of the legal positions had previously become known from statements made by Bush administration officials in response to court challenges and congressional inquiries. But the opinions provided the clearest illustration to date of the broad definition of presidential power that was approved by government lawyers, including John Yoo and Jay Bybee, in the months following the Sept. 11 attacks.

In a memorandum dated Jan. 15, 2009, just before President George W. Bush left office, a top Justice Department official wrote that the earlier memorandums had not been relied on since 2003. But the official, Stephen Bradbury, who headed the Office of Legal Counsel, said it was important to acknowledge in writing "the doubtful nature of these propositions," and he used the memo to formally repudiate the opinions.

Bradbury said that the earlier memorandums were the product of lawyers confronting "novel and complex questions in a time of great danger and under extraordinary time pressure."

The opinion authorizing the military to operate on domestic territory was dated Oct. 23, 2001, and written by Yoo, at the time a deputy assistant attorney general, and Robert Delahunty, a special counsel. It was directed to Alberto Gonzales, then the White House counsel, who had asked whether Bush could use the military to combat terrorist activities inside the United States.

"The law has recognized that force (including deadly force) may be legitimately used in self-defense," Yoo and Delahunty wrote to Gonzales. Any objections based on the prohibition against unreasonable searches in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution would vanish, he said, because any privacy offense that comes with such a search would be less than any injury from deadly force.

Yoo and Delahunty also said in the Oct. 23 memorandum that "First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully." They added that the "current campaign against terrorism may require even broader exercises of federal power domestically."

Yoo said the Posse Comitatus Act, a statute first enacted in 1878 and since renewed, would also not present an obstacle to the use of the armed forces. The Posse Comitatus Act generally forbids the use of military forces in domestic law enforcement.

Yoo and Delahunty asserted that the act's prohibition against use of the military was only for law enforcement functions and that using soldiers against terrorist suspects would be a national security function.

Yoo, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, is widely known as the principal author of a 2002 memorandum that critics said authorized torture. The memorandum, signed by Bybee, was repudiated in 2004.

The memorandum issued by Bradbury in January appears to have been the Bush lawyers' last effort to reconcile their views with the wide-scale rejection by legal scholars and some Supreme Court opinions of the sweeping assertions of presidential authority made earlier by the Justice Department.

Walter Dellinger, a former head of the Office of Legal Counsel during the Clinton administration who was also a law professor at Duke University, said that Bradbury's memo "disclaiming the opinions of earlier Bush lawyers sets out in blunt detail how irresponsible those earlier opinions were." He said it was important that it was now widely recognized that the earlier assertions "that Congress had absolutely no role in these national security issues was contrary to constitutional text, historical practice and judicial precedent."

Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. said Monday morning before the release of the documents: "Too often over the past decade, the fight against terrorism has been viewed as a zero-sum battle with our civil liberties. Not only is that thought misguided, I fear that in actuality it does more harm than good."

Holder said that the memorandums were being released in light of the legitimate and substantial public interest.

One of the opinions, issued in March 2002, suggests that Congress lacks any power to limit a president's authority to transfer detainees to other countries. Other memorandums say that Congress has no authority to intervene in the president's determination of the treatment of detainees, a proposition that has since been invalidated by the Supreme Court.

Bradbury's memo repudiating these views said that it was "not sustainable" to argue that the president's power as commander in chief "precludes Congress from enacting any legislation concerning the detention, interrogation, prosecution and transfer of enemy combatants

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/03/america/terror.php

Offline oyashango

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,524
  • 43 Trillion and counting
Re: Bush Administration Memos Claimed Vast War Powers
« Reply #91 on: March 03, 2009, 07:47:23 PM »
                        Some Of Bush's Memos On Presidential Power Released


03-03-2009
Source: IHT

The secret legal opinions issued by Bush administration lawyers after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks included assertions that the president could use the nation's military within the United States to combat people deemed as terrorists and to conduct raids without obtaining a search warrant.

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 showed a broad interpretation of presidential authority, asserting as well that the president could unilaterally abrogate foreign treaties, deal with detainees suspected of terrorism while rejecting input from Congress and conduct a warrantless eavesdropping program.

Some of the legal positions had previously become known from statements made by Bush administration officials in response to court challenges and congressional inquiries. But the opinions provided the clearest illustration to date of the broad definition of presidential power that was approved by government lawyers, including John Yoo and Jay Bybee, in the months following the Sept. 11 attacks.

In a memorandum dated Jan. 15, 2009, just before President George W. Bush left office, a top Justice Department official wrote that the earlier memorandums had not been relied on since 2003. But the official, Stephen Bradbury, who headed the Office of Legal Counsel, said it was important to acknowledge in writing "the doubtful nature of these propositions," and he used the memo to formally repudiate the opinions.

Bradbury said that the earlier memorandums were the product of lawyers confronting "novel and complex questions in a time of great danger and under extraordinary time pressure."

The opinion authorizing the military to operate on domestic territory was dated Oct. 23, 2001, and written by Yoo, at the time a deputy assistant attorney general, and Robert Delahunty, a special counsel. It was directed to Alberto Gonzales, then the White House counsel, who had asked whether Bush could use the military to combat terrorist activities inside the United States.

"The law has recognized that force (including deadly force) may be legitimately used in self-defense," Yoo and Delahunty wrote to Gonzales. Any objections based on the prohibition against unreasonable searches in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution would vanish, he said, because any privacy offense that comes with such a search would be less than any injury from deadly force.

Yoo and Delahunty also said in the Oct. 23 memorandum that "First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully." They added that the "current campaign against terrorism may require even broader exercises of federal power domestically."

Yoo said the Posse Comitatus Act, a statute first enacted in 1878 and since renewed, would also not present an obstacle to the use of the armed forces. The Posse Comitatus Act generally forbids the use of military forces in domestic law enforcement.

Yoo and Delahunty asserted that the act's prohibition against use of the military was only for law enforcement functions and that using soldiers against terrorist suspects would be a national security function.

Yoo, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, is widely known as the principal author of a 2002 memorandum that critics said authorized torture. The memorandum, signed by Bybee, was repudiated in 2004.

The memorandum issued by Bradbury in January appears to have been the Bush lawyers' last effort to reconcile their views with the wide-scale rejection by legal scholars and some Supreme Court opinions of the sweeping assertions of presidential authority made earlier by the Justice Department.

Walter Dellinger, a former head of the Office of Legal Counsel during the Clinton administration who was also a law professor at Duke University, said that Bradbury's memo "disclaiming the opinions of earlier Bush lawyers sets out in blunt detail how irresponsible those earlier opinions were." He said it was important that it was now widely recognized that the earlier assertions "that Congress had absolutely no role in these national security issues was contrary to constitutional text, historical practice and judicial precedent."

Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. said Monday morning before the release of the documents: "Too often over the past decade, the fight against terrorism has been viewed as a zero-sum battle with our civil liberties. Not only is that thought misguided, I fear that in actuality it does more harm than good."

Holder said that the memorandums were being released in light of the legitimate and substantial public interest.

One of the opinions, issued in March 2002, suggests that Congress lacks any power to limit a president's authority to transfer detainees to other countries. Other memorandums say that Congress has no authority to intervene in the president's determination of the treatment of detainees, a proposition that has since been invalidated by the Supreme Court.

Bradbury's memo repudiating these views said that it was "not sustainable" to argue that the president's power as commander in chief "precludes Congress from enacting any legislation concerning the detention, interrogation, prosecution and transfer of enemy combatants.
 
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/03/america/terror.php


Offline TBPauly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
    • The World Of Big Pauly
Re: Bush Administration Memos Claimed Vast War Powers
« Reply #92 on: March 04, 2009, 05:47:28 PM »
If the Bush administration claims all of these powers, then what is to stop from assuming these powers on 9/11/01....and thus, shot down Flight 93 in PA?
"Let justice be done though the heavens fall."
Jim Garrison, c. 1969

Offline cambodreads

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #93 on: March 17, 2009, 08:04:09 PM »
Any news on where and what bush has been up to since he left office any new bloopers?

strgzr

  • Guest
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #94 on: March 17, 2009, 08:05:47 PM »
Any news on where and what bush has been up to since he left office any new bloopers?

He's probably had a lot of drinkin' to catch up on.

Offline cambodreads

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #95 on: March 17, 2009, 08:16:50 PM »
toasting himself for such a good *uck up he did

Offline Tsul777

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,236
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #96 on: March 17, 2009, 08:37:29 PM »
Any news on where and what bush has been up to since he left office any new bloopers?

He was in Calgary today hosting 1500 people for lunch. 400 bucks a plate from what I heard. Who but a neo-con or Bilderberger would attend such a fiasco? What a waste of space that sumbitch is!

Shoe throwers awaiting Bush in Canada
Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:22:07 GMT
 
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=88907&sectionid=3510203

Canadian protestors have organized a shoe-throwing rally to hail George W. Bush's first post-presidential address in oil-rich Calgary.

Hundreds of footwear has been amassed outside a Calgary conference center to be thrown at Bush's effigy in protest to the wrongdoings committed by the former US President, said Colette Lemieux of the Canadian Peace Alliance, AFP reported.

"We had shoes sent in (to us) from across the country," said Lemieux, saying Bush is a "war criminal" who must be prosecuted for his former administration's policies in the US "war on terror."

"It doesn't matter that he is no longer president," she added. "A bank robber who stops holding up banks can and must still be prosecuted for his crimes." The same applies for Bush, she said.

Bush, due to speak to some 1,500 people at a luncheon ceremony on Tuesday, has come to the North American country with a dismal approval rating and the lion's share of the blame for his country's collapsing economy.

More than 200 protestors from across Canada are expected to launch a rally and throw shoes at Bush's effigy to show their protest against his invasion of Iraq and rendition of terror suspects, the Alliance said.

The move is inspired by the action of Iraqi journalist Muntadar al-Zaidi, who threw his shoes at Bush calling the unpopular then US president a 'dog'.

Yah!!!! Way to go Canada!!
I AM POLITICALLY AGNOSTIC AND PROUD OF IT - John Tsul

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,189
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #97 on: March 17, 2009, 08:51:30 PM »
Where's Waldo?  Watch for GWB:
http://www.topix.com/news/george-bush/2009/03

http://www.topix.com/news/george-bush/2009/03/protesters-gear-for-bush-visit

http://www.fftimes.com/node/220680

Protesters gear for Bush visit
George W. Bush, who left office with one of the lowest popularity ratings in U.S. history, officially will kick off his unofficial post-presidential image rehabilition tour with a speech in Calgary tomorrow

Protesters gear for Bush visit
By editorial
Monday, 16 March 2009 - 1:16pm.
THE CANADIAN PRESS
CALGARY—George W. Bush, who left office with one of the lowest popularity ratings in U.S. history, officially will kick off his unofficial post-presidential image rehabilition tour with a speech in Calgary tomorrow.

But some protesters who plan to be on hand at the city’s convention centre say “Dubya” doesn’t deserve a soapbox—he should be in handcuffs.

When Bush steps up to the podium at a closely-controlled private event, he’ll face 1,500 friendly faces brought in by organizers and the Calgary Chamber of Commerce.

Tickets reportedly sold for $400 each and were made available exclusively by invitation.
Those invitations say Bush will share his thoughts “on eight momentous years in the Oval Office.” The former president also will speak about “the challenges facing the world in the 21st century.”
Protesters promise to be out in full force.

“It’s a war criminal being invited to Canada by a municipal representative body, to come and have a chat,” said Toby Pollett, who argues Bush should be arrested at the border over the alleged torture of prisoners in U.S. military camps.

“It’s ludicrous, really, when you look at it.”

Bush left office Jan. 20 when President Barack Obama was sworn in.
His image was battered from constant criticism over a crumbling economy and the war in Iraq, and he had the highest disapproval rating since Richard Nixon. Presidential scholars put him at the bottom of the list of American presidents of the 20th century.
In his last speech in office, Bush said he hoped people will remember that he was willing to make tough decisions through eight years.
One Canadian who tried to buy tickets to the Calgary speech online said the former president should be allowed a chance to respond to his many critics in a non-hostile environment.
“I’d like to say—OK, what do you say to all this? Give us your rebuttal,” said Edith, who lives outside Vancouver.

She declined to give her last name because she has found that expressing support for Bush in Canada provokes radical reactions and she’s worried about the effect on her job as a realtor.
While her son was able to find one ticket for $600, they decided it wasn’t worth the cost to make the trip.

Bush may have made mistakes in his presidency, but he does not deserve to be vilified for what he believed was right at the time, Edith said.
“I would like to observe him for myself,” she noted. “I haven’t completely formed my opinion on him, in the sense that maybe he was as bad as everybody says he was, [but] in my heart I believe he really tried, and there were a lot of good policies that he has, as well.”
A group of Canadian lawyers have written a letter to the RCMP war crimes section demanding that Bush not be allowed into Canada because he condoned the use of torture at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, as well as at prisons in Afghanistan and Iraq.
------------------------
Watch the other Bushes too:

Another Bush uncovered associated with another scandal (Lehman bankruptcy)
....
Why don't they (Bush's) all leave the country, now....or at least be indicted

Nope, sorry  gw Bush and wife seem to be in hiding...

http://www.fox4now.com/Global/story.asp?S=9844412
Bush family visits Bonita Springs for Celebration of Reading

Posted: Feb 13, 2009 06:33 PM MST

Former Florida governor Jeb Bush and his father, former President George H.W. Bush were in town today for the 9th annual Celebration of Reading at the Coconut Point Hyatt.

The event raised 1.4 million dollars for Florida literacy programs. As a special surprise, Jeb Bush presented a four-year college scholarsip to Maria Segura, saying she is a success of child literacy programs. She was part of the JumpStart Family Literacy Academy for children.

Also today, the Bush family answered questions about the current state of the economy. Former gov. Bush gave his support to Republicans for not voting for the stimulus package.

"Had it been truly bipartisan from the beginning, then I think there would have been a willingness to cross party lines," he said.

Former governor Bush also dismissed any rumors of a presidential or Senate run. He joked that his father does have political aspirations for him.

When it comes to budget cuts for southwest Florida schools, governor Bush said the solution is in Tallahassee. "You can't keep cutting forever," he said.

Fox 4's Justine Waldman asked former President Bush if he has any words of wisdom for Barack Obama on the economy. "I don't even remember where I had lunch yesterday," he said.

Barbara Bush usually attends the celebration but was sick with the flu.

Keep an eye on Jeb boy: Jeb Bush News for February 2009 - Topix
 http://www.topix.com/who/jeb-bush/2009/02
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

JBS

  • Guest
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #98 on: March 17, 2009, 08:58:32 PM »
I don't know where he is, but everybody knows where he has been and where he is going. There is no place to hide for war criminals.

Offline ellas95

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #99 on: March 17, 2009, 09:10:25 PM »
george bush

Yes you're all gonna miss me  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmwQTAA8H7Y

Lyrics:
Yes you're all gonna miss me, The way you used to quiz me, But soon I'll touch the brown, brown grass of home.


I spent my days clearing brush
I clear my head of all the fuss
But the fuss you made over harriet and brownie
Down the lane I look and here comes Scooter
Finally free of the prosecutor

Chorus

And then I wait and look around me
At the oval walls that surround me
I realize I was only dreaming
For there's Condi and Dick, my old compadre,
Talking to me about some oil rich Saudi,
But soon I'll touch the brown brown grass of home."

Chorus

That old White house is behind me,
I am once again carefree,
Don't have to worry 'bout a crisis in Pyongyang.
Down the lane I look, Dick Cheney is strolling
With documents he'd been withholding,
It's good to touch the brown brown grass of home."
Alex Jones: Question Your Reality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpFu_bYkomc

JBS

  • Guest
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #100 on: March 17, 2009, 09:11:51 PM »
Let's face it, the NWO people trashed bush as the sacrificial lamb, now it's time to pay the piper.

Offline ellas95

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #101 on: March 17, 2009, 09:51:26 PM »

4 arrested outside Bush's speaking engagement in Calgary
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2009/03/17/cgy-bush-speech-calgary.html

Slideshow .. Bush protesters in Calgary
http://www.cbc.ca/calgary/photogallery/2061/
Alex Jones: Question Your Reality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpFu_bYkomc

Offline Tsul777

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,236
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #102 on: March 17, 2009, 09:59:15 PM »
I wonder which oil-baron/mofo's house he's staying at tonight or if he had his Learjet fueled and made a quick getaway back to the farm?
I AM POLITICALLY AGNOSTIC AND PROUD OF IT - John Tsul

Offline thought_criminal

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Conspiracy of one.
    • my myspace page about building 7
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #103 on: March 17, 2009, 10:10:50 PM »
 I heard he's still recovering from the surgery to remove the puppeteer's hand from his ass.
"It is the first responsibility of every citizen to Question Authority." - Benjamin Franklin

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,706
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #104 on: March 17, 2009, 10:15:36 PM »
Calgary Bushvids - he's loved! ;D

The Shoe Launcher: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UtTa6zFQ_Q

Human Shoe Throwers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbNPonLU9wI

Pro Bush meet Anti Bush groups from the SleazeBC (and an anti gets arrested for throwing a shoe!):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nZ3hq1bxbw
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,706
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #105 on: March 17, 2009, 10:17:21 PM »
Ahhhh! Bush made $150,000 for his speech today. Crime DOES pay.
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,706
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #106 on: March 17, 2009, 10:23:38 PM »
Dude tries to make a citizen's arrest on Bush - like the RCMP is supposed to do due to Bush's "alleged" involvement in torture and war crimes - but the poor bugger gets arrested himself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aqgBV9lA7k
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline Tsul777

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,236
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #107 on: March 17, 2009, 10:28:29 PM »
Ahhhh! Bush made $150,000 for his speech today. Crime DOES pay.

Hey Freeski; if the take at the door was a cool $600,000.00 (1500 x 400per) and they only paid Shrub 150k, who were the criminoligists who pocketed the remaining 450k? Now that's a pretty sweet swindle!! Must have been taking lessons from Bernanke or something.
I AM POLITICALLY AGNOSTIC AND PROUD OF IT - John Tsul

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,706
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #108 on: March 17, 2009, 10:40:37 PM »
Hey Freeski; if the take at the door was a cool $600,000.00 (1500 x 400per) and they only paid Shrub 150k, who were the criminoligists who pocketed the remaining 450k? Now that's a pretty sweet swindle!! Must have been taking lessons from Bernanke or something.

Good lord, I think I'll organize an event called "The Three Takers" and invite Mulroney (for taking moola), Bush (for taking lives) and Clinton (for taking Monica). That should net me about one billion, less your tax-free 'inspiration fee' of what - say 19.5%?

Deal?
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline Tsul777

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,236
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #109 on: March 17, 2009, 10:49:02 PM »
Good lord, I think I'll organize an event called "The Three Takers" and invite Mulroney (for taking moola), Bush (for taking lives) and Clinton (for taking Monica). That should net me about one billion, less your tax-free 'inspiration fee' of what - say 19.5%?

Deal?


Nah, I'd settle for 5%. Just like the Gouge and Screw Tax  ;D
Then I could buy my arctic island and wait for the water to rise tee hee!!
I AM POLITICALLY AGNOSTIC AND PROUD OF IT - John Tsul

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,706
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #110 on: March 17, 2009, 10:56:01 PM »


Nah, I'd settle for 5%. Just like the Gouge and Screw Tax  ;D
Then I could buy my arctic island and wait for the water to rise tee hee!!

Have it your way, but no bitching about the lack of polar bears please!

PS - I thought it was the Grab 'n Steal tax? Symantics I guess.
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline Tsul777

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,236
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #111 on: March 17, 2009, 11:03:20 PM »
Have it your way, but no bitching about the lack of polar bears please!

PS - I thought it was the Grab 'n Steal tax? Symantics I guess.

On a serious note; I've talked to a lot of Inuvialuit hunters in the delta that are really perturbed about the government outright lying about the numbers of bears. According to them, the numbers are up. Have you ever tried polar bear? It's quite tasty to tell you the truth. Now that should piss off a few on the board!!
I AM POLITICALLY AGNOSTIC AND PROUD OF IT - John Tsul

Offline thought_criminal

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Conspiracy of one.
    • my myspace page about building 7
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #112 on: March 17, 2009, 11:06:55 PM »
I'm sure the left over money goes to the RNC, or some PAC or something.
"It is the first responsibility of every citizen to Question Authority." - Benjamin Franklin

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,706
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #113 on: March 17, 2009, 11:13:18 PM »
On a serious note; I've talked to a lot of Inuvialuit hunters in the delta that are really perturbed about the government outright lying about the numbers of bears. According to them, the numbers are up. Have you ever tried polar bear? It's quite tasty to tell you the truth. Now that should piss off a few on the board!!

Not much of a wild game man myself but I've tried a lot of it (not polar bear though!)

Yes, you've pissed of Alicia Silverstone with that comment. No Alicia for you!
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,706
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #114 on: March 17, 2009, 11:15:21 PM »
On a serious note; I've talked to a lot of Inuvialuit hunters in the delta that are really perturbed about the government outright lying about the numbers of bears. According to them, the numbers are up. Have you ever tried polar bear? It's quite tasty to tell you the truth. Now that should piss off a few on the board!!

BTW - any signs of spring up there yet? We're out of the woods now (Eastern Ont.) with plus zero temps for the next two weeks. Woo hoo!
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline Tsul777

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,236
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #115 on: March 17, 2009, 11:21:01 PM »
Lucky luck! We're still knee deep up here and a balmy -46 today with the windchill. Oh well, it's like they say: "If you can't stand the heat, get outta the kitchen or move to Fort McPherson!!" Spring's on the way baby!! In a couple months....
I AM POLITICALLY AGNOSTIC AND PROUD OF IT - John Tsul

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,706
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #116 on: March 17, 2009, 11:25:25 PM »
Lucky luck! We're still knee deep up here and a balmy -46 today with the windchill. Oh well, it's like they say: "If you can't stand the heat, get outta the kitchen or move to Fort McPherson!!" Spring's on the way baby!! In a couple months....

Egad! -46 (make more carbon footprints)
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline Tsul777

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,236
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #117 on: March 17, 2009, 11:37:47 PM »
Egad! -46 (make more carbon footprints)

I'd love to see the "woodstove police" come knockin' on my door!!
I AM POLITICALLY AGNOSTIC AND PROUD OF IT - John Tsul

Offline Elvis

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,356
  • just one
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #118 on: March 18, 2009, 06:25:58 PM »
"A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within." - Will Durant

Offline Overcast

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,133
Re: Whats happened to george bush?
« Reply #119 on: March 19, 2009, 10:24:38 AM »
I figured he'd be hangin' at the Grove, getting his freak on with p0rn stars.
And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin' to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they'll never take... OUR FREEDOM!