Bush Illegally Misuses Funds for Iraq Planning

In the interview, Woodward talked about how the administration was able to finance secret preparations for the Iraq war. ....


.... "... The end of July 2002, they need $700 million, a large amount of money for all these tasks. And the president approves it. But Congress doesn't know and it is done. They get the money from a supplemental appropriation for the Afghan War, which Congress has approved. ... Some people are gonna look at a document called the Constitution which says that no money will be drawn from the treasury unless appropriated by Congress. Congress was totally in the dark on this."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/15/60minutes/main612067.shtml

Shades of Nixon .... This IS an impeachable offense.

www.earthside.com

to pick up on the significance of this. Maybe after the interview airs on "Sixty Minutes" tomorrow night --

but this post does not conform to posting rules. Its title should be changed to reflect the actual title shown on the website. It's also more than 24 hours old.

Your manufactured headline is pretty misleading.

Thanks for posting this article nonetheless.

he plundered humanitarian aid for Afghanistan to plot a pre-emptive war. . .?

The actual title of the article doesn't reflect any of the news in the piece. I also looked back at DU headlines way into yesterday and I didn't see anything similar.

But the title does reflect exactly what Woodward says ... HE references the Constitution.

Perhaps everybody is waiting for 60 Minutes to make a big deal about this. But this is a big dea! It should be headlined now. Not only did Bush, according to Woodward, misuse funds apppropriated for an entirely different purpose, but he subverted what was arguable the real "war on terror" by taking money needed for the prosecution of that battle for a personal, pet secret project.

It is outrageous ... and potentially one of the most damaging things to come out of this whole stinking mess. We should all be screaming about it to everyone right now ... and demanding a Congressional investigation.

last night.

"President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq?' What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret," says Woodward.

-snip-

In a preview of Sunday's piece, Wallace described a conversation between Mr. Bush and CIA director George Tenet in which Tenet assured Mr. Bush that finding weapons of mass destruction was a "slam dunk."

Woodward writes of a White House meeting on Dec. 21, 2002, attended by CIA Director George Tenet and his top deputy John McLaughlin, who briefed the president and the vice president assuring them that Saddam Hussein definitely possessed weapons of mass destruction.

"McLaughlin has access to all the satellite photos, and he goes in and he has flip charts in the Oval Office," Woodward tells Wallace. "The president listens to all of this and McLaughlin's done. And and the president kind of, as he's inclined to do, says, 'Nice try,' but that isn't going to sell Joe Public. That isn't going to convince Joe Public."

Woodward writes in his book, "The presentation was a flop. The photos were not gripping. The intercepts were less than compelling. And then George Bush turns to George Tenet and says, 'this is the best we've got?'"

Says Woodward: "George Tenet's sitting on the couch, stands up, and says, 'Don't worry, it's a slam dunk case." And the president challenges him again and Tenet says, 'the case it's a slam dunk.'"

---------------------------------

they all should be in prison

Says Woodward: "George Tenet's sitting on the couch, stands up, and says, 'Don't worry, it's a slam dunk case." And the president challenges him again and Tenet says, 'the case it's a slam dunk.'"

Looks like a setup for the CIA guy, so he can take the blame for WMD.

Before we get too excited....

What were these funds actually authorized for? Did they come out of the congress approval of the "War on Terror"?

I mean, good gawd,...how much evidence is necessary to impeach this "worst president EVER" and charge his cronies with high crimes/misdemeanors?

Dean stated that his book basically lays out a prima facie case!!!

Will the freakin' congress do the RIGHT thing and impeach Bush NOW?

The Bush administration seems to agree. Earlier this year, the White House announced that it would not seek to reauthorize the industry tax. Instead, Bush wants to transfer $700 million from the general treasury to pay for Superfund.

http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=38

I'm amazed that Woodward has all this evidence of an unconstitutional and illegal war of aggression worthy of Nuremburg-style war crime trials.

I know the Boy King believes he is 'God's Chosen Soldier of Virtue' and above reproach or nagging 'doubting Thomas's' but the rest of the gang must've surely seen the danger in letting Woodward in on the plans.

Perhaps they were all so sure of getting away with their crimes that this book was to be used to show that they had saved us from WMD all by themselves without that pesky Constitution or Congress or the participation of the electorate so 'let's just get rid of all that clutter' because FUHRER KNOWS BEST.

Pride cometh before a fall. But with a massive body count.
TRIBUTES BECOME EPITAPHS. Remember that, soldier.

Woodward is most likely a MOCKINGBIRD asset - Watergate notwithstanding.

Bush At War was a joke. Woodward is no longer the investigative journalist he once presented himself as. I understand that Bernstein is none too fond of the guy.

So what's really going on here? Are we looking at damage control? A limited hang-out?

Clause 7: No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

(I'm assuming this is the clause Woodward refers to.)

Just throwing that out there. Maybe this is a set-up for the WMD "K.O."?

Worse than Watergate

Believe it or not, it is a felony! It violates the Anti-Deficiency Act, which forbids the government from spending funds for purposes for which they were not appropriated.

If Bush did this, then he committed an impeachable offense. If Cheney did it, then he committed a felony and should be prosecuted.

Remember the name of the law: Anti-Deficiency Act