BUSH's ORDER IS ARGUABLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL & IMPEACHABLE

Washington Monthly

This is against the law. I have put references to the relevant statute below the fold; the brief version is: the law forbids warrantless surveillance of US citizens, and it provides procedures to be followed in emergencies that do not leave enough time for federal agents to get a warrant. If the NY Times report is correct, the government did not follow these procedures. It therefore acted illegally.

Bush's order is arguably unconstitutional as well: it seems to violate the fourth amendment, and it certainly violates the requirement (Article II, sec. 3) that the President "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

I am normally extremely wary of talking about impeachment. I think that impeachment is a trauma for the country, and that it should only be considered in extreme cases. Moreover, I think that the fact that Clinton was impeached raises the bar as far as impeaching Bush: two traumas in a row is really not good for the country, and even though my reluctance to go through a second impeachment benefits the very Republicans who needlessly inflicted the first on us, I don't care. It's bad for the country, and that matters most.

But I have a high bar, not a nonexistent one. And for a President to order violations of the law meets my criteria for impeachment. This is exactly what got Nixon in trouble: he ordered his subordinates to obstruct justice. To the extent that the two cases differ, the differences make what Bush did worse: after all, it's not as though warrants are hard to get, or the law makes no provision for emergencies. Bush could have followed the law had he wanted to. He chose to set it aside.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_12/007789.php

when he has Senator Tom Harkin on his show. Senator Harkin expressed the same logic. This is serious politics now baby...... we are just about ready for "Check mate". :smoke:

Thanks again to my senators.

O8) :loveya:

Now.

This country has endured far too much. Give us relief. Restore our Constitution and the rule of law.

It also allows searches without probable cause, although it gets around the warrant with a "delay in execution of the warrant clause." It basically means that they can search and get the warrant later. Not acceptable.

Reid, Pelosi, let's go go go!

Git the pitchforks and torches ready, folks.

Best Invented Word Ever.:)

How many more laws does he have to break? Or is it because he is Jesus Christ Bush he will never have to accept responsibility for his treason? God,this is awful. He sure is lucky his trashy party is in the majority. :puke:

Especially those that went on at length during the Clinton impeachment about this being a nation of laws.

Those scumbags have an answer ready for everything chimp ass does.The party of "morals,ethics,honesty and integrity" only practice it when the Dems are in trouble.....but when the shoe is on the other foot all that goody goody shit goes out the door. They make me sick.

is say it's a new era after 9/11 blah blah blah and in the name of "terrorism." That's why they support the "Patriot Act" in the first place.

The hipocrisy must be trumpeted for all to see. Also LTTE time. And tell your Repug coworker.

We as a nation have been hugely disgraced by the actions of GWB and his henchmen. Bush on so many things rises light-years above the threshold set by Republicans for "high crimes and misdemeanors" when they impeached Bill Clinton, their failure to act now reveals the base hipocrisy that underlies all they do. We need to raise pressure so that they will act as their "consciences" should dictate, given their performance in 1998.

Say it loud, IMPEACH NOW!

Where are you, Henry B. Gonzales?

for goddess sakes, Democrats! Say it out loud. it isn't arguably against the law, it IS against the law and the Constitution!

and no, this isn't a question of what the meaning of "is" is...

People are always making that mistake, it drives me crazy.

HE SCREWED THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

gawddamn piece of paper keeps poppin' up...

Yeah. Gawddamn piece of paper, at that!

How dare "it" get in the way of PNAC! *coughing*

What were our founding fathers thinkin' anyways!?!? I mean... :sarcasm:

I can just hear him say it! The dictator wannabe. :grr:

would some of the GOP congress members impach their own leader? There must be some GOPs who hold to the law? Probably count them on one hand?

``That's wrong, clearly and categorically wrong,'' Specter said today on the Senate floor. ``This will be a matter for oversight by the Judiciary committee as soon as we can get to it in the new year -- a very, very high priority item.''

I'm encouraged by his outrage.

Do we need to clamor locally to impeach our Congressmen? Those Congressmen who fail to impeach Bush? Maybe that's the first step toward restoration of our democracy, clamoring for local impeachments?

The Republicans have given their official endorsement of the idea that you can impeach for any damned thing you find annoying. So let's get cracking. I find war crimes and numerous Constitutional violations to be very annoying indeed.

Enough is enough! How much power are the republicans going to let this dictator take. It is going to take those with a conscience, to join us in demanding this criminal be impeached. They need to stop him before he completely destroys America.

Sonia

And...

Never Give Up.

Where does it say that he can do whatever the hell he wants if he can say it's to "pertect Murkin lives"?


NGU.

I don't see that part in there.

NGU.

considers his job...

Creepy AND goofy.



NGU.

I usually reserve that phrase for good people. :hi:

The Constitution has too many big words in it. It has no pictures, graphs, box scores, or accompanying DVD summary compiled by staffers. No way he's ever gonna read it.

They don't call them the Bush** Crime Family for nuthin.

:hi: Dahling...

NGU.

Perhaps we should just start reading it over the phone to each other and to friends abroad? That way, he might listen. :hi:

"We the people... in order to form a more perfect union..." (Dang, I need to get that book by Jesse Jackson Jr.)

NGU.

he doesn't really care what it has to say or have any attention of standing by it so what is the purpose of him actually reading it.

That and Repugs are HUGE on plausible deniability..."You mean we have a CONSTITUTION! WOW, if someone had said that on September 12th I would never have endorsed the Patriot Act. Where can I get a copy?"

it would be a BLESSING! O8)

the first step to flushing all the impacted crap out of this country's political system. But not the last step. Chimpco to the Hague!

Not impeaching Bush would send a signal to every would be dictator in America, "You Can Get Away With It".

Just how did Clinton's impeachment traumatize the country? I didn't agree with it, but it didn't affect my day to day life. I also lived through Nixon's near impeachment and resignation, that had a bigger effect on the country in my opinion.

We ARE the Progressive Media.

NGU.

please give appropriate credit to the author, Hilzoy, who is guest posting on Kevin Drum's blog, The Political Animal on The Washington Monthly. Hilzoy's blog is Obsidian Wings.

The cavalcade of incompetence just keeps marching on. Is there no GOOD news in Freeperland ? It's constant war with these bozos. 'War in Iraq , war on Christmas, culture war,...'

Peace is at hand...when ?

could this mean Bolton gets implicated and INDICTED? This so sounds like him...(check out TPM Cafe):woohoo:

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Good to be here on this splendid day!!! PS: I LOVE POPCORN!


:popcorn:

I don't believe it. Hell just froze over.

"I think that impeachment is a trauma for the country, and that it should only be considered in extreme cases. Moreover, I think that the fact that Clinton was impeached raises the bar as far as impeaching Bush: two traumas in a row is really not good for the country,"

Jesus! What fucking tortured logic is that? The country was put through a trauma over phony, trumped up charges, a purely political act, so we're suppossed to ignore REAL DASTARDLY CRIMES because it's not good for the country?

Let's see: a doctor mis-diagnoses you with a serious condition, so you're traumitized until it's revealed that there was no condition. Three years later, you're told conclusively that you've got cancer, but you don't deal with the REAL medical problem because - after that false diagnosis - it's too traumatic. Shit!

I'm not so willing to sacrifice the rule of law as is the writer.

Pure asshole-dom.

Clinton Screwed an Intern...
Bush Screwed the Constitution!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:rofl:

I, for one, would not be traumatized by *'s impeachment. In fact, I'm more traumatized by the fact that this administration gets away with wiping its ass with our constitution daily.

It hurts, for a day or two, but you have good drugs and then pain is reduced a lot anyway because that rotted old tooth is gone. I have another tooth that needs yanking (damn wisdom teeth, anyway)- I think I'll nickname it Cheney.

It certainly wouldn't be a "trauma" for anyone but the most hardcore Bushbot. After 6 years of flagrant disregard of numerous laws and treaties, the Bush Administration has seriously undermined the the public's faith in the legitmacy of their own government. Impeachment would be a firm statement that the law does still matter.

That would save the country time and money.

Let's get on with it Junior! Spare us!

of impechment?

A regular bill would get referred to and die in committee. A priviledged resolution must be acted upon if the committee takes no action or votes it negatively.

would be my choice.

an UnConstitutional president and has been since 2000. The people are supposed to elect the president by the popular vote which the EC is supposed to go by but in 2000 the Scotus selected him even though Al Gore won the popular vote. In 2004 there is hard evidence that he clearly didn't win that election. So what's anyone going to do about it? He has been doing illegal stuff since day one.

The trauma should come when it sinks in how absolutely corrupt this administration has become! Stealing elections should be enough to throw the entire nation into a constitutionally traumatic fit, but I guess as long as the economy is doing "well" (for the investor class), nothing else matters...

The only way for this to really happen or even be investigated is for the House to flip from r to DEM.

We have to work our asses off, get progressive dems into office in '06 and get all this stuff aired out. Repukes don't care for the rule of law. All legal arguments will fall on deaf ears and NEVER reach the House floor, the only floor that matters at this point.

I am very angry.

Then on second thought who do we get after, Cheney?

The i word is only allowed to be used in secret. And if the secret gets out, you have to lie about it because you would never want somebody to know that you were interested in standing up for democracy for a change.

What's the D for again?

I've been signing petitions and rallying to impeach Bush ever since he stole his first election.

Hello Everyone, I voted to impeach bush and it is going to take millions of people to actually get the vote out. But the only problem is getting those right wing republicans to actually start signing the papers of impeachment to get Bush out of office. Because we can only take so much c**p from Bush before this country really starts to fall apart. And it's high time we had a new President in office. That's just my thought on things. So anyways i'll let you go, I just think when something is an impeachable offense that the President should be impeached right away. I hope to hear from you soon,good luck in all you do.

Welcome to DU!

I'm afraid too many Republicans are PERMANENTLY brainwashed.
Beyond repair.
But we can still keep trying!

This is not something silly, like a blue dress.


This is about violating the fourth amendment. The Constitution. No talking points. No spin. No Faux. Period.


And any Republicans that don't go along with this are immoral, unamerican.

noticed the threads about him surveiling Americans or whatever it was, and didn't stop at them. What did he do? What's this all about?

this is impeachable...

If violation of that by our highest elected (?) official isn't a high crime, I don't know what is.

Surely there are specific laws that a president can or cannot do by an Executive Order. bush has done lots of clever things with the stroke of an executive pen.

"U.S. Presidential usage
Presidents of the United States have issued executive orders since 1789. There is no United States Constitution provision or statute that explicitly permits this, aside from the vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution and the statement "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" in Article II, Section 3.
Executive orders do not have legal force by themselves. Most are simply orders issued by the President to United States executive officers to help direct their operation, the result of failing to comply being removal from office. Some orders do have the force of law when made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress due to those acts giving the President discretionary powers.
Other types of executive orders are:
national security directives,
homeland security presidential directives, and
presidential decision directives, both of which deal with national security and defense matters"

Well, this is interesting, don't know how accurate?

I really doubt this, but I hope he resigns! Also, I'm totally in favor of impeachment Bush and his entire administration!

~Erin

MSNBC managers will soon be trotting out the photos of Bush emblazoned with flags and halos as a counter to the latest scourge of scandal.

What was that former President Eisenhower warned about giving the military industrial complex too much power?

in the name of "National Security."

Once we clean out the WH of these evildoers, we have got to return to the public its "right to know," starting w/a complete media makeover.

http://www.cafepress.com/cuckoobanana

personally, the only thing that will bring me out of the trauma of the Bush Administration is to IMPEACH THE BASTARD! What a gift that would be to restore my faith in this once great nation.

Then to show the world that we truly are sorry...we throw him in prison in this country and/or sign on to the ICC ASAP and send him TO THE HAGUE!

Then our newly restored democracy would be able to celebrate Christmas without the hypocrisy...oh glory day.

PEACE ON EARTH...soon

He has violated the constitution, impeach the bastard.

Like take the kid gloves off already, * was installed by corporats to run roughshod on the rest of us. When his position becomes too untenable for them to support they will begin to groom another to install over us. Have you not got a clue yet?

... can't be legally impeached" argument from the freeper sect.

Lots of heads to explode that day, to be sure!

The March on Washington in October, 1973 after Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre" where everyone carried placards and banners calling for Nixon's Impeachment motivated Congress to send the House Judiciary Committee into session on the issue of Impeachment, and we all know how that turned out. We need to do it again. NOW!

to allow slithering away without doing anything.
here's a clue: THE JACKASS STINKING UP THE WHITE HOUSE IS THE TRAUMA TO THE NATION, dumbass, and the nation is more traumatized with every passing day that he is allowed to desecrate the office of "president."
and what's with this "arguably" CRAP?
sheesh, what more does the disgusting little prick have to do to be IMPEACHED, INDICTED, and IMPRISONED?

impeaching another president, especially so soon.
They knew they would be doing impeachable acts, and they wanted the innoculation.

on this topic may be The Imperial Presidency, by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. He outlines the history of the tension between the three branches of the federal government. By definition, they are equal, but by no means exactly the same in power.

The executive branch has always attempted to gather power unto itself in times of warfare. The constitution does imply that the president has some limited "extra" powers in times of crisis.

The problem, obviously, is when the executive office attempts to maintain a higher degree of power, and ignores the balance the constitution demands with the legislative and judicial branches. The problem becomes acute when there is a weak legislature and/or a corrupt judicial branch .... and one might argue that this was the case in 2001-2002.

The issue also becomes one that goes into constitutional rights rather than national security when the executive uses those "extra" powers for purposes that have nothing to do with protecting the nation. It is one thing for the intelligence community to take an immediate look at people & organizations tied to those who attacked the country on 9-11, and begin to instead monitor groups such as the Quakers who opposed the invasion of Iraq -- which has no relation to our national security, the 9-11 attacks, or any future risk to national security.

People should take the time to become more informed on these issues, because they are as serious of a threat to democracy as anything being hatched in the Middle East.

They have the ability to remove executive or judicial by impeachment, a parliamentary move only. Many of the extra moves a president is able to make are mere acts of fiat because of the plethora of laws (many unnecessary) that have been forwarded by the legislature.

Others are part of what might be called "constitutional practice." An example of that is the VP becoming president , when the president dies. The 83 words in the constitution on this subject do not say the VP becomes President, but this is the practice. Likewise, the president's "extra" powers come from the common war-time practices. They are also considered by many to be the #1 cause for impeachment, in theory. They should be in practice.

Impeach now! I want to see it everywhere!

:)

We want him behind bars, sharing a cell with Scooter.

"Bear City" in that cell all night, every night. Just imagine...

IMPEACH NOW! NO MORE BLOOD FOR OIL!!!

U.S OUT OF IRAQ!!!!

BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!!!!!

IMPEACH! THE PATRIOTIC THING TO DO!!! :patriot:

:dem: :kick: