Letters to the Editor
-
Lawless Group??? More like BRAINLESS
It is not as if each and every argument advanced by Addington in his demented theory of the Unitary Executive has not been heard before. Ditto for Bush's rather less articulate claims. What it comes down to is Bush's claim that he occupied the Presidency because God chose him . . . and Addington's claim that Bush could, in his wisdom, violate the law in his role as Commander in Chief.
Charles I of England made similar claims. Charles said he ruled by Divine Right . . . and that The King Can Do No Wrong.
Parliament was rather less than enthused by Charles posturing, and in 1649 they resolved this controversy by removing Charles Stuart's head from his shoulders.
The Framers of the Constitution were well aware of the history of the English kings . . . and having just deposed one monarch, were in no hurry to install another. There is a reason that the Legislature is the pre-eminent of the three branches of government. The Legislature is the only body directly selected by the People (Executive is by the Electoral College, Juridical by Appointment), AND the Legislature has the authority to remove the Executive of the Judiciary by fiat, a power granted no other branch.
Either Addington et alii are either too fucking stupid to know this . . . or are simply consciously ignoring the facts. Either way, their actions do not grant them license to abuse the law.
Impeach. Remove. Indict. Try. Convict. Imprison. Bush and his enablers are criminals, pure and simple.
-
The rumors of his demise
are greatly exaggerated. Mukasey WILL be confirmed for AG. With Democratic support. And he will be just as you say, a cog in the machine willing to do whatever it takes to destroy American democracy. If he's a Republican, he's a criminal. Simple as that. But the Dems are SOOOOOO afraid of being called names, they will give away our freedoms and rights. We have no saviors. We have no heros. Only frightened children pretending to be tough. The country is so over. RIP America.
-
USE VIDEO!
The democrats need to play tapes of torture for Mukasey and then ask him if what he has seen is torture. The juxtaposition is pwerful. Have a look ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaK3a3XSPA8
-
So I read it...
After about the millionth time reading how Cheney, Addison, and co. believe the constitution grants the president absolute power over the military and foreign relations, I had to go back to re-read the constitution. This Cheney version is just not how I remember it from high school civics class mumble-mumble years ago.
Sure enough, the constitution I found on line bears no resemblance to their fictional document. (Google pointed me here http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html - I'm sure there are many other options).
Rather than quote at length from the section on congress's powers and the president's powers I'll point out some highlights. I urge you to read it in context.
Congress has the power to:
To define and punish ... offenses against the law of nations (clearly the US is not considered the sole definer of international law)
To declare war ... and make rules concerning captures on land and water; (Congress has the explicit power to take charge of POWs)
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces; (can't get much plainer than that!)
The president:
The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States ... (I read this as: he will be the top general and be in control of all tactical planning subject to the restrictions above)
He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; (no power to make or break treaties without Senate concurrence)
And last but not least, I consider breaching of the oath of office (I ... will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States) by attempting to circumvent the constitution to be treasonous and grounds for impeachment. The attacks on the constitution of the United States by the administration of President Bush necessitate calling for his impeachment.
-
Mukasey clearing throat
Sorry, but if Mukasey gets confirmed, he can kiss his credibility goodbye, his distinguished legal career, all of that -- this administration knows and respects only one law:
Whatever Bush/Cheney want, they get.
That's it. Anything else is treason, in their eyes. And as Attorney General, Mukasey will have to uphold that "law," if he wants to keep his job. We'll know if he has any integrity, if he resigns shortly after confirmation. Otherwise, he'll just keep quiet and let the rogue administration keep doing their thing. The last thing this administration will want or accept is an Attorney General actually doing his job. That's why Gonzo was such a great choice for them. So, Enabler General or Legal Housecleaner? There's really no choice for Mukasey, not if he wants to keep his job (and I'm assuming the Democrats will roll over and play dead on this, like everything else).
I would hope a judge would respect his reputation more than that, but we'll see. That he'd even come out of retirement for this dismal assignment doesn't fill me with hope. Regardless of what cosmetic reforms Mukasey is permitted to pursue, the real meat and potatoes work required to repair Justice would fly in the face of the Unitary Executive Theory, and so if power or law are to be thrown out, for this administration, it's the law that's got to go.
-
MUKASEY IS UNFIT TO BE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES
Blumenthal's article today was the nail in the coffin of Mukasey's nomination to be attorney general. All the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee MUST vote no on his nomination.
-
Another Sad Theme of the Times
"By God, we've got to get rid of the lawyers!" he told William Webster, Reagan's FBI director.
There's no better way to subvert the rule of law than to get rid of the lawyers. Hatred of lawyers is a theme that intrinsically appeals to, and favors, those who have enough power and privilege to advance their interests without the constraints of law. Yet one of the most pervasive memes of recent decades has been the widespread disdain for lawyers. It's one of the chief reactionary norms that has come to roost in the Bush administration's attack on lawyers everywhere, including within its own departments and offices.
At the center of this attack has been, ironically, a lawyer -- David Addington. The PBS "Frontline" episode "Cheney's Law" was really as much about Addington as Cheney. It includes a parade of administration lawyers -- all ideological conservatives -- who entered the administration with stars in their eyes and left with Addington's bootprint on their rumps. Their crime? They tried to exercise something resembling independent legal judgment with respect to the legality of the administration's conduct.
That's the same theme pursued by Mr. Blumenthal here, and his contributions are most welcome. I hope readers will keep this pernicious episode in mind the next them they're tempted to slander lawyers as a class. Without them (and yes, "them" includes me), we are all well and truly screwed.