Bush's unchecked Executive power v. the Founding principles of the U.S.

[kpete]

Saturday, December 17, 2005
Bush's unchecked Executive power v. the Founding principles of the U.S.

Underlying all of the excesses and abuses of executive power claimed by the Bush Administration is a theory of absolute, unchecked power vested in the Presidency which literally could not be any more at odds with the central, founding principles of this country.



As this morning’s New York Times analysis put it in describing the rationale behind the Adminstration's violations of Foreign Intelligence Security Act, pursuant to which it has been secretly spying on the commuincations of American citizens without judicial warrants:

A single, fiercely debated legal principle lies behind nearly every major initiative in the Bush administration's war on terror, scholars say: the sweeping assertion of the powers of the presidency.

From the government's detention of Americans as "enemy combatants" to the just-disclosed eavesdropping in the United States without court warrants, the administration has relied on an unusually expansive interpretation of the president's authority.



As the Times reports, Bush's claim to absolute executive power has its origins principally in one document:

a Sept. 25, 2001, memorandum that said no statute passed by Congress "can place any limits on the president's determinations as to any terrorist threat, the amount of military force to be used in response, or the method, timing and nature of the response."

http://nytimes.com/2005/12/17/politics/17legal.html?
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2005/12/bushs-unchecked-executive-power-v.html

[billybob537]

1. The process for getting warrants

in this case is very easy and you can start the survielance before getting the warrant So why didn't they apply for warrants? Becouse they knew they would be denied {my opion}.

[pinto]

4. Yeah, Sen. Feingold noted the 72 hour window to apply for a warrant.

This is about maintaining secrecy and pushing the envelope of Executive authority under the guise of providing security.

[Inland]

6. Exactly right. They can't claim a nat sec. reason for not getting warrant

[pinto]

2. Today's statement was a flat-out challenge to Congress and the courts,

and an acknowledgment that Bush will continue to operate beyond his Constitutional authority unless the other branches hold him to account. It could be no clearer. Sen. Feingold got it right in his rebuttal,
"A President, not a king."

[in_cog_ni_to]

3. And what are they gonna do about it?

I can't WAIT to find out. We SHOULD BE hearing "Breaking News".....Congress to IMPEACH Bush. I'm waiting.

[Hubert Flottz]

8. You won't hear it because...

The GOP SLIMEBALLS in congress care more about money, power, party and winning than they do about the country or the people they were set to Washington to PROTECT! It's called treason and it tis the season every day since Bush stole the election in 2000. I don't expect the SCOTUS to turn a hand to PROTECT America either. It very well may come down to the people of this country PROTECTING themselves. SO be ready to rumble! If Bush thought taking over Iraq was "hard work" wait until he tries that shit on a pissed off America!

Cowards like Bush, can't really take the heat...

[supernova]

5. "I have unlimited power because I say I have unlimited power"

This is really just the legalese version of circular reasoning.

[tlsmith1963]

7. Leave Me Alone, Bush

Ever since I came to DU, my computer has been screwing up (putting up pop-up ads when I am supposed to have them blocked, recovering from "serious system errors"), so I am really beginning to think that this site & myself are being monitored. Well, I think they are wasting their time going after me. I have absolutely no ties with terrorists. In fact, I am a really dull person. I just want my country to be a true democracy & not a dictatorship. It has moved far from what the Founding Fathers wanted. So why don't they just leave this "ordinary" person alone & go after the *real* terrorists? I'm just some dull person with an ordinary life, okay?

Tammy

[Bluerthanblue]

9. Under the Constitution- the patriot act cannot exist-

There isn't any getting around the clear, direct, and relevant first four words of the first ammendment- SHALL doesn't mean "maybe" or "shouldn't" or any other variable adverb. Shall, means will, and will in the future tense as well- it is concrete-

"Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Patriot Act, section 802 violates our first ammendment right to speak freely, for peaceable assembly, and most importantly to petition the Government for a redress of grievances-

Therefore the Patriot Act is VOID- because it expressly states that "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW-...ABRIDGING THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE AND PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES" every time a citizen of the US is refused to speak at one of bush's 'public speeches'- the hand picking of audiences- the bufferzones violate the right of peaceable assembly,
And 'free-speech' every citizen detained by this immoral administration, without cause or charge, has been denied the RIGHT to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Doesn't bush et all deny that the Constitution IS a 'living document'?- given that, he can't manipulate it to his liking- it is CONCRETE- and the Patriot Act is treason.

[Patsy Stone]

10. The Greenwald piece is great

lots of background about why the framers had no intention of letting this happen.

"Both the Bush Administration’s theory of its own unchecked power and its indiscriminate and aggressive use of that power to violate Congressional law contradicts every constitutional principle created to ensure that we do not live under unchecked Executive tyranny. If the President is allowed to get away with secretly decreeing that he can violate the law and then doing exactly that, then there really are no remaining checks on Executive power -- and we have, without hyperbole, arrived at the very definition of tyranny."

Kick.

[Raydawg1234]

11. If Bush is not impeached, the Constitution is rendered meaningless and our

democratic-republic is officially over.