When we take back Congress, we need a new Sedition Act.

[NativeTexan]

There are so many things that not only the Village Idiot has done, but most of his minions, including, but not limited to, the Vice-Village Idiot, Scott McClellan, Rumsfeld, Rice, most of the appointees at the Defense Dept. that could and SHOULD fall into the category of sedition.

Not only taking us to war under false pretenses, but the large conspiracy involved in pulling it off, and continuing with the sheer propaganda that they are putting out to mislead and manipulate the American public.

Acts of treason that shouldn't go unpunished like over 2300 counts of murder due to their lies and deceit....or the breaking of legitimate treaties....or ignoring the Constitution and the 4th Amendment specifically.

The theft of at LEAST ONE election, if not two.

The complete culture of corruption that they have spawned thru their lack of conscience and/or concern for the welfare of anyone but themselves and the people who bought the primaries AND the elections for them.

We all know them, and we all feel that Bush should be impeached as soon as we take power back. But others should be tried and convicted for sedition, treason, crimes-against-humanity, murder, conspiracy, and maybe even enacting a coup!

Just a thought, but thats just me.

[Dr.Phool]

1. Send every god damned last one of them

Either to the Hague or Gitmo! They've committed treason. They've committed murder. The charges are innumerable.

[stevietheman]

2. At any rate, we need to give these f**kers not one day of peace...

after their term is over. We need to chase them to the ends of the earth until justice is brought to them. If they're not watching their backs, we're not doing our job.

[Old and In the Way]

3. We'll need a truth and reconciliation committee.

We've been lied to, spun, and bamboozled so consistantly for so many years, we've lost track of the truth. We'll need basic social agreement on what is truth and what is false. If Republicans ever want to be taken seriously again, they will need to look at the evidence and reach common ground with us on what is true and what are lies.

[Lib Grrrrl]

4. Wrong! Do You Know What "Sedition" Is?? What It Means??

If anything, WE are guilty of "sedition" as "sedition" could be loosely defined as speech against one's government. We are certainly guilty of that on a daily basis here at DU...and I'm proud to be a part of that!!

However, here is the definition, from wikipedia: Sedition is a deprecated term of law to refer to non-overt conduct such as speech and organization that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order.

So, as you see, WE are actually the ones "guilty" of "sedition." Fortunately, there is no law against "sedition" in this country, anymore. At least, not officially. President Adams unwisely passed the original "Alien and Sedition Act" to silence critics of his Administration.

An example of seditious speech would be our continual call for Bush's impeachment. Likewise, the Repuke's call for Clinton's impeachment could have been considered "seditious" in terms of the actual word meaning. Because it was speech tending towards insurrection against the established order.

Fortunately, there is no such crime as Sedition...officially, anyway, in the United States.

Now, TREASON...is a crime, defined in our Constitution, and is a crime that only can be committed during a time of war, by it's own definition. whether we are TRULY in a state of war is a matter for debate, since only Congress can legally declare war, and they have not.

Crimes against humanity, murder, conspiracy, well, I think that a good case can definitely be made for bringing up these guys on those charges. I also think charges of election fraud, and conspiracy to commit election fraud can be explored.

But not sedition. They are The Powers That Be. How can, by definition, The Powers That Be...be guilty of sedition? They can't. Lying, on the other hand...well, do not confuse LYING with SEDITION....they are not synonymous words.

[Kutjara]

5. Good analysis, but (the inevitable 'but')...

Forgive me if I quibble (and I know the Wikipedia is not a recognized legal journal from which to draw citations) but, if sedition is defined as 'tending toward insurrection against the established order' then doesn't that beg the question: what is the established order?

If the established order is the Constitution, three branches of government, bicameral legislature, checks and balances and all that, then it is arguably not seditious to criticise any particular manisfestation of the government, as long as one does not incite insurrection against the underlying institutions. For example, I may say that GWB is a slackwitted tool with the Presidential gravitas of pond film and that the rest of the Executive Branch are either criminals or cowards. In saying that, I have not impugned the Executive Branch in any way. I believe the Presidential system is excellent and, in the right hands, is an effective means of government. Have I been seditious?

If, however, the established order is whatever bunch of mendacious clowns happen to be in power, then I'm getting on the first plane out of here.

I rest my case.

[Lib Grrrrl]

8. Your Caveat Is Noted

and I agree with it, to a degree.

But, again, I say that THE ESTABLISHED ORDER is the one with the power and the might to punish you for actions/speech which they do not approve of.

In a way, then, you could say that Bush and his cronies, the entire Administration had usurped and replaced THE ORIGINAL ESTABLISHED ORDER (the Constitution, et al) with their own ESTABLISHED ORDER...and have become the new ESTABLISHED ORDER (such IS the definition of a coup, no??)

At any rate, I sure do not want to see any sort of a law against Sedition being passed in our country. ANY law that seeks to limit free thought and free speech cannot be a good thing, can it? After all, even if we Progressives...and the Democrats were in power when such a law was passed...what happens when the next paradigm shift happens, and our political enemies come to power - and then use the very laws we passed to oppress them...to oppress US in revenge for their years of oppression?

Not good, is it?

I'd like to think the American public is not unintelligent enough to ever again allow a group like the neo-cons to grab power...but, if there is one thing I have learned, it is that history repeats itself, and repeats itself, and repeats itself...ad nauseam.

[NativeTexan]

7. "conduct.....deemed by a legal authority......

.....as tending toward insurrection against the established order."

I believe that a bloodless coup in 2000, as it has been proved out to be, falls under that category.

[Lib Grrrrl]

9. Except

that since the coup - which occurred in 2000...REPLACED THE EXISTING ESTABLISHED ORDER OF THAT TIME - with the own ESTABLISHED ORDER. That old established order no longer has the power to enforce punishment or anything. It no longer IS the established order, see? Isn't that the entire point of a coup? To replace the existing established order?

They were successful in their coup, and thus, cannot be charged with sedition. They BECAME the established order, with the success of their coup.

No matter how they came to that point...the fact is, they are there! Election fraud, or however else you contend they got there (and I sincerely believe the elections were rigged, myself) they did get there, and thus replaced the old established order with their own.

One cannot be guilty of sedition against a no-longer-existant established order which they defeated - thorough fair means or foul does not matter - they DID replace the existing established order.

Sedition is, therefore, not an appropriate word for their current activities. They may have engaged in seditious activities to get where they are now...but, as that old established order fell, there is no way to hold these people accountable. That established order fell...and along with it...it's power to enforce punishment for sedition.

We can only hope to wrest power back from them...to create a new established order - and then to re-establish the old order (the Constitution, et al.) And there is no provision in the Constitution to prosecute people for sedition...and no provision to prosecute them ex-post-facto, either.

I agree we must hold them accountable. But we must hold them accountable for the crimes that they have actually committed, and we can prove. Otherwise, we come off sounding pretty stupid and angry. And that does not help our cause. Our enemies did not get where they are by allowing their anger to cloud their reason. I implore the rest of us...to not let our justifyable and righteous anger...to cloud our reason in how we go after them. That is, if we truly want to be successful in going after them!

[NativeTexan]

14. And that would be the reason for a NEW Sedition Act.....by the ...

.....newly revived Constitutional government, and one that doesn't "grandfather".

But I agree about reasoning. I just think that whatever we need to do to hold them accountable for their actions, needs to be done.

[CPMaz]

6. What we need first is an amendment to the Constitution

limiting the power of the President to issue pardons.

I think it is a safe bet that no matter who wins the election in 2008, the White House printers will be working 24/7 from the election to the end of the term spitting out the pre-emptive pardons for staffers, elected officials, "campaign contributors" (aka - "bribers"), and anyone else involved in this administration's crimes.

It's time to bar pardons for elected officials and goverment employees, and to bar pardons for large (say... >$1000) campaign contributors, or the directors of organizations that make contributions. This list could be clarified (and a LOT longer :) ) but the basic idea is pretty clear.

It won't happen, but since the original Sedition Act was unconstitutional, it will probably take a full amendment to the Constitution to even begin to address the corruption in Washington.

[Lib Grrrrl]

10. I Think You Propose An Excellent Idea

but it'll never happen. No one in Washington is ever going to agree to get rid of the ability to have their asses covered.

Likely as not, you are correct, we will see a record number of pardons at the end of Bush's term...and a lot of them pre-emptive in nature.

I hate to say this, but I do not think that the vast majority of this criminal gang that has run our country into the ground will ever face justice. And this saddens and angers me. Because I want them to PAY...and pay dearly...for the harm they have caused our country, and my countrymen/women.

[newyawker99]

12. Hi CPMaz!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Jack Rabbit]

11. We don't need a sedition act

In a way, we have one: it's called the Patriot Act and a lot of it needs to be repealed.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

No member of the Bush regime is guilty of treason. Treason is the only crime defined in the Constitution (Article 3, Section 3) and what these people have done does not fit that definition.

Many members of the Bush regime can be charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. This includes Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, three of the four current top cabinet officers and a number of their aides. The invasion of Iraq was a war crime on its face. It was an unnecessary war of aggression without cause or provocation and without proper authorization from the UN Security Council. The reasons given for the war were false. When Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Libby and General Powell said they had proof that Saddam had biochemical weapons, a "reconstituted" nuclear program or intimate ties to international terrorism, they were lying. What intelligence they had was inconclusive at best. We know from the memoranda leaked from the British government that members of the regime, including Mr. Bush, were aware that the case against Saddam was "weak", yet they continued to present the case in public and before Congress as being certain. They were manipulating the intelligence behind the scenes. Mr. Cheney and Mr. Libby made frequent trips to Langley to pressure intelligence analysts to say what they wanted to hear. In the Pentagon, the Office of Special Plans under Douglas Feith cherry picked intelligence reports that were favorable to the case for war and edited the ambiguity out of others. Intelligence reports refuting the case for war were suppressed. Those who lied or manipulated intelligence should be prosecuted.

In addition, many international treaties have been disregarded. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits an occupying country to rewrite the laws of occupied territory, yet Paul Bremer decreed changes in Iraq's laws on foreign investment. That is a war crime. Persons detained suspected of being terrorists have been held incommunicado and denied prisoner of war status, even initially. That is a violation of the Third Geneva Convention, and a war crime. Some of those held in the custody of the United States have been threatened with a judicial proceeding that may result in a death sentence, yet the rules of such proceedings are such as to deny the accused due process of law. This is a violation of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions and a war crime. Many who are held in custody of the United States have been subjected to torture or cruel or humiliating treatments and punishments. This is a violation of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. It is a crime against humanity and a violation of federal law. This use of torture was justified beforehand in legal papers prepared for Mr. Bush by then-White House Council and now-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales with the assistance of others, including John Yoo, now a professor of law at the Hastings Law School, University of California at San Francisco, and Jay Bybee, now a federal judge. The legal reasoning, based on the argument that the President is above the law, is so spurious as not to be serious. It is a crime against humanity.

Those named in the above paragraphs and others should be charged under the appropriate federal statutes and sent to prison for the rest of their natural lives. If the federal government is unwilling or unable to make a good faith effort in prosecuting members of the Bush regime for war crimes and crimes against humanity, then an international tribunal should be established for this purpose.

[NativeTexan]

15. I propose that when we were sent to a war by lies and propaganda...

....that this action could be construed as levying war upon the American people, and thus since the government is of the people....that would be treasonous. And adhering to their enemies....when we were attacked by Saudi's, and not only did they receive protection from the U.S. government, but that the family of Osama bin Laden was allowed to leave the country by air while everyone else was grounded....this would fall under THAT category.

[Jack Rabbit]

17. Seriously, that is too much of a stretch

(The Frat Boy has to take a lot of comfort in this discussion. We're arguiong about whether he's a traitor or just a war criminal.)

In order to be guilty of treason, Bush would have had to have been collaborating with al Qaida. OK, there are some people who probably think he was or that al Qaida really nothing to do with it and it was all him, but I'm not one of them.

As for Osama's brothers, well, so what? While I agree that they should have been questioned rather than spirited out of the country, the question would have been routine. There is no reason to believe that they knew anything of the plot.

[sutz12]

13. Not really.....

we need Congress to stop making new laws we don't or won't enforce, and start funding and forcing real enforcement of existing laws.

It's the same with gun control, drug control, immigration, education, whatever. They enact new laws, knowing full well that no money exists to enforce them, while existing laws are fragrantly broken and/or ignored.

Congress needs to step on the neck of the White House and press down vigorously.

[NativeTexan]

16. And we shall, when we bring back the power to the people, but...

......we have high government officials that have clearly committed war crimes. Either the U.S., which I think is preferable, or The Hague, needs to hold them accountable!

[Kablooie]

18. When we take back the Congress we will be in the middle of a nuclear war.

[Xeno of Elia]

19. We need Nuremburg Trials for those criminals

The lot of them should be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Once they are convicted, they should be jailed for life. (Though "rendering" the whole lot of scummy traitors to a torture-friendly country like Syria would be perfect justice.)


I pray nightly that all of bushco will be shipped off to The Hague, where the Chimp himself can take up residence in Milosovic's old cell. I'm sure that the responsible governments of the world will have no problem meting out justice to these animals.

[NativeTexan]

20. Well said....

....and right on the mark.