Is this enough for impeachment? - Page 12 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-21-2005, 09:11 AM   #166
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 08:26 PM
Here's a couple of conservative scholars weihging in.

Conservative scholars Bruce Fein and Norm Ornstein argued yesterday on The Diane Rehm show that, should Bush remain defiant in defending his constitutionally-abusive wire-tapping of Americans (as he has indicated he will), Congress should consider impeaching him.

QUESTION: Is spying on the American people as impeachable an offense as lying about having sex with an intern?

BRUCE FEIN, constitutional scholar and former deputy attorney general in the Reagan Administration: I think the answer requires at least in part considering what the occupant of the presidency says in the aftermath of wrongdoing or rectification. On its face, if President Bush is totally unapologetic and says I continue to maintain that as a war-time President I can do anything I want – I don’t need to consult any other branches – that is an impeachable offense. It’s more dangerous than Clinton’s lying under oath because it jeopardizes our democratic dispensation and civil liberties for the ages. It would set a precedent that … would lie around like a loaded gun, able to be used indefinitely for any future occupant.

NORM ORNSTEIN, AEI scholar: I think if we’re going to be intellectually honest here, this really is the kind of thing that Alexander Hamilton was referring to when impeachment was discussed.

Bruce Fein, former Associate Deputy Attorney General under President Reagan: Bush is claiming “more power than King George III had at the time of the revolution, in asserting the theory that anything the president thinks is helpful to fighting the war against terrorism he can do.

*edit*
__________________

__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 10:30 AM   #167
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 01:26 AM
Spy Court Judge Quits In Protest

Jurist Concerned Bush Order Tainted Work of Secret Panel

By Carol D. Leonnig and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 21, 2005; Page A01

A federal judge has resigned from the court that oversees government surveillance in intelligence cases in protest of President Bush's secret authorization of a domestic spying program, according to two sources.

Link to full article
__________________

__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 10:54 AM   #168
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 08:26 PM
The world we live in demands many things Mr. Vice President, that doesn't necessarily justify them.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/20/D8EK9JP81.html


WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney on Tuesday called for "strong and robust" presidential powers, saying executive authority was eroded during the Watergate and Vietnam eras.

"I believe in a strong, robust executive authority and I think that the world we live in demands it," Cheney said.

"I would argue that the actions that we've taken there are totally appropriate and consistent with the constitutional authority of the president. ... You know, it's not an accident that we haven't been hit in four years," the vice president said, speaking with reporters on Air Force Two en route from Pakistan to Oman.

.... Cheney told reporters that in his view, presidential authority has been weakened since the 1970s through laws such as the War Powers Act, which Cheney says infringes on presidential authority

He said the White House has helped protect presidential power by fighting to keep secret the list of people who were a part of his 2001 energy task force. The task force's activities attracted complaints from environmentalists, who said they were shut out of discussions on developing a national energy policy while corporate interests were present.

"That issue was litigated all the way up to the Supreme Court and we won," Cheney said
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 10:58 AM   #169
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 01:26 AM
What the hell happened to Republicans fearing a strong central government?

Are we seeing a shift in traditional party stands or do the Bushies have their heads so far up their asses they can't think straight?
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 11:00 AM   #170
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2democrat
do the Bushies have their heads so far up their asses they can't think straight?
Yes
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 11:05 AM   #171
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 01:26 AM


We can't let this story go away. In all likelihood something big will come along, some sensational story that the media will go nuts over, but we can not let this story be put on the back burner. Write letters to the editor, e-mail the major cable news networks, etc. This can not die if we want legitimate action taken.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 11:15 AM   #172
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:26 PM
another wet dream of the left fizzles into obscurity.

db9
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 11:17 AM   #173
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:26 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Calluna
I think it's great how even practically illiterate people like diamond can still communicate on internet forums by using photographs and cutting and pasting. Good for them for finding a clever way to get around their disabilities!
comments like these show a poster's own insecurities.
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 11:23 AM   #174
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
another wet dream of the left fizzles into obscurity.

db9
That's not going to happen this time. From the wingnuts favorite paper

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/bfein.htm

. . . unlimited?
By Bruce Fein
December 20, 2005


According to President George W. Bush, being president in wartime means never having to concede co-equal branches of government have a role when it comes to hidden encroachments on civil liberties.
Last Saturday, he thus aggressively defended the constitutionality of his secret order to the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on the international communications of Americans whom the executive branch speculates might be tied to terrorists. Authorized after the September 11, 2001 abominations, the eavesdropping clashes with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), excludes judicial or legislative oversight, and circumvented public accountability for four years until disclosed by the New York Times last Friday. Mr. Bush's defense generally echoed previous outlandish assertions that the commander in chief enjoys inherent constitutional power to ignore customary congressional, judicial or public checks on executive tyranny under the banner of defeating international terrorism, for example, defying treaty or statutory prohibitions on torture or indefinitely detaining United States citizens as illegal combatants on the president's say-so.
President Bush presents a clear and present danger to the rule of law. He cannot be trusted to conduct the war against global terrorism with a decent respect for civil liberties and checks against executive abuses. Congress should swiftly enact a code that would require Mr. Bush to obtain legislative consent for every counterterrorism measure that would materially impair individual freedoms.
The war against global terrorism is serious business. The enemy has placed every American at risk, a tactic that justifies altering the customary balance between liberty and security. But like all other constitutional authorities, the war powers of the president are a matter of degree. In Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer (1952), the U.S. Supreme Court denied President Harry Truman's claim of inherent constitutional power to seize a steel mill threatened with a strike to avert a steel shortage that might have impaired the war effort in Korea. A strike occurred, but Truman's fear proved unfounded.
Neither President Richard Nixon nor Gerald Ford was empowered to suspend Congress for failing to appropriate funds they requested to fight in Cambodia or South Vietnam. And the Supreme Court rejected Nixon's claim of inherent power to enjoin publication of the Pentagon Papers during the Vietnam War in New York Times v. United States (1971).
Mr. Bush insisted in his radio address that the NSA targets only citizens "with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations. Before we intercept these communications, the government must have information that establishes a clear link to these terrorist organizations."
But there are no checks on NSA errors or abuses, the hallmark of a rule of law as opposed to a rule of men. Truth and accuracy are the first casualties of war. President Bush assured the world Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction before the 2003 invasion. He was wrong. President Franklin D. Roosevelt declared Americans of Japanese ancestry were security threats to justify interning them in concentration camps during World War II. He was wrong. President Lyndon Johnson maintained communists masterminded and funded the massive Vietnam War protests in the United States. He was wrong. To paraphrase President Ronald Reagan's remark to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, President Bush can be trusted in wartime, but only with independent verification.
The NSA eavesdropping is further troublesome because it easily evades judicial review. Targeted citizens are never informed their international communications have been intercepted. Unless a criminal prosecution is forthcoming (which seems unlikely), the citizen has no forum to test the government's claim the interceptions were triggered by known links to a terrorist organization.
Mr. Bush acclaimed the secret surveillance as "crucial to our national security. Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends and allies." But if that were justified, why was Congress not asked for legislative authorization in light of the legal cloud created by FISA and the legislative branch's sympathies shown in the Patriot Act and joint resolution for war? FISA requires court approval for national security wiretaps, and makes it a crime for a person to intentionally engage "in electronic surveillance under color of law, except as authorized by statute."
Mr. Bush cited the disruptions of "terrorist" cells in New York, Oregon, Virginia, California, Texas and Ohio as evidence of a pronounced domestic threat that compelled unilateral and secret action. But he failed to demonstrate those cells could not have been equally penetrated with customary legislative and judicial checks on executive overreaching.
The president maintained that, "As a result [of the NSA disclosure], our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk." But if secrecy were pivotal to the NSA's surveillance, why is the president continuing the eavesdropping? And why is he so carefree about risking the liberties of both the living and those yet to be born by flouting the Constitution's separation of powers and conflating constructive criticism with treason?

Bruce Fein is a constitutional lawyer and international consultant with Bruce Fein & Associates and the Lichfield Group.
__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 11:29 AM   #175
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
another wet dream of the left fizzles into obscurity.
or another complete delusion of the "right" is shattered, another flaw exposed
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 11:45 AM   #176
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 01:26 AM
zing!
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 12:09 PM   #177
Babyface
 
lemon_pop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: North Providence, Rhode Island
Posts: 7
Local Time: 08:26 PM
Clinton was not impeached because of a blow job. He was impeached because he lid under oath....aka perjury
__________________
lemon_pop is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 12:12 PM   #178
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Justin24
Well Bush wasn't the only one who spyed on us "illegally." Jimmy Carter and Clinton did also.

http://drudgereport.com/flash8.htm
You really should be carefully quoting Drudge "BLURBS".

Maybe take the time to read the actual documents...

Oh wait...Scarletwine did!

THis is SPIN....Verses REALITY.

PHYSICAL searches and Wiretapping of FOREIGN citizens is not the same issue.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 12:30 PM   #179
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 01:26 AM
Thank you Dread

Drudge is an idiot
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 12:33 PM   #180
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:26 PM

In the wake of 9-11 and War On Terror most Americans will give GW a pass and consider him and his actions honorable based the circumstances he was thrust into.

Shrill, negative, naysayers will only be exposed for who they are, and what their agendas include.

The majority of the country figuatively rolls their eyes, acknowledges who is complaining, and the work presses forward.

Peace,
db9
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com