Democrats & Liberals Archives

Bush Above The Law

Who would have ever thought that one, we would have a President who is a criminal and two, that nobody in the United States seems to care.

There are those who choose to apologize and forgive this corrupt, inept and criminally incompetent administration, but then there are those who watch the criminal activity of this administration and just shrug. Why?
The Democrats and Republicans better bring this administration to justice.

Yesterday James Comey testified about the NSA wiretapping program and what he said was quite disturbing.

President Bush ordered the NSA to engage in warrant less eavesdropping back in October 2001. The incidents, which Comey described yesterday -- whereby the DOJ refused to certify the program's legality -- occurred in March 2004, two-and-a-half years later. Since the NSA was spying on Americans the Federal court that ruled on this matter has concluded that the NSA program violated both federal law and the U.S. Constitution.

Once Bush knew that both Aschcroft and Comey believed the eavesdropping was illegal, he ordered it to continue anyway.
“In the early part of 2004, the Department of Justice was engaged -- the Office of Legal Counsel, under my supervision -- in a reevaluation both factually and legally of a particular classified program. And it was a program that was renewed on a regular basis, and required signature by the attorney general certifying to its legality.
And the -- and I remember the precise date. The program had to be renewed by March the 11th, which was a Thursday, of 2004. And we were engaged in a very intensive reevaluation of the matter.”

Comey then made clear that he and Ashcroft met, determined that the NSA program lacked legal authority, and agreed that the DOJ would refuse to certify the legality of the NSA program. Yet even once Ashcroft and Comey made clear that the program had no legal basis, the President ordered it to continue anyway. As Comey said: "The program was reauthorized without us and without a signature from the Department of Justice attesting as to its legality."

The President's own political appointees -- the two top Justice Department officials, including Ashcroft were so convinced of its illegality that they refused to certify it and “were preparing, along with numerous other top DOJ officials, to resign en masse” once they learned that the program would continue even though the President knew it was illegal.

It is clear that the President deliberately violated the law and committed multiple felonies by eavesdropping on Americans in violation of the law.
When The Whitehouse realized Comey and Ashcroft were not going to authorize the continuation of the NSA program ( the spying on America illegally), Gonzales and Andrew Card tried to get Ashcroft’s signature while he was hospitalized and incoherent after surgery. Nice.

What prompted the DOJ suddenly to "reexamine" the legality of the program after all that time?

If the Justice Department and Federal court says the program is illegal, isn’t that convincing enough?

Why is impeachment “off the table” as one Democrat put it?

Cheney and Bush have blatantly violated the laws of the United States and violated the Constitution that both took vows to uphold.

They deserve impeachment. We owe it to ourselves, the world and future generations of Americans who face Presidents who abuse their power and ignore and even break the law.

Let’s put the impeachment option back” on the table.”

The Washington Post Editorial Board (Hardly "Liberal" media7 said:

" this is an account of Bush administration lawlessness so shocking it would have been unbelievable coming from a less reputable source." And as I documented yesterday, these "shocking" revelations were long concealed due to Alberto Gonzales' patently false assurances that the testimony of Comey and Ashcroft -- which Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee sought last year -- would not "add to the discussion.

Posted by Andre M. Hernandez at May 16, 2007 5:56 PM
Comments
Comment #220532

The only ones more upset, than the anti-Bushies, with Bush and company are the terrorists! Good company to keep, huh!?!.***

Posted by: rahdigly at May 16, 2007 2:20 PM
Comment #220535

Andre….I just commented the other day on another thread that I am certainly not the most politically savvy person in here. It took me months to quit being explosive about the need to impeach becuase it had been drilled into my brain that we need the votes to do that. Has anything changed enough to put it back “on the table”?
I can’t remember being so disgusted, discouraged and all the other “dis” and “de” words that apply, over the state of our country.
I probably read the same article you did about the wiretapping fiasco and this also appeard in the New York Times

WASHINGTON, May 15 — The Bush administration, shifting strategy in the face of mounting opposition to Paul D. Wolfowitz, opened the door Tuesday to his resigning voluntarily as World Bank president if the bank board dropped its drive to declare him unfit to remain in office.

How can one person who so strongly touts his religious beliefs be so dirty, nasty and criminally intent????

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at May 16, 2007 2:31 PM
Comment #220543

Andre,

“Who would have ever thought that one, we would have a President who is a criminal and two, that nobody in the United States seems to care.”

How about…

“Who would have ever thought that one, we would have a Senator who is a criminal and two, that nobody in the United States seems to care.”

Oh, that’s right. It’s politically incorrect to connect Kennedy’s name with 1st degree murder.

Sorry about that.

Posted by: Jim T at May 16, 2007 3:18 PM
Comment #220548

Jim T-
I think there are far more intelligent ways to commit first degree murder than to drive yourself and the person off a bridge while drunk, fail to report it, get yourself embroiled and entangled in an investigation and essentially kill your chances for higher office forever.

Also, even if Edward Kennedy is the scumbag you say he is, then that changes absolutely nothing about Bush’s illegal behavior. You don’t see me trying to claim that because Bush violated the Fourth Amendmdent, that means Ted did nothing wrong at Chappaquiddick.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 16, 2007 3:36 PM
Comment #220553

Jim T, first degree is premeditated. You may want to revise that to manslaughter. That was Ted Kennedy’s crime, and failure to contact authorities ASAP.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 16, 2007 4:56 PM
Comment #220555

Stephen,

You’re right. If Bush broke the law, then impeach him. He deserves it.

This was just a gentle reminder that there are criminals on both sides of the aisle…not just one.

It is also a gentle reminder that finger pointing leaves 3 fingers pointing right back at those that point fingers.

But let us agree that suspects in criminal actions need to be investigated and then, if warranted, prosecuted…no matter what the position, power or wealth of the suspect.

Posted by: Jim T at May 16, 2007 5:01 PM
Comment #220557

Want I find funny is that this is the same Ashcroft that that was regarded has being an enemy to our civil rights.

That even he was appalled at this program is very telling.

I think that this specific issue is the one that could get the most traction after the revelations recently uncovered. My only fear is that the constant drumbeat for impeachment since before Bush took office has now so put off so many citizens that they will see this as another ‘crying wolf’ assessment and simply ignore it as continued bleating by the dems. I warned against this very thing years ago on here and it looks like it will turn out just as I predicted, with nothing getting done and impeachment now being off of the table.

Posted by: Rhinehold at May 16, 2007 5:05 PM
Comment #220558

David,

I’m not sure, but today the laws are a bit different than they were. Manslaughter would be the charge, but there would also be other charges, I think. MADD got some laws passed that added to the manslaughter charge if there was alcohol involved.

Anyway, manslaughter is a felony…and this is something I also can’t remember…but aren’t persons convicted of a felony excluded from holding a federal office? I just can’t remember.

As far as impeaching Bush. just practice saying…”President Cheney”.

Posted by: Jim T at May 16, 2007 5:17 PM
Comment #220562
The only ones more upset, than the anti-Bushies, with Bush and company are the terrorists!

Actually, the terrorists love Bush, Rah. al_Qaeda even endorsed his re-election in 2004. As did the Iranians. Hugo Chavez loves him too. These guys all need a US President like Bush to gain and maintain power, and Bush and his supporters are playing right into their hands.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 16, 2007 5:44 PM
Comment #220564

Good article, Andre. I think it may be time to revisit impeachment. Though I’ve consistently believed this criminal administration was deserving of impeachment, I sounded a cautionary note on the heels of the ‘06 election because of the very real need for Democrats to take care of the country’s business first. (They’ve not done as good a job of that as I would have liked.) These new revelations may indeed be the catalyst for a real examination, but it will take more a few big name politicos and/or journalists to offer commentary in slack-jawed dismay to make it happen.

You never know what will finally have political sails. I was slack-jawed about Alberto Gonzales’ nomination as Atty Genl back in January of 2005, after it was revealed he was author of the memorandum excusing torturesque investigations and describing the Geneva Conventions as quaint, before the Abu Ghraib story broke. But it seems Democratic Senators are more moved by the firing of 8 U.S. Attorneys than the fact that the Attorney General of the United States excuses torture and limitless imprisonment of uncharged detainees who MAY be guilty of abetting terrorism.

So far I don’t see the media firestorm around this illegal bypass of authorization story, but it may yet come with the proper attention. Thanks for highlighting it here.

Posted by: Walker Willingham at May 16, 2007 5:56 PM
Comment #220565

Laws on someone dying because of a drunk driver have changed much after Teddy’s screw-up. At the time he was investigated and noting was done, but even if there had been charges it would not have been manslaughter, but wrongful death. He would have then been released anyway. I don’t excuse his behavior, but murder/manslaughter are both way out of the ballpark.

Can someone please tell me how Teddy got put on the table for this discussion? He wasn’t president, so could not have been impeached. He was responsible for the death of one person through neglegance, while the Commode-in-chief is responsible for countless deaths, and if he lied to get them killed it would be REAL murder. There is no comparison between the two.

Teddy did not even shit on the Constitution…

Posted by: Marysdude at May 16, 2007 5:57 PM
Comment #220584

If the program is so illegal, as Democrats claim. And if that demands impeachment as Andre and others claim, go ahead and impeach the President of the United States on the grounds that he tried everything within his power to protect the American people from further terrorist attacks after 9/11, and was at odds with those in the Department of Justice regarding other investigative techniques that would help to increase protections against those attacks.
I, for one, would love to see how such an impeachment charge would play out with the public, seeing that there have been no more terrorist attacks upon the United States in the last five years. Beautiful!!!! Go for it!

JD

Posted by: JD at May 16, 2007 8:49 PM
Comment #220588
on the grounds that he tried everything within his power to protect the American people

Nah, those aren’t the grounds. The grounds would be that he broke the law.

Please try to keep up.

Protecting us is a good thing. Trashing the law and the constitution unnecessarily isn’t.

Posted by: LawnBoy at May 16, 2007 9:22 PM
Comment #220601

>>I, for one, would love to see how such an impeachment charge would play out with the public, seeing that there have been no more terrorist attacks upon the United States in the last five years. Beautiful!!!! Go for it!

Posted by: JD at May 16, 2007 08:49 PM

JD,

Do you REALLY believe our invasion of Iraq has kept terrorists from mischief here during the last five years? Don’t you feel a little silly saying such things?

We went to Afghanistan to find and punish the culprits of 9/11. We failed miserably. We failed mostly because we robbed our Afghan resources to back the lies that got us into Iraq. How in the world can you relate all that to our security?

Please think…just for once…please think!

Posted by: Marysdude at May 16, 2007 11:21 PM
Comment #220617

Andre-

The possibility that our Congress and Senate have

their own agendas ahead of the peoples. There is

the probability they lack the toughness the old

timers of the sixties an seventies had because

all seem at apply plausible deniability when

questioned or put on the hot seat. They may just

owe too many contributors for their re-election.

I realize the possibility of replacing every

damn one of them is nearly impossible, although

I would love to see the greatest move our Country

would ever attempt!

Posted by: DAVID at May 17, 2007 2:26 AM
Comment #220618

Please do all these things or shut up and be Americans. You all have the votes to do many things…whining is one of course, but if you honestly feel what your saying, it’s your responsibility. I sincerly mean this.

I’m sick of defending America to Americans. You got the keys freakin use them or be of help.

Posted by: andy at May 17, 2007 2:34 AM
Comment #220619

Andre, I’m sure that the leaders of Syria, Iran, Somalia, Libya, Hamas, N. Korea etc. are all in complete agreement with you on this issue. If the lefties win the white house in ‘08 we can scale back on the tracking of terrorists. After all if they haven’t actually detonated the bomb yet we probably should be careful not to infringe on their privacy.

Posted by: carnak at May 17, 2007 2:44 AM
Comment #220630
I’m sick of defending America to Americans.

And I’m sick of defending America’s laws, traditions, and system of constitutional democracy to those that think that the President should be exempt from all of those as long as he tells us that he’s doing it to protect us.

Posted by: LawnBoy at May 17, 2007 8:44 AM
Comment #220633

I am with you Lawnboy
These “Patriots” who THINK they are defending America? How?
By eliminating the rights of the ACCUSED (note the word ACCUSED)
By condoning TORTURE (THINKING that it works, when EVERY interrogation EXPERT will tell you that “intel” from TORTURE is WORTHLESS)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/22/AR2006092201304_pf.html
What you “Patriots” are defending is NOT AMERICA
it is some other rotten tyrannical place that does not deserver the name nor the flag of the United States of America.

I love all this talk about “worrying about the rights of the terrorists” — exactly HOW and WHO decides just WHO is a terrorist in the first place??
The people held at Gitmo are ALL GUILTY right?? after all if they weren’t guilty in the first place they wouldn’t be there.
but
The military has released several hundred of these “detainees” (a little nicer than kidnapped torture victims, eh?) after holding them for several years, completely ruining their lives, not allowing them an opportunity to tell the authorities that a mistake has been made — but then “ooops” sorry, we looked into it and we guess your not the person we were after, after all.
So either the military is criminally negligent in allowing these “dangerous terrorists” loose on the rest of us or
they are criminally negligent in kidnapping, torturing and stomping on the civil rights of INNOCENT civiilians.
OOOPs
They keep telling us about the “thousands of lives that have been saved” — and Geo Tenant made me sick when he would not address this situation except to keep saying “We do NOT Torture” — but no one can tell us how these lives were saved
Meanwhile
back at the ranch
6 homegrown terrorists (did they miss the plane to Iraq where we are “fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here”?) were captured prior to attacking Ft Dix
How?
Hmmmm, seems that a civilian noticed something fishy, contacted the authorities, and some rather benal, normal gumshoe sort of LEGAL law enforcement investigation led them to these gentlemen.
No Torture
No Wiretap
No Kidnapping
NOTHING

9/11
it has become well known and documented that our wonderfull CIA and FBI had all the information in the world on the people who conducted the attack.
The CIA even knew who and where some of these guys were and their affiliation with terrorist groups. The FBI had suspicions, but the leads got lost in the system and not followed up on
THEY HAD THE DOTS, they just couldn’t (or wouldn’t CONNECT the DOTS)
No torture
No illegal wiretapping
No Kidnapping
Nothing ILLEGAL and they had ALL THE INFORMATION they needed.
The BS arguement that these techniques are NECESSARY for Protecting the US is total BS and you right wing a-holes buy into it because you watch too many episodes of “24” and believe that Hollywood BS (meanwhile condemning “Hollywood” at the same time for other things that are “unamerican”?)
Or you think torture is somehow “Macho” — proves your “tough on the terrorists” (better that than being EFFECTIVE on crime/terroism??)
This is the most corrupt, inept, arrogant, embarrasing, UNAMERICAN, UNPATRIOTIC administration in our nation’s history
It is a BLOT on our History.

We need to get these guys out and put them in jail but we have to work thru the politicians that are in the pockets of the “Money-changers” and too many of the population are too stupid or too brainwashed to realize what the heck is happening.
they will realize — when it is too late
enough

Posted by: Russ at May 17, 2007 9:21 AM
Comment #220641

“Who would have ever thought that one, we would have a President who is a criminal and two, that nobody in the United States seems to care”

Everybody on the right side of the isle who lived through the 90s?
Pretty easy question there Andre.


I wouldn’t think one would wear their hip-hop outfit to a Klan meeting and shout “kill whitey, “and I wouldn’t think a Klansman would wear his outfit in the inner-city and shout black people suck.

There is a time and place for everything.
IF, these imans wanted Americans respect, they would respect Americans instead of acting like assholes.
They wanted this attention, maybe even hoping to sue and make money from what they knew would happen. Thankfully, there are still Americans who don’t just shut up and accept things that are considered not PC.

Posted by: kctim at May 17, 2007 12:45 PM
Comment #220642

Sorry all.
I posted last part under wrong topic, my bad.

Posted by: kctim at May 17, 2007 12:57 PM
Comment #220645

Russ…..excellant summation !! Thank you.

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at May 17, 2007 1:15 PM
Comment #220648

Russ,

I agree one hundred percent, and wish I’D shouted it…sometimes the abject ignorance of wing-nut fools is just too much.

Posted by: Marysdude at May 17, 2007 1:31 PM
Comment #220655

This is a posting from another blogsite that caught my attention this morning. It is right on, and adds fuel to your statements on here Andre, as well as many of the the responders.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/bush-opposes-troop-pay-in_b_48714.html
It is the 5th. comment that is quite interesting……

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at May 17, 2007 2:12 PM
Comment #220685

OK, Russ. Don’t get a wedgie rising up from your office chair, for crying out loud!

Your guys have the purse! Eliminate all funding for the Department of Homeland Security. Defund the programs that the President and his cabinet have put in place, and that you say are completely unnecessary. Just do it, already!!

While you’re at it close Guantanamo and “let your people go”! But, not without an apology and full restitution with our tax dollars, OK! That’s the only fair and ethical thing to do.

Even cut back the FBI and CIA to the funding levels of the Clinton Administration, since they seemed to be so effective back then. Save us billions of dollars.

And finally, cut the funding for the troops altogether! Bring our troops home, now!!!!
Go ahead, who’s stopping you?

JD

Posted by: JD at May 17, 2007 10:46 PM
Comment #220686

“Go ahead, who’s stopping you?”
Posted by: JD at May 17, 2007 10:46 PM


Oh, the Democrats, that’s who!

JD

Posted by: JD at May 17, 2007 10:49 PM
Comment #220713

“We need to get these guys out and put them in jail”

We need to crush them so they can’t come back and do it again. Putting them in jail wil only make them martyrs.

Posted by: Frank at May 18, 2007 8:45 AM
Comment #220731

Russ-
excellent post, As from above, the like

minds will rush in an defend all these crooks.

I only wish more people would apply some good

common sense, but the problem is that seventy

percent of our population do not have what it


takes [wise critical thinking power]. The end

solution is for them, is to counter-act all

opposing view-points. Sorry about being so

negative, but I am really tired of spinners an

prognostigators distorting the truth because

they are just plain, ignorant.

Posted by: DAVID at May 18, 2007 12:38 PM
Post a comment