"Bush''s High Crimes"

[AGBF]

The following are excerpts from a piece in, "The Nation". If you came of age after the impeachment of President Nixon you should definitely read this in its entirety so that you can understand the reasons for his impeachment and subsequent resignation. They are relevant to the current abuses of power by George W. Bush.

Presidents are not above the law, although they frequently think they are. (Richard Nixon once said, "If I do it, then it is not illegal".) When a President is not restrained by law, he becomes a dictator. We are in danger of allowing George W. Bush to become a dictator.

"Choosing his words carefully, George W. Bush all but accused critics of his extralegal warrantless wiretaps of giving aid and comfort to Al Qaeda: 'It was a shameful act, for someone to disclose this very important program in time of war. The fact that we're discussing this program is helping the enemy.' If so, the ranks of the treasonous now include leaders of the President's own party, and the New York Times's revelations of illegal wiretaps foretell an earthquake. Senator Lindsey Graham, last seen carrying gallons of water for the White House on the status of Guantánamo prisoners, will have nothing of Bush's end run around the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act: 'Even in a time of war, you have to follow the process,' he said flatly. An infuriated Arlen Specter, Senate Judiciary chairman, whose good will the White House depends on in the upcoming Supreme Court confirmation of Samuel Alito, declared the President's domestic spying 'inexcusable...clearly and categorically wrong' and plans hearings.

...​

no constitutional clause gives the President 'because I said so' authority. The fact that former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo tried to concoct a laughable fig leaf out of Congress's 9/11 use-of-force resolution in no way diminishes the President's culpability. Nor does the evident collusion of a handful of Senate leaders, including minority leader Harry Reid, who was evidently informed at least partly about the spying program.


A belligerent President vowed that warrantless domestic spying will continue, whatever the letter of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or the Bill of Rights. Bush also none too subtly threw down the gauntlet to Congress: 'An open debate about law would say to the enemy here's what we're going to do.'

But open debate is the very essence of democracy; without it, there is little to prevent a slide into authoritarianism (indeed, the ACLU has released FBI documents that indicate the bureau has expanded the definition of 'domestic terrorism' to include citizens engaged in nonviolent protest and civil disobedience). Congress therefore has a solemn obligation to carry out a full investigation into these grave breaches of our constitutional liberties...."

article

 

[AGBF]

Good old George W. He never disappoints. He epitomizes arrogance and hubris.

An old saw: do you know the definition of "chutzpah"? (That is Yiddish for "gall", nerve".) It is someone who kills his parents then throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan.

Now Mr. Bush was caught:

(a) conducting illegal wiretaps on American citizens

and

(b) lying about it.

So what does he do? He directs the Justice Department to investigate who leaked the news about his lawbreaking to, "The New York Times"!!!!!!!!

This reminded me of the movie, "Born Yesterday" in which Billie decides she will no longer let her bullying gangster boyfriend pay off members of Congress and threaten her. Her boyfriend accuses her of ratting on him. (Like Bush complaining that his lawbreaking was leaked to the press, he feels he should have unquestioned loyalty, no matter what he does!)

Billie tells her boyfriend (and I am doing this from memory):

"I don't see it that way. If I see a fi-uh and call the Fi-uh Department, who am I rattin' on? The fi-uh?"

Bush should see that movie. It's a great flick. It actually teaches American values to the democratically challenged...you know, guys like the gangster boyfriend and Dubya.

Go rent this movie...or better, yet, BUY IT and make your kids watch it with you!!! You'll learn a lot about civics!

Born Yesterday

 

[strmrdr]

I havent had time to follow this much but he sure has lost my respect.
Not that he had a lot of it to start with.

 

[AGBF]

This is PITIFUL!!!! How can we Americans allow this?

"The Justice Department has opened another investigation into leaks of classified information, this time to determine who divulged the existence of President Bush's secret domestic spying program.

The inquiry focuses on disclosures to The New York Times about warrantless surveillance conducted by the National Security Agency since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, officials said.

The newspaper recently revealed the existence of the program in a front-page story that also acknowledged that the news had been withheld from publication for a year, partly at the request of the administration and partly because the newspaper wanted more time to confirm various aspects of the program.

White House spokesman Trent Duffy said Justice undertook the action on its own, and Bush was informed of it Friday.

...​

Disclosure of the secret spying program two weeks ago unleashed a firestorm of criticism of the administration. Some critics accused the president of breaking the law by authorizing intercepts of conversations - without prior court approval or oversight - of people inside the United States and abroad who had suspected ties to al-Qaida or its affiliates.

Bush, who publicly acknowledged the program's existence and described how it operates, has argued that the initiative is legal in a time of war.

The inquiry launched Friday is only the most recent effort by the Bush administration to determine who is disclosing information to journalists.

Two years ago, a special counsel was named to investigate who inside the White House gave reporters the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame, an effort that led to perjury and obstruction of justice charges against Vice President Dick Cheney's top aide, Lewis I. 'Scooter' Libby.

More recently, the Justice Department has begun examining whether classified information was illegally disclosed to The Washington Post about a network of secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe and elsewhere.

The NSA leak probe was launched after the Justice Department received a request from the spy agency.

It is unclear whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales will recuse himself from the inquiry. He was White House counsel when Bush signed the executive order authorizing the NSA, which is normally confined to overseas operations, to spy on conversations taking place on American soil.

For the past two weeks, Gonzales also has been one of the administration's point men in arguing that the president has the constitutional authority to conduct the spying.

'It's pretty stunning that, rather than focus on whether the president broke his oath of office and broke federal law, they are going after the whistleblowers,' said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Romero said a special prosecutor from outside the Justice Department needs to be appointed. 'This confirms many of the fears about Gonzales' appointment - that he would not be sufficiently independent from the president and that he would play the role of a crony,'he said.


article

 

[fire&ice]

I don't get it. I see ABSOLUTELY no relationship to Nixon.

Again, WHO was wiretaped? Do you honestly think we were free'er in the 1950's?

Or better yet - the "protestor's ala Rubin in the 60's? One has to be putting their head in the sand if spying on "our" people is something new under G.W.'s sun.

 

[rubydick]

Date: 12/31/2005 11:22:26 AM
Author: fire&ice

I don''t get it. I see ABSOLUTELY no relationship to Nixon.

Again, WHO was wiretaped? Do you honestly think we were free''er in the 1950''s?

Or better yet - the ''protestor''s ala Rubin in the 60''s? One has to be putting their head in the sand if spying on ''our'' people is something new under G.W.''s sun.

It isn''t a question of who was wiretapped. It''s a simple question of following the law. A law that is ludicrously easy to obey. Bush lies through his teeth when he says he had to act quickly and so did not have time to seek warrents. The FISA law allows for warrents in such situations to be obtained after the fact.

Bush is also wrong when he says that he took an oath to protect the American people. This is a flat-out lie. He took an oath to uphold the Constitution. It is the Constitution which protects us, not an (un)elected official.

The argument you make is equally weak. Because spying on Americans happened before we should simply get over it? Nixon was forced from office for precisely this offense. It''s time history repeated itself. Throw the crook and his cronies out on their collective oil slicks.

 

[fire&ice]

Of course past history doesn''t excuse the behaviour. But, to single handedly blame this G.W. as something new doesn''t make your arguement either. And, yes - exactly WHO was wiretapped? In my mind it does make a difference. You state an offense - in any arguement there has to be an offender & a offendee.

Sorry, Nixon wasn''t "spying" on the general population. His people were doing something that campaigns have done in the past (probably still do). The cover-up and lying were what got him into the impeachable offense.

 

[rubydick]

Nixon wasn''t impeached. He resigned in order that Ford could pardon him, to avoid going to jail. From what I understand, if he had been impeached, he would have been ineligible for a pardon.

Nixon didn''t spy on the general population. He spied on his political enemies. According to William Shawcross, the first of the so-called Watergate crimes was the burglary of Daniel Ellsberg''s pyschiatrist''s office. As you know, Ellsberg was a major war critic and co-author of the Pentagon Papers. Nixon and Kissinger were obsessed with Ellsberg. It stretches credibility to believe that Nixon and Kissinger did not order that burglary. Yes, he was forced out because of the cover up. What is forgotten, is that the burglary at the Watergate was not the major event, just a sideshow. The only reason Kissinger was not thrown in the slam along with Haldeman, etc., was that Congress decided to limit the investigation to crimes not involving foreign policy.

Bush most likely isn''t spying on the general population, either. If he is truly spying on those who might be involved with terrorism, then why not seek a FISA warrent? You may disagree, but many people suspect the only logical reason not to seek FISA warrents is because he was not spying for "national security" reasons, but spying on political foes.

In Nixon''s case, he always claimed he was innocent. The thimble-brained Bush already blew that defense. On national television, he admitted he ordered the illegal wiretaps, and said he would continue to do so. Case closed.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 12/31/2005 1:06:23 PM
Author: Richard Hughes

Bush most likely isn''t spying on the general population, either. If he is truly spying on those who might be involved with terrorism, then why not seek a FISA warrent? You may disagree, but many people suspect the only logical reason not to seek FISA warrents is because he was not spying for ''national security'' reasons, but spying on political foes.

You can not assume that as a logical reason. Another could be that seeking a FISA warrant would be giving a "head''s up" to the "spying". Hence, that wouldn''t be spying.

I just don''t see this as a big deal. If one would like to find an impeachable offense, I would think the BIG lie (WMD - if one could see this as a lie or as bad intel) would be more an issue.

Again, WHO is he wiretapping? I''ve yet to see an instance except with the Satelite incepts from know AlQ to overseas contacts.

 

[rubydick]

How does seeking a FISA warrant give a heads-up to those who are being spied upon? This court was set up precisely to deal with such matters. All involved have top security clearances.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 12/31/2005 1:06:23 PM
Author: Richard Hughes.

In Nixon''s case, he always claimed he was innocent. The thimble-brained Bush already blew that defense. On national television, he admitted he ordered the illegal wiretaps, and said he would continue to do so. Case closed.

It sounds as if he doesn''t need to make any excuses, even.

Doesn''t this guy have any contestants capable to push him the Nixon way?

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 12/31/2005 1:46:12 PM
Author: Richard Hughes
How does seeking a FISA warrant give a heads-up to those who are being spied upon? This court was set up precisely to deal with such matters. All involved have top security clearances.

The communications happen in the here and NOW. The warrants are sped up but not instantaneous (days if not a week delay). In fact, many are granted after the fact. Seems kind of silly.

Sorry, I don''t think spying on known AlQ is a grievous sin. Certainly can keep us safe.

 

[Momoftwo]

Congress was also briefed on this program, as much as some of them want to "forget" it for politics. Our world has changed and that''s just a fact. A great number of people in the justice department and the administration counseled the President that this was legal. If your legal counsel (and other lawyers) tells you something is legal do you believe him? I think most people would. This has not been determined one way or the other so I wish the media and politicians would stop speculating. I''m so tired of journalists who think they have to disclose everything. Whoever leaked this is a felon, period. You cannot go around leaking classified information just because you want to. And the 500 or so people being watched were already on a watch list because of their previous activities.

 

[colormyworld]

Fire& Ice From what I understand the NSA can gather the evidence and then has three days to get the FISA paper work. AFTER THE FACT!!!! Now why would there be a problem with time constraints with that kind of leeway. Doug

 

[rubydick]

Unfortunately, briefing Congress does not make something legal. And it's no surprise that the sycophants surrounding Bush would sign off on something like this.

Keeping us safe is a laudible goal. Something which BushCo. has failed dreadfully at. The number of "terrorist" attacks against US and allied targets has increased mutifold since Dubya was appointed.

Global terrorist attacks tripled in 2004

When it comes to the present revelations regarding Don Bush, I find his argument that he is working for our collective "safety" a bit thin.

It is sad that we can hoodwink ourselves into believing we are safer. This attitude is not unlike Dubya's avoidance of Vietnam service and his actions thereafter. They seem to suggest that we are okay, so long as it is others doing the dying.

I believe most agree that it was Osama that attacked us on 9-11. Where is he? I would speculate that the reason he has not been caught is because he is useful. No Osama would have meant no Iraq invasion (the holy grail of the Neocon death cult). This is probably why US and British Special Forces were called off the hunt after they had him cornered in Tora Bora in Dec. 2001.

This is not just idle speculation. I was invited to Afghanistan in 2002 by a friend who travels there every year (sadly, my wife nixed my participation). That summer, my friend was accompanied to Afghanistan by an ex-SAS Brit who was hunting Osama in Tora Bora in Dec. 2001. The SAS man's story (as told to me by my friend) tallies nicely with this one:

CIA Commander: U.S. Let bin Laden Slip Away

When one couples the story of Osama and Mullah Omar slipping away along with that of the US-sanctioned Pakistani airlift at Kunduz in November 2001 (see Sy Hersh's 'The Get Away'), the picture is either one of shocking incompetence or out-and-out treason. Take your pick.

 

[Momoftwo]

How about we get the facts first? Once again, Congress was briefed and NO ONE had a problem with it til politics got involved. Having friends who work on the hill and myself working in the intelligence field, I can tell you, the media and politicians are playing games. The facts are that whoever leaked this HAS committed a felony and I see it as Treason. Journalists do not have the right to speculate or write torwards their own opinions which is what most do. It's amazing, liberals label conservatives judgmental and righteous when they call someone on something, but when liberals do it, they're being "concerned americans". Also, the Justice department is made up of members of both parties and they said it was legal.

You expend a lot of energy on this site bashing our President. Seems like an inordinate amount of time for someone who isn't getting something out of it.

 

[rubydick]

Sorry, I''m not gonna reply to that one. Your own words say it all.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 1/2/2006 12:53:48 PM
Author: Momoftwo
You expend a lot of energy on this site bashing our President. Seems like an inordinate amount of time for someone who isn''t getting something out of it.

I do not speak for Richard Hughes, but I will tell you that I do get "something out of it" when I criticize (or, "bash", if you prefer) Mr. Bush. I get the satisfaction of using my freedom of speech and expressing my grave concerns that my rights as an American citizen are being eroded by someone who is not, but thinks he is, above the law. I get the satisfaction of knowing that if more of my rights are taken from me by Mr. Bush that at least I spoke up while I had the chance to do so.

 

[colormyworld]

Hey Richard, Is there anyone you would like me to notify in case you come up missing? I don't think a lawyer wiil do any good!!!
Rember BIG BROTHER is watching!

 

[AGBF]

Date: 1/2/2006 12:53:48 PM
Author: Momoftwo
How about we get the facts first?

Here are some facts for you.

"As Mr. Bush continued to defend the program in San Antonio, he was asked about a remark he made in Buffalo in 2004 at an appearance in support of the antiterrorism law known as the USA Patriot Act, where he discussed government wiretaps.

''Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap,'' Mr. Bush said in Buffalo, ''a wiretap requires a court order.''

He added: ''Nothing has changed, by the way. When we''re talking about chasing down terrorists, we''re talking about getting a court order before we do so.''"

The most important fact is that Mr. Bush is a liar. He lied to the American people. He spied on us secretly while assuring us that our civil liberties remained intact.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 1/2/2006 12:24:18 PM
Author: colormyworld
Fire& Ice From what I understand the NSA can gather the evidence and then has three days to get the FISA paper work. AFTER THE FACT!!!! Now why would there be a problem with time constraints with that kind of leeway. Doug

That''s precisely my point in reverse. You have the go ahead to spy TO BEGIN WITH. To me, after the fact application to do so is dopey.

Richard, we have NOT had any attacks in our country since 9/11. In fact, the news has reported a few thrawted (sp?) ones. Sorry, I DO think this says something. Do I feel safe? No, never will again. I''m not lulled into a false sense of security; but, spying on known AlQ isn''t high on my list of sins.

Spying is an essential part of gathering information. Growing up where I lived some of my friends phones were tapped. That was the heyday of tracking the mafia. I simply don''t understand the outrage? It''s been a fact of life for life - certainly not something GW invented.

O.K. - to throw even more of a monkey wrench - Some could point DIRECTLY to Clinton and his anti-spy policies as the downfall of knowing our enemies.

But, then - I know I enjoy my spy novels. - SPYGIRL! lives.

 

[fire&ice]

Not that this is of any consequence - but the thing that bugs the crap out of me with any of these threads is the absolutes. In life there are no absolutes. One has to take the good with the bad. I''m not keen on the thought of someone spying on me willy nilly. But, is there a greater good here? - I entertain the possibility.

 

[colormyworld]

Fire & Ice Do you think any body caught will ever go to court???? Or do we just through them into one of those black prisons in eastern europe? Maybe water boarding them until drowned would solve any lingering problems. These are all quite leagl to. I'm sure bush's justice dept. has cleared. Heck why not just breif congress to keep things on the up and up.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 1/2/2006 2:14:57 PM
Author: colormyworld
Fire & Ice Do you think any body caught will ever go to court???? Or do we just through them into one of those black prisons in eastern europe?

Caught here - as in terrorists?

My point is that information gathering is more important than trying to charge low level AlQ. Exactly what could they charge them for? Following the money, movement, etc is the point.

 

[colormyworld]

And do what with the info? Just gather it.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 1/2/2006 2:28:47 PM
Author: colormyworld
And do what with the info? Just gather it.

Process it - as in an on going investigation. At a certain point - you are connecting the dots. Hopefully that is

 

[colormyworld]

I guess I am tring to figure out to what end all this gathering will lead. I mean if someone is caught in this country tring to commit a terriorist act what can we do with them. The evidence will not be of any use in a court. What then? OOPS sorry. Or do we do as I stated eairler? Or maybe we can just hold them until....... I was brought up to believe we are (were) a nation of LAWS. If we stoop to the radicals level what seperates us from them. Freedom does indeed come at a high cost

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 1/2/2006 2:45:44 PM
Author: colormyworld
I guess I am tring to figure out to what end all this gathering will lead. I mean if someone is caught in this country tring to commit a terriorist act what can we do with them. The evidence will not be of any use in a court. What then? OOPS sorry. Or do we do as I stated eairler? Or maybe we can just hold them until....... I was brought up to believe we are (were) a nation of LAWS. If we stoop to the radicals level what seperates us from them. Freedom does indeed come at a high cost

What radical levels? Spying is not an means to an end - but a means themselves.

This is my senerio in all this. One intercepts information that said car is carrying explosives across the Canadian border. By process of elimination (again information gathering), one determines possibly which car. Cars are searched. A car is found with explosives, detonator, and blue prints to LAX. The information stops the carrying out of the act. Those people go on trial for what evidence they have. I''d love for a criminal lawyer to chime in; but, the evidence of the listening in on the conversation isn''t admissable - all the rest is.

Also, it is my understanding that the law has not caught up with technology. Air space is free game. I believe that one can listen in on cell phone calls and satilite phones.

I believe we must give up certain freedoms for safety. I wasn''t a big believer in putting cameras into the subways, etc until 7/7 in London. They caught the people REALLY quick because of them.

 

[colormyworld]

F&I I am not a lawyer put I think any evidence gathered unlawfuly cannot be used and I think that includes your senerio because it all came from the same poison fruit.

 

[rubydick]

Date: 1/2/2006 1:51:42 PM
Author: colormyworld
Hey Richard, Is there anyone you would like me to notify in case you come up missing? I don't think a lawyer wiil do any good!!!

Rember BIG BROTHER is watching!

Doug,

Seems Big Sister just blew her cover. Whoops! You shouldda seen what she wrote before she edited her post. I believe the words "sad" and "bitter" were prominent.

I've a confession to make. Just can't take it anymore, gotta come clean. Can't stand the secrecy any more...

It was a good cover while it lasted. So many hide behind pseudonyms, thus my handlers thought it best to appear to be open. Create the appearance of Richard Hughes (not my real name) as Joe Public, where both name and e-mail address are freely available. Make the legend available online for those who want to do a bit of searching. Subtle. Believable.

Of course, one cannot infiltrate the desparate Islamo-anti-whateverwearetheyarenot-terrorism wing of the radical left without a bit of street cred. Which is why the Company invested so much time creating both a gemological (Ruby-Sapphire.com) and a faux lefty web site (DogSkinReport.com) for me.

Think deep doo doo here. I know jack-doodle about gems. The Agency takes care of that for me. Yes, many believe my parents were Middle America Republicans. Exactly according to plan (they were surrogates, chosen to nurture the image for my later role in life).

I know what many of you are thinking: this is all an act, the set up. A minor player on Pricescope's politico forums, next you know he and his ilk have taken over the nation. First up on the evil agenda will be forcing children to have gay sex with underage stem cells.

All I've got to say is this:

Damn you, Ana, why did you ever publish my picture here. YOU BLEW MY ENTIRE COVER!!!

And thanks, too, to MomOfTwo. Feel proud? You have done irreparable harm to our nation's security. Sure, Ana can be blamed, indirectly, but she's from Romania!!! A damned furrener!!

Okay, emotion got the best of you, you meant well. So what. Benedict Arnold probably argued likewise.

Of all people, you should have known! Didn't they teach you anything in spy school? COMPARTMENTALIZATION, COMPARTMENTALIZATION, COMPARTMENTALIZATION. Kow chai, mai?