Secret Bush administration legal memos released to public

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by leekohler, Mar 3, 2009.

  1. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #1
    O...M...G...not really something we didn't know, but still very scary. And there's still more to come.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-documentsmar03,0,6427490.story
     
  2. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #2
    As you say, lee: shocking, but not altogether unexpected. The notion that the president reserves dictatorial powers, is above the law, as long as it's in the interests of the nation.

    What I really want to know is: what can be done to prevent any future president from seizing this kind of power again? Is there any way to do it short of an outright constitutional amendment (which would be time-consuming and contentious)?
     
  3. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #3
    I thought we already had things in place to do just that. As far as I'm concerned, Bush is simply an untried criminal who broke the law for years. It's just that no one had the guts to step up and enforce the law.
     
  4. Macaddicttt macrumors 6502a

    Macaddicttt

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #4
    I don't know if it's as clear-cut as that, although I admit I don't know the letter of the law that well concerning this.

    Nixon pretty much had the same position as Bush ("When the President does it, that means that it's not illegal."), and had he gone to trial we would have gotten some resolution on this. But Ford preemptively pardoned Nixon, killing the chance to have this thinking tried in the court.
     
  5. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #5
    Publishing these memoranda is a very good way to make such actions by future Administrations a much less attractive proposition.
     
  6. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #6
    Hopefully this kind of information dump will prod certain members of Congress to begin investigations into what else there is out there. The idea that a president can designate an American citizen as outside the US legal system on his say-so with no guidelines as to how he makes that decision and no recourse to the accused is decidedly un-American.

    Add in the fact that we now know the CIA destroyed at least 90 videotapes depicting "enhanced interrogations", and we really need to know how broadly Bush used the powers his legal toadies invented for him.
     
  7. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #7
    You are right about that, mac. It's scary to me that this has happened once again with absolutely no consequences. We should not feel this powerless over our government in the US. We need to do some fixing, and soon.
     
  8. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #8
    Clearly not. I object to the false implication that things which routinely happen in America are "un-American".
     
  9. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #9
    Perhaps you can point out which other presidents have made the assertion that American citizens are not subject to the legal protections of the American justice system based on their say so? I mean, if it's so "routine" and all, there should be plenty of other examples, right?
     
  10. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #10
    Do we really know what every president has done while in office? Just because Bush didn't cover his tracks doesn't mean he wasn't the only one.
     
  11. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #11
    Christ, is this the standard of proof these days?

    Do we really know what you do in your spare time? Just because we don't have proof that you have molested puppies doesn't mean you haven't done it, right?

    I'm asking Skunk to show us how routine presidential violations of habeus corpus have been. AFAIK, the only presidents known to have done so are Lincoln and Bush. Hardly routine, IMHO.
     
  12. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #12
    We don't know how many others have considered it. Presidents have a lot of power, we don't know what happens behind closed doors.
     
  13. Sedulous macrumors 68000

    Sedulous

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    #13
    Point is that the president swears to uphold the Constitution. No man is above the law.
     
  14. ravenvii macrumors 604

    ravenvii

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Location:
    Melenkurion Skyweir
    #14
    Don't forget the Japanese internship camps.

    Worse; it has gone to the Supreme Court and they upheld the camps. A shameful moment in our checkered legal history.
     
  15. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #15
    It's great that Obama has released these memo's. What's sad and scary is he hasn't reversed the warrantless wiretaps yet.
     
  16. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #16
    I think we would have to agree that there is a vast difference between considering something and actually doing it, right?

    I mean, come on... the Bush administration was one of the most secretive -- if not THE most secretive -- administration we've ever had, and we knew some of this stuff before he even left office. We're finding out more within months of the Bush administration leaving office. These kinds of actions leave paper trails. They don't just happen in a vacuum.
     
  17. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #17
    I wasn't being terribly serious, and I certainly wasn't referring specifically to habeas corpus, but it just seems a little tired after the last eight years to use "American" as a synonym for "civilised" or "scrupulously correct and law-abiding". I think the linkage is going to have to be revalidated, don't you?
     
  18. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #18
    I wasn't intending it to be synonymous with civilized. I was referring to America's founding as a rebellion against, among other things, that type of abuse of power by government. And of course, that's not to imply that it is something uniquely American; but for most of our admittedly short history, we've managed to avoid tossing our own citizens in prison on the say-so of the head of state with no recourse by the accused to the justice system.
     
  19. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #19
    You guys and your spelling. :)
     
  20. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #20
  21. JLatte macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2005
    Location:
    San Diego
    #21
    Being conservative doesn't necessarily mean you have to agree with Bush or anyone in the Republican party right now, or Fox news, or Limbaugh or any of them.
     
  22. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #22
    Why would they bother posting when you clearly are ready to attack them.

    Your post is set up as bait and quite frankly aggressive. To me it shows you do not want to debate but to bash.
     
  23. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #23
    You're damn right. I want them to explain why they decided to turn a blind eye while this was going on. They defended the trampling of our Constitution. You're damn right I'm ready to attack them.

    I'm talking about those who did agree.
     
  24. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #24

    And there you have the reason why this tread is useless.

    You do not want to debate. you want to attack.

    This is an example why the conservative side does not even post here. The other side just will bash them until they leave. They will out number them 10 to 1 and just make low blows that get as close to breaking the rules here as they can.

    I do not blame them for not posting when you have attacks like the one you posted. You clearly do not want to debate but attack them.
     
  25. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #25
    I admitted as much. But I really do want to hear their excuses for this. I want to know what the hell they were thinking while our kids were dying over there. Then I want them to admit they were wrong and I want an apology.

    They get attacked because they won't debate according to the rules of the forum, and they refuse to use facts.
     

Share This Page