Bush Blames Supreme Court for No Gitmo Tribunals
It's never his fault. Boy George, in another attempt to deflect criticism from why he hasn't prosecuted top terrorists, took another constitutionally low-blow at the Supreme Court. He blamed the court for deciding that he had to have Congress enact legislation before he could run his military tribunals.
What he never tells you is that he has lawyers too. So does Dick Cheney. These lawyers feed Bush and Cheney's ignorance and disregard for the Constitution with the most extreme interpretations of constitutional law ("Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice").
Some obscure reactionary lawyer named David Addington on Cheney's staff seems to be the lawyer who mainly dishes out the unconstitutional stew that Boy George and Herr Cheney want to slurp down as correct legal reasoning.
At his news conference on terrorism today, Bush acted as if he would have had Khalid Sheik-Mohammed and 13 other high ranking al-Qaeda hung by now, except for that liberal Supreme Court making him follow the Constitution and come up with some rules for fair tribunals in consultation with Congress.
Of course, he could have consulted Congress 5 years ago, passed the necessary legislation, and have them hung by now, if he hadn't acted as though he himself had some dictatorial power to decide how to hold the tribunals.
He shouldn't be pointing fingers at the Supreme Court, of which seven of nine are Republican appointees. He should be asking his own lawyers why they gave him such lousy advice.
What he never tells you is that he has lawyers too. So does Dick Cheney. These lawyers feed Bush and Cheney's ignorance and disregard for the Constitution with the most extreme interpretations of constitutional law ("Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice").
Some obscure reactionary lawyer named David Addington on Cheney's staff seems to be the lawyer who mainly dishes out the unconstitutional stew that Boy George and Herr Cheney want to slurp down as correct legal reasoning.
At his news conference on terrorism today, Bush acted as if he would have had Khalid Sheik-Mohammed and 13 other high ranking al-Qaeda hung by now, except for that liberal Supreme Court making him follow the Constitution and come up with some rules for fair tribunals in consultation with Congress.
Of course, he could have consulted Congress 5 years ago, passed the necessary legislation, and have them hung by now, if he hadn't acted as though he himself had some dictatorial power to decide how to hold the tribunals.
He shouldn't be pointing fingers at the Supreme Court, of which seven of nine are Republican appointees. He should be asking his own lawyers why they gave him such lousy advice.
posted by Marshall Darts at
5:22 PM
3 Comments:
It's just difficult to understand why military tribunals are necessary at Gitmo, when the Massoui(?) trial seemed just fine as done by a court of his peers. There was no need for a military trial there and there is no need for one in this case, either.
By
jinx protocol, at 9/06/2006 6:16 PM
I heard an attorney who is an expert in the Uniform Code of Military Justice say tonight on PBS that the UCMJ would work just as well or better than Bush's plan. If Bush had done that he could have tried any of the detainees years ago and not wait for the mid-term elections.
The problem j.p. is that Bush and his guys want to run the country themselves. When one of the other branches of government checks them, they bad-mouth it.
It's especially troubling when the Executive derides another, co-equal, branch of government. It has the potential to undermine our system of checks and balances and respect for that institution.
By
Marshall Darts, at 9/06/2006 7:39 PM
P.S. Thanks for your insightful comment. You haven't let them throw sand in your eyes.
By
Marshall Darts, at 9/06/2006 7:40 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home