Having made the mistake of confirming Michael Mukasey as US Attorney General, the Democrats again find their efforts to hold Republican government officials accountable for illegal and unethical behavior stonewalled by the Department of Justice (sic) and blocked by the brownshirt tactics for which the Bush Regime is now infamous.
White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers were found in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with subpoenas and refusing to cooperate with congressional committee investigations of the Bush Regime’s political firings of eight Republican US Attorneys. The eight fired US Attorneys declined to politicize their offices by investigating only Democratic officials and ruining their election chances with leaks from “investigations” designed to smear their reputations.
Mukasey gave House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the majority Democrats in Congress the finger and refused to refer the House of Representatives charges against the two Bush Regime operatives to a federal grand jury for investigation. Following the now established practice by the Bush Regime, Mukasey told the Speaker of the House that members of the executive branch are above the law and are not accountable to the US Congress, formerly a co-equal branch of government under the US Constitution in the days now past when the executive branch felt obliged to abide by the Constitution.
Mukasey boldly asserted in his letter to Congress that Miers and Bolton are immune from congressional subpoenas and, thereby, their “noncompliance did not constitute a crime.” According to Mukasey, “The contempt of Congress statute was not intended to apply and could not constitutionally be applied to an executive branch official who asserts the president’s claim of executive privilege.”
The way matters stand in America today, the executive branch can falsely prosecute, frameup, and imprison members of Congress and governors of states at will, but itself cannot be held accountable to law.
Pelosi herself was instrumental in making the executive branch unaccountable to Congress or to law when she declared impeachment of Bush to be “off the table.” This declaration by the Speaker of the House has effectively released the Bush Regime from any accountability, just as the Enabling Act released Hitler from any accountability to the Reichstag, the German constitution, or statutory law.
Moreover, the case for impeaching Bush and Cheney--indeed the entire administration--is by far the most powerful and necessary case for impeachment that has ever existed. By declaring Bush unimpeachable, Pelosi is giving away Congress’ only remaining power to prevent tyrannical rule by the executive branch. If Bush is above impeachment, every future president will be as well.
The Democrats naively believe that just one more year and the Bush Regime horror will be gone. But that is not the case. No matter who is the next president, the Bush Regime has established that the executive branch is no longer a co-equal branch of government. It is the primary branch, armed with unaccountability and the discretion to consult with other branches of government if it so wishes. The US Congress cannot give up the powers it has given up during the Bush years and ever expect to get them back.
The US Congress cannot conspire in Bush’s destruction of US civil liberty and expect a future restoration of civil liberty.
Republican federal judges who have aided and abetted the rise of an executive branch dictatorship cannot expect the judiciary to continue as a check on the unconstitutional and illegal behavior of the executive branch.
The Bush Regime, with the complicity of Congress and the judiciary, has destroyed the American constitutional system. For the brownshirt Republicans only THE AGENDA is important. Law, Constitution, separation of powers, truth, decency, honor--all of these things and any others in the way of THE AGENDA are dispensable.
While neoconservatives used 9/11 to pursue American and Israeli hegemony, Republicans used 9/11 to pursue executive branch hegemony. Whether or not Republicans can hold on to the executive branch through election theft or declaration of national emergency, the power that they have accumulated in the executive branch will remain. In the November 2006 congressional elections, voters gave Democrats control of Congress in order to rein in the Republican administration, but by then Congress had been reduced to an impotent branch of government and has proven to be incapable of reining in even an unpopular president with a 19% approval rating.
If a Regime that has come to be despised and deplored by a majority of Americans and the world can ride roughshod over law and the Constitution, constitutional government obviously has no future in America.
Pelosi says the House of Representatives is going to file a civil suit against the Bush administration for refusing to help it enforce its subpoenas. Who does Pelosi think is going to prosecute the suit, the politicized Republican US Attorneys? The Republican federal judges who have helped to create the unaccountable executive?
The White House branded Pelosi’s request for a federal grand jury to enforce the House subpeonas “truly contemptible.” Pelosi’s House Republican colleagues dismissed her request as “a partisan political stunt.” White House spokesman Tony Fratto played the fear card and denounced Pelosi for trying to investigate loyal Americans instead of passing legislation that makes Americans safe by allowing the executive branch to spy without warrants. House GOP leader John Boehner’s spokesperson accused Pelosi of making Americans unsafe by “pandering to the left-wing fever swamps of loony liberal activists.”
The only power the House has left is impeachment, and Pelosi is too frightened to use it. Why is the Speaker of the House afraid to use the power the Constitution gives her to remove from office a president who deceived Congress and the American people, who violated US and international law, and who is a clear and present danger to American liberty, to the US Constitution, and to peace and stability in the world?
Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, has held numerous academic appointments. He has been reporting shocking cases of prosecutorial abuse for two decades. A new edition of his book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions, co-authored with Lawrence Stratton, a documented account of how Americans lost the protection of law, was published by Random House in March, 2008.
while required will not kill the corruption that has flowed through the veins of our nation. Every artery, every vein, every capillary of our society flows with lies, deception and the inability to not think of themselves as Gods.
The people who were elected to uphold the law and therefore the will and morality of the people, are now the largest criminals to ever permeate the face of the earth. They hold the law as only something that everyone but they have to obey. They look down upon the American people as if our names rhymed with Kunta Kinta and we should plow their fields and tend their horses genuflecting "Master" as we pass by.
It is time for the courage and strength that our founding fathers had to sacrifice all they had to gain freedom from oppression, lies, and slavery from those who do not even look at us as human.
by
Michael Morris (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 293 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 12:28:19 PM
Why have Ms. Pelosi and other congressional misrepresentatives (as well as our justice department) blatantly violated the law, cackled at the joke of their oaths of office, signed legislation in direct conflict with constitutionally protected rights, built detention centers around the country, and tucked martial law under Bush's direct control?
It's called Peak Oil leading to Peak Famine in combination with complete financial collapse, with another fake terror attack thrown in for the still unconvinced.
I will never forget that we LET them do it. To paraphrase Gandhi, Empire can have my dead body, but never my consent.
by
Susan Guest (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 73 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 1:11:02 PM
"The Speaker of the House has effectively released the Bush Regime from any accountability, just as the Enabling Act released Hitler from any accountability to the Reichstag, the German constitution, or statutory law".
So the US Empire has become very similar to Nazi Germany. We completely disregard the rule of law within our society and the international community. We do as we please.
Congress is a corporate rubber stamp and has given up virtually all of its power. They act in lock step and fail to operate in the best interests of the people.
The article is clear and concise, but most people carry on their day to day activities as if nothing extraordinary were happening, nothing out of the normal course of activities.
So, now what? Congress won't impeach. Is there any hope of truly creating a free and democratic society that serves the people instead of usurping them?
How can out of control mad men serving their own hidden agenda's be stopped?
by
August Adams (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 385 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 1:12:02 PM
Who would have thought that in the year 2008 we would be talking about the United States of America without a functioning Constitution? Utterly astounding!
Perhaps we could simply blame it all on Bill Clinton? Although Clinton must share some of the blame with his signing of NAFTA/GATT in 93'. And how nice it'd be though if all our country had to focus on was a blue dress?
I also don't see the neocons and this Bush junta relinquishing the powers they have worked so hard to accumulate over these past eight long miserable years. What is most freighting is that the vast majority of Americans who continue to be played for as fools, they don't have the slightest inclination of the many presidential directives issued by this despotic Bush administration. Directives which I believe will be test driven before the next General Election in November. Dictatorial powers which many in this country will not stand up to lightly.
And if for those who think House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and this complicit Democratic Congress will come to America's rescue? You've got a better chance at wining a Noble Peace Prize.
This will undoubtedly be a very long, hard and perhaps bloody slog?
"Overgrown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty." George Washington, 1796.
by
Munich (0 articles, 47 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 668 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 1:48:50 PM
How have we as a people elevated Presidential directives over the body of the constitution?
If Nancy was a man,we would expect her to grow some ,suck it up and issue inherent contempt charges and then go send the sergeant of arms to drag Mier's and Bolton's ass in PDQ. None of the pleasantries of a civil suit,time's past for that.
Myself ,I feel America died when we allowed lobbyists to spend an average of $3 million a year on congressmen and women making $150,000.+ a year. No corrupting influence possible with that now is there?
by
tjb (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 178 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 2:23:45 PM
I believe that citizens have a moral, if not legal, responsibility to report crimes of which they are aware.
So what would happen if a couple hundred thousand people began reporting crimes to their local US Marshall's Office, US Attorney's Office, or local police for that matter.
"Hey, I'm aware of the commission of a crime. And I even know who did it!"
The list is long, so choose the crime you want to report.
by
Angelo (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 147 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 4:42:35 PM
Looking back on all of this what I find most troubling is Al Gore and the Democratic party not having really challenged the Supreme Courts 2000 decision. I happen to believe this was all part of a contrived plan, and that Gore and the Democrats were informed to "stand-down" just as they're doing right now with all of the Impeachable offenses committed by Bush and his wanton cabal. There's a reason why Impeachment is off of the table. Sadly, we'll never be told this reason. We have a preety good idea though!
After the 2000 usurpation the PNAC's puppet was finally installed. The neocons had at last found their Charlie McCarthy, this impish frat boy who would be used to fulfill this maniacal dream of Middle East hegemony and Global dominance. Al Gore must of had some inkling of what was going on? The plan was in the making for some time, was it not?
With this bellicose cowboy (Cheney's mannequin) now in place, and with the full support of a complicit corporate media and it's continued effort of "dumbing down" it's citizens, they've all conspired to lead this country down a path of death and destruction. A path that appears to have no end in sight.
by
Munich (0 articles, 47 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 668 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 4:46:16 PM
Keep in mind that the illegal spying began prior to 9/11, and as it was done without the legally required warrants, it was done for blackmail purposes.
by
paul roberts (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 4:52:10 PM
the argument for impeachment would have been a foregone conclusion...the level of unlawlessness would never have risen to this level, before some thing would have been done. I weep in frustration....
by
Susan Nelsen (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 226 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 5:07:43 PM
Re Precedent. Would Republicans take impeachment off table?
While neoconservatives used 9/11 to pursue American and Israeli hegemony, Republicans used 9/11 to pursue executive branch hegemony. Whether or not Republicans can hold on to the executive branch through election theft or declaration of national emergency, the power that they have accumulated in the executive branch will remain.
I wonder if taking impeachment off the table might be a peculiarly Democratic party thing, and that if Republicans find themselves in a situation where they are being opposed by a President using 'unitary executive powers' whether they might be more willing to use impeachment.
I am not American, but it sometimes seems that Republicans are more willing to play political hardball. Perhaps 'Executive Branch Hegemony' would only be permitted by Democrats when there is a Republican President and not vice versa. Any thoughts?
by
Brett Paatsch (0 articles, 2 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 783 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 5:23:06 PM
For sure, parties differ in their willingness to align their actions with party needs, versus constituents needs and principled defenses of the constitution.
But I think the executive branch is on a racheting mechanism now. It is stronger than the effect of party. It may be turned the other way from time to time, sure, but the torque is all applied in one direction now: Monstrous strengthening of the Executive.
The president of the US can no longer be impeached; and all his actions can now be kept away from knowledge of Congress via National Security Ongoing Operations; and Supreme Court is no longer the final interpreter of law.
Sure, a democratic president can still be impeached, but it will not diminish the power of the executive office. I'm thinking this is why Pelosi and Reid are afraid to use impeachment: The fear of direct and immediate retaliation in kind, onto the next Democratic president if any more get that far ever again.
by
Geoffrey of Bordentown (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 5:06:55 PM
I've long believed that the bloodthirsty, power-hungry puppets we know as "Bush and Cheney" were brought to power for one reason, and one reason only: to implement PNAC (which is really nothing more than a somewhat deceptively repackaged version of "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm"; repackaged in an attempt to appeal to some traditional U.S. imperialists.
And it's clear from reading the public PNAC documents that the PNAC agenda of U.S. militarism, aggression and conquest (obviously for the sake of Likud Israel) cannot ultimately be carried out from any kind of political platform even remotely resembling a "Constitutional republic". Thus what PNAC boils down to is a manifesto for the overthrow of the U.S. government.
The neocons, Bush and Cheney, and their Mossad operatives obviously pulled off 911 to get the ball rolling, and now we're on our way to hell.
What I don't understand is why so few people seem to be able to see this?
by
Harold Smith (0 articles, 2 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 373 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 5:40:35 PM
I don't think that you're naive enough to believe that the actions and foibles of the democrat party are the result of unsophistication. The neglects of not only the past seven years but the failure to rally the most effectual president in decades, Bill Clinton, shows a distinct plan to undermine the party and connect with the republican party with a deliberate assist in the coup of 2000 and a continuation through the 9/11 attacks and direct involvement in the advancement of the war in Iraq.
Would you really believe that all that has transpired in the past two decades is just chaos at work? The poor dems are just witless victims of circumstance? I don't. These things don't just happen and I don't believe that intelligent people such as yourself believe that they just happen either.
Until everyone wises up to who is really involved and quits blaming just thebush administration nothing will ever be OK. Everyone who was ever involved in any part of allowing bush in office, voting for the war, allowing the castigation and impeachment of Clinton, not questioning the antics of the 9/11 attacks and the so-called 9/11 investigation, until everyone is held up and held accountable nothing will ever be OK.
by
PeterJ (4 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 28 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 6:02:07 PM
Considering that the warrantless spying began prior to 9/11, it is not far-fetched to conclude that its real purpose is to collect information with which to blackmail Democrats. We know that most politicians have their foibles, and blackmail could explain the curious impotence of a party that controls both Houses of Congress and has a large number of issues on which to bring charges.
The wars and the police state measures are products of the neoconservative agenda, which is hegemony for the US and Israel, and the Federalist Society agenda. The Federalist Society is a group of Republican lawyers who are committed to putting more power in the hands of the executive. This society, from which Republicans draw their judicial and Justice Department nominees and their congressional judiciary committee staffs, was formed due to Republican frustration with Democratic congresses blocking the agendas of Republican presidents. The society dates from the days when the Republicans were believed to have a "lock on the presidency" and the Democrats had a lock on Congress. To overcome their frustration, Republicans, such as Terry Eastland, wrote books, such as "Energy in the Executive: The Case for a Strong Presidency." A strong presidency became the goal, and with so much of the federal judiciary now comprised of Federalist Society members or former members and the DOJ in the Society's hands as well along with the Republican staffs of the judiciary committees of Congress, we now have in place all the foundations for a police state. It is, in a way, a case of generals fighting the last war and bringing us a police state.
For the neoconservatives, nothing is important but The Agenda. It trumps all the values and civil liberties that the English people achieved through centuries of struggle. A few really despicable neocons and some short-sighted Republican lawyers have wiped out a thousand years of human achievement.
Paul Craig Roberts
by
paul roberts (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 6:51:22 PM
After what I've seen the ruthless Bush regime do to this country and the world during the past seven years, I honestly can't discount anything. And I lived through Watergate as a college student. I'm truly shocked and appalled because I never thought a U.S. president would outdo Nixon. But Bush has and his neocons have...blatantly so.
I thought it was just me, but Paul Craig Roberts raised a legitimate concern: I've also been wondering if Bush's warrantless wiretapping has enabled blackmailing of Congress and others.
I believe that's why Bush wants immunity for the telecoms -- the multiple, civil-action suits would reveal his regime's illegal spying on Americans and political foes in every arena.
I'm very afraid about the future of this country. Consequently, I hope true conservatives (not Bushies and their fellow neocons) will join forces with other political movements to fight this threat.
I'd like to see Mr. Roberts and like-minded conservatives obtain a stronger voice in the MSM (though I hear them on talk radio).
by (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 7:52:55 PM
Since the PNAC agenda, if followed through, will obviously bring devastating consequences, I don't think the conspirators could afford to rely on fear of and fealty to AIPAC alone, to keep any potential troublemakers at bay. Given Bush's horrific crimes and low approval rating, who knows...somebody might decide to be a "hero"; thus our prudent conspirators would need to have something more. And what other conceivable purpose would there be for the illegal spying? I don't know how much they're depending on blackmail, but I think it's a factor.
by
Harold Smith (0 articles, 2 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 373 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 8:35:45 PM
Paul Craig Roberts' article hits the nail on the head and expresses the fear that I have been harboring since the Dems gained the majority and Pelosi took "impeachment off the table".I get the sense that the American public is being fed a load of crap by both parties, and that there is some sinister backroom dealings going on which will completely destroy what is left of our Constitution. Roberts is correct: any new President is not going to willingly give up the power that Bush has usurped. The precedent has been set to legitimize just about anything a President wants to do. Cheney has been working since the days of Nixon to create a presidency which can ignore the Congress and it appears that he has succeeded. Pelosi and the Dems who have aided and abetted the Bush crimes should themselves be impeached. It sickens me. And it stuns me that our elected representatives don't care about our Constitution. Our democratic republic as set up by the Founding Geniuses is the best political system ever created, and our Congress wants to give it away. Damn Pelosi to hell. The entire Congress would not make a pimple on Jefferson's ass.
by
Robert Sullivan (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 6:59:38 PM
Consider the ruthless ambition of the Clintons who I strongly suspect did everything in their power to neuter Reid (easily enough) and bring Pelosi in line so as to allow for all of those monstrous powers of tyranny to be intact once Billary swept back into the White House.
I say that the Clintons and Democrats bear more than their share of the blame for this due to their fecklessness, their corruption and their weasel like ability to ensure that no leader would emerge during the desecration of our Constitution and the illegal wars that resulted who would dare to intrude on the limelight of the Queen in waiting.
It is grossly unfair to blame the PNAC fascists for this alone, they had accomplices in their criminality and if one day we ever manage to return the rule of law to this sick, sad post 9/11 lemming colony may the trials be bipartisan.
Just go do some research on the Clintons and Bushes, they are thick as thieves and their arcs intersected in Mena along with Iran Contra Ollie North and his cocaine/gunrunning.
This thing is a bottomless snakepit.
Kudos to Paul Craig Roberts for being a truly patriotic American in his ongoing attempt to shine a light into the cockroach nest. He is a national hero and I have been following him for years, ever since he realized what Nazis that the Republican party had become after they turned on him.
Just my two cents
EE
by
Ed Encho (6 articles, 7 quicklinks, 54 diaries, 345 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 7:03:06 PM
Indeed...When the contrived "event" comes in the next 8 months and Directive 51 kicks in, the snakes will be coming outta the pit to finish off the Constitution and the USA. 'Murrika Uber Alles!
by
Papawhale (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 55 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 2:05:08 PM
Ed Encho doesn't have it right. I turned on the Republicans (not on Reagan, who was a conservative Democrat) when I left the Reagan administration during Reagan's first term. According to Business Week's editor, I was the magazine's most effective critic of the Bush I administration. I have been a critic of the Bush II administration ever since it was apparent that the wicked fools were going to attack Iraq and had no respect for International law or US law. I am an early skeptic of their absurd explanation of 9/11.
Reagan enjoyed his visits with Tip O'Neil. He couldn't stand Bob Dole.
Paul Craig Roberts
by
paul roberts (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 10:27:25 PM
