Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 7 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Republican Lawyers Offer Proof that George Bush is a War Criminal

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)   7 comments
Message Ed Martin

Republican lawyers David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey in a February 17 Washington Post article, A Truth Commission?, try desperately and without success to extend George Bush's false claim of executive privilege and immunity from even investigation into his war crimes into the present, post-Bush era.

In the article, they try to show that Senator Patrick Leahy calling for a "truth commission" and Congressman John Conyers' introduction of legislation to establish a National Commission on Presidential War Powers and Civil Liberties are both unconstitutional.

Rivkin and Casey list as examples of "blue ribbon commissions the Warren Commission established by President Johnson to investigate Kennedy's assassination and the September 11 commission organized by Congress to investigate the events of that day in 2001.

They apparently have no objection to these investigations into possible criminal activities, one instigated by a sitting president and the other instigated by Congress, since there were no Republicans as the direct subject of the investigation.

In trying to support their claim that these new commissions would be unconstitutional, they state that, "Because of their unique organizations, these commissions often exist outside of the Constitutions three branches of government." They completely ignore the fact that Leahy and Conyers are elected members of the Senate and House, which is in fact one of the three branches of government, the legislative, which is in fact established by the constitution.

In a further, disingenuous attempt to discredit the validity of an investigative commission, they claim that, "So the commission would be unlawful if it served anything but an advisory role." Well, of course, we already knew that. They further claim that the commission " also raises serious concerns about due process that could render it unconstitutional."

These are attempts to falsely imply that the commissions are prosecutorial and not just investigative. They are not. They can only serve an advisory role, such as advising the Justice Department, that yes, we have found evidence that George Bush and his administration committed war crimes. Then and only then does statute law kick in and the right to due process apply.

But, the crowning achievement of Rivkin and Casey's article, though they have no idea that they have done it, is that they present their own evidence that George Bush is a war criminal. They state, "President Obama's charge sheet has already been started. By authorizing continued Predator missile attacks against al-Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan, he has directly targeted those "civilians" with deadly force. That is a war crime."

Pay close attention to that last sentence and what it refers to as a war crime, and let me quote from an Associated Press article of October 10, 2008. "Washington has pushed Pakistan to eliminate such insurgent sanctuaries - and President Bush has okayed U. S. strikes in Pakistan, Defense Secretary Robert Gates has revealed."

Rivkin and Casey have presented the best case there can be, using their own reasoning and quoting their own words that George Bush has committed a war crime. But, since they are Republicans and George Bush is a Republican, they cannot conceive that there can be a charge sheet for Bush with exactly the same charges that for them are war crimes for Obama, but not for Bush.

Rivkin and Casey presented no evidence that Obama "okayed US strikes in Pakistan," but then they conveniently left out the evidence that Bush actually did, which according to their own words, "That is a war crime."

Rate It | View Ratings

Ed Martin Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Ed Martin is an ordinary person who is recovering from being badly over-educated. Born in the middle of the Great Depression, he is not affiliated with nor a member of any political, social or religious organization. He is especially interested in (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Conyers' year of tolerating contempt

The twelve powers of a President.

Removal of the President from Office

You need to read this! Rob Kall's declaration of war

Textbook descriptions of George Bush reveal psychopathy, and much worse.

The worst is yet to come; foreclosure fraud is the banksters' least problem

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend