July 20, 2007

It's official. Bush is a dictator. US coup D'etat a reality. The White House has made the Constitutional Crisis official: the Justice Department will never be allowed to pursue contempt charges against an official invoking executive privilege -- even if it's blatantly illegal. stolen directly from the Blue. Spiderwire's post

Can't we impeach the bastard already? I give this country ten more years if we don't. Doesn't matter who's elected next, there's no going back unless we stop Bush NOW. Of course, if we don't, we the Bush regime can blame the ensuing mess on a black guy or a woman.

posted by BlueHorse 17 years ago
  • Doesn't matter who's elected next There's going to be an election?
  • And before I forget, everyone remember to fly your flags on tomorrow and hail President Cheney.
  • I predict that by next Friday everyone in the US will have forgotten about this (except homunculus, of course), just like the last twenty illegal power grabs. I know of no other country that would allow this to happen.
  • You know, when I read stuff like this, I start to wonder - what were the Romans thinking when Caesar crossed the Rubicon? Did they realize this was a regime-changing event, or was it one of a series of gradual steps whose implication wasn't realized until Caesar was officially the Emperor? Are we going through a similar regime change, but because it's been so gradual and couched in legal technicalities, we're just not noticing?
  • Write your reps, people. Impeachment won't happen unless we scream for it.
  • Disgusting. Yet again. I'd really consider heading North from Seattle and becoming Canadian. Seriously. And since I recently left my last job (for good reason), this could be the chance of a lifetime. Now, to convince my wife...
  • Aahhh, but he's such a compassionate dictator! "He's a good man, we're gonna get him some new legs..."
  • *pulls Ralph's choker*
  • Maybe during that colonoscopy they'll find Bush's brain.
  • I think you're right, jaypro. One I stop vomiting, it'll be a fascinating question to ponder: what will history pinpoint as the Rubicon of our day?
  • Remember, Americans, you have two choices: 1. The $800,000 Option. 2. The Beer for RTD Option* *requires living on a 10' by 10' lot in Ralph's Woods, without plumbing or electric (or "Hydro", as you'll learn to call it.)
  • my husband and I have joked about getting divorced so we can each marry someone with say, an EU passport, move to whatever beautiful country and continue our lives together out from under the oppressive fist of the 'tardocracy
  • You know, much as I love the US, sometimes I'm really happy that my family moved to Canada when I was a kid. Looks like we've now got a full-bore constitutional crisis down there. I'm teaching a constitutional law course this fall, and I've been working this past few weeks putting the syllabus together. One of the things I'll be teaching is that there's a notion in Canadian federalism of the rule of law, that is Plato's "rule of law and not men." It's seen as a fundamental constitutional principle in this country. In this US this principle was abstracted by the Founders into the checks and balances system but it seems to me that the fundamental principle is often lost in American discussions of this sort of thing. What this means is that Bush can claim to be following the Founders' model by asserting the rights of the executive yet completely miss the point of what they were trying to accomplish.
  • Write your reps, people. Impeachment won't happen unless we scream for it. Done (again, again, again, again). Here's that link with rep's contact information. *Buys beer for RTD*
  • The day after the 2004 election, in a thread on here somewhere, I lashed out against all Americans for allowing this guy to get re-elected. Not just the ones who voted for him, but ALL Americans for not trying hard enough to stop him. Shortly after, I softened my stance a bit and stopped blaming you all. That's starting to change again as I see what you're allowing to happen. I'm afraid writing your congresspeople isn't going to do it. I wasn't kidding when I said other countries don't stand for this shit. You have to DO something other than complain on the internet.
  • Like what?
  • we can each marry someone with say, an EU passport I accept your proposal. And I require nothing in return. Other than sex that would make a Bangkok whore vacationing in Amsterdam blush. Frequently.
  • Not just the ones who voted for him, but ALL Americans for not trying hard enough to stop him. Careful what size brush you stick in that paint can.
  • I'm curious, too. It's hard to plan an armed revolt a la 1776 these days.
  • In the past, many changes were made through demands from the people. Suffrage, civil rights for blacks...those battles weren't won through letter writing. Like-minded people need to organize. Like-minded organizations need to co-ordinate until your numbers are too big to ignore. Rally, march, gather...whatever...just do it in huge numbers. Also, if your media won't question the government, demand that they do. Go to your local network affiliates (again in large groups) and demand that they start reporting "real" news, instead of Hollywood gossip. I guarantee they'll report on your rally (they love when a story is about them). Organize focused rallies and strikes at your congressman's home or office. Just make it legal and peaceful. But make them notice you. And above all, stay focused. Don't get distracted by Harry Potter or American Idol. That's how the bastards got away with this in the first place.
  • I wasn't kidding when I said other countries don't stand for this shit. Other countries "stand for this shit" -- actually, much worse -- every fucking day of the week. So climb down off that high horse, pardner. Or tell me what it is exactly you think I am remiss in not doing.
  • what were the Romans thinking when Caesar crossed the Rubicon Entirely different. J.Caesar (who was never an Emperor, actually) came with an army. Moreover, alone among Romans he had style and panache, combining gay aristocratic glamour with a uniquely democratic approach to his troops. Moreover, having conquered half of Europe and distributed large amounts of the resulting money to the citizens of Rome, he was fantastically popular. The Roman Republic was actually a stale oligarchy: I have no doubt that if there had been one man one vote, J.Caesar would have been elected President by a landslide repeatedly. It is in a whole nother situation we find ourselves.
  • Oops. Preview. But then, I and many like me are already doing all the things you mention. Protesting. Complaining to newspaper public editors and TV producers. I agree that the people need to get in the streets in larger numbers, more often, though.
  • That sound? Oh, that's the sound of checks and balances dropping like flies. Oh, and the sound of founding fathers spinning in their graves.
  • Attention citizens: participation in this thread is a violation of President Bush's latest Executive Order. All your financial assets will be confiscated immediately. Thank you and have a good day.
  • A situation indeed (and I know I will regret saying this) where the Democrats dither about whether to put up a black man or a woman, because after all we like worthy candidates more than successful ones, whatever may be happening to the Constitution.
  • Actually, perhaps this will give Congress no other option than to impeach the cunts -- all of them.
  • I think focus is the key. When the war happened, there were a few rallies in the first few months and then nothing. After Katrina, people grumbled and complined and agreed that the Admin fucked up, and then nothing. When the Gitmo torture was exposed, people were shocked, and then nothing. Wiretapping? a week or two of coverage at most. Abu Graib? Ancient history...all but forgotten. Plamegate? Out of the limelight. Today's top stories? Dogfighting and Harry Potter.
  • And I like how the opposition is now alluding to Nixon. Long overdue, if you ask me.
  • Harry Potter fights dogs?
  • Oh shit, I promised I wouldn't spoil the story.
  • It will take nothing less than a collective mass to demand change. Yeah, I'm an American, but I grew sick and tired of so-called "patriotism" back in, oh say circa 1990-ish. The true "patriots" are few and far between. I moved to Indonesia in 2002 for a while. It's not a country without problems *by any means*, but if the government started jerking the citizens around, large masses of protestors descended upon the official residence of teh prezident, bamboo stakes and banners in-tow, to make it known that they were not happy. I had to admire that. Bush is on his game. The American public, in general, is deceived, disillusioned, and beguiled with the entrapments of its wonderful capitalistic culture. Nothing and everything is going to change soon. Yesterday was blogosphere day. Perhaps it should have been a day to log out and organize in the streets. Ooops, never mind, it's Friday. Where's my Flash Fun!? /otterbile
  • Hello, Kafka!
  • I'm sorry, but I just don't understand America at all anymore
  • So, mass groups of protesters descending on the Presidential palace don't just appear. They have to be built. So how do *we* build them? Because it's no good waiting for someone else to do it.
  • One of the things you can do is to make your displeasure known to you congressperson and senators. The other thing is to vote. US voter turnout is an embarrassment and a couple of percentage points change in voter turnout would have changed the result of the last two presidential elections. For those of us who live abroad, democrats abroad and republicans abroad can help you to get registered. Protests are useful, but protests coupled with a jump in registrations will get politicians moving.
  • The problem with revolutions in a country the size of the USA is just that it's not homogeneous enough. LA is not NY is not Chicago is not Kansas is not Texas. Just as there are millions enraged over pardons and power-grabs, there are other millions taking conservative cruises and nodding to the Fox News talkpoints. And even if some event united the population, support from some of the armed forces would be needed to exert any meaningful pressure. All those guns and automatic weapons and home-made tube bombs won't be a match for hypersonic-based crowd control weapons and other fine new toys. Other countries endure this and worse, yes. And it's that trump card of the division of the masses which those on top know how to play. On my city, you will see almost daily some demonstration, a mob shouting and blocking streets over some perceived injustice or governmental ommission. People on the street just ignore or antagonize them because they make them late for work... What would *really* unite the USA population against its' government? I can't think of anything.
  • I think you're fucked, people.
  • There's a couple of problems with frequent mass protests. If we spend too much time away from our jobs, we could get fired. I can't afford that - I've got a baby. Other members of my family that could help us out if such a thing were to happen would not be sympathetic because they have the opposite political beliefs. Also, it's likely that protesters are going to increasingly find themselves either arrested or killed while protesting. I can't afford to have either of those things happen to me, for obvious reasons. One thing people can do in addition to voting & writing congresspersons is participate in those groups that can and do make a difference. The ACLU is one I can think of off the top of my head - I'm sure there are plenty more. In this day and age, I do believe we can make a difference even if we don't protest & rise up in arms. We just have to *do* it, which is where the problem really is. As someone in this thread already mentioned, we're too busy watching American Idol and Big Brother to worry about our government's illegal actions & unchecked power. Maybe if Bush were to start doing to those shows what he does with the country, people would fight back.
  • I have a feeling the Bush Administration will not step down from power when their term is up. At one time I thought that absurd, but it begins to seem much more likely.
  • Yes. Make that donation you've been meaning to make to the ACLU. 25 bucks, what you'd pay for a date to the movies. Money well spent. Meanwhile: Dear Congresswoman Pelosi: Every week, the executive branch goes a step farther over the line, leaving respect for the Constitution and the rule of law far behind. This week, it was the executive's argument that it does not have to listen to the Congress vis-a-vis the U.S. Attorney scandal, plus an executive order claiming to right to seize the assets of anyone who in the executive's judgment is undermining the successful prosecution of the war in Iraq. Meanwhile, more troops are heading to a bleaker and bleaker situation in Iraq, and we're intensifying the game of chicken we're playing with Iran. It's pathetic to watch this happen to my country, and I worry for our future. I and others like me voted for you to stand up to Bush, Cheney, et. al. Why are you not demanding change? Why are you not enforcing accountability? Why are you not upholding the Constitution and the rule of law? Why are you not pushing for impeachment, for Bush and certainly for Cheney? What more needs to happen? Sincerely, HawthorneWingo
  • Well, Mr. Mabuse, I think you may be right in that he will step down but little will change. Of course, this guy might be on to something, in which case, you're dead on.
  • and yes, the absurd seems increasingly less so.
  • I would like them to try, to be honest. That would give us something very concrete to fight against. I'm afraid, though, that what'll happen is the behind-the-scenes movers & shakers won't go away and will continue their agenda. Something else I think is extremely likely is a rigged election. That seemed to go over pretty well the last couple of times it happened. On preview, HW if you don't mind I'd like to use that letter. (when I get home; it's quittin' time)
  • Go for it.
  • I would think that letters bearing the same or similar wording would be easier for these idiots to ignore. Might be better to make them different. My thinking behind the idea that they won't step down is that they have gone this far to prevent stuff that they have been doing from coming to light. If a Democratic administration comes to power, there might be more investigations, which they should surely want to avoid for the same reasons. I am personally convinced that Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld are guilty of war crimes, and that this is among the things they are trying to cover up. I think their gamble was that the Iraq invasion would go swimmingly, but it didn't, enforcing the follow-on. I mean, this could all blow over & it might turn out to be nothing, & everything will be hunky-dory. But how likely is that? I don't know. That none of this has greater implications seems pretty low possibility. If you had predicted any of this 5 years ago, you would have been laughed off the internet as a tinfoil-hatter & given a regular slot on Jeff Rense. But now it has happened, &, well you you have to have another look at the crazy theories, don't you?
  • A thought on being an even squeakier wheel: use snail mail instead of email to contact your congresspeople.
  • Raise or fold. That's all that can happen.
  • There is no excuse that any of us have for not being public, vocal, and active in opposition to this administration. There are frequent demonstrations in Washington to end this war, the participation is laughable in light of the number of people that say they want to see it end, why aren't you there? Put your money, your actions, and your future where your mouth is.... contact your representatives, show up at every single governmental meeting you can and demand action on local, state, and federal levels to end this war. Be willing to sacrifice your money, your job, your life... otherwise..... things will not change, you will not make a difference.
  • Impeachment won't happen unless we scream for it. posted by middleclasstool Fixed that for you.
  • Hank, see my comment... first one in this thread. I've been saying this for a couple months now, but no one has paid any attention. (perhaps they assumed it was plain batshit crazy). I keep thinking that the current POTUS candidates are just wasting their time and money - - the way I see it, another well-timed attack on the Homeland is all it's going to take; BushCo will invoke the magic genie (Executive Privilege) to hold on to power, and who's going to stop them? The groundwork has been carefully put into place, and continues to do so each day. It's a cunning plan, and I can only pray that my nightmare does not come to fruition.
  • When I was in California post-9/11, I sent emails to Feinstein to complain about her recommendations for treatment of non-citizen residents (I being one) and received nothing more than form emails saying "Thank you for your email; we'll get back to you eventually". Nothing else. Snail mail *might* be more effective. Cynical as I am, I don't think they would give either form of correspondence a lot of attention.
  • SMT: I've thought about that, too. Wondered if I should get my tinfoil hat adjusted, even. Seems more likely every day, doesn't it?
  • Yes, it's frightening. Each day just seems to bring more confirmation (for me, anyway). All of these executive orders that on the surface seem "fine and dandy" - - today's order on torture, for example - - makes for good BushCo PR snippets that make him look "good" to those who don't bother to dig further to see what evil really lurks within.
  • I don't discount attempts to manipulate the forthcoming elections, but, while there's more than enough crap going on, I think a coup is unlikely. The US did hold elections during WWII and the Civil War after all. One of the strengths of the checks and balances system is that election dates are constitutionalized and there's no obvious procedure for ignoring them. (Unlike a parliamentary system where you could have a government of national unity and delay an election for quite some time, assuming the Queen or Governor General plays ball.)
  • Yeah, they could ignore them. Say there's a terrorist attack & subsequent martial law lockdown, or, say, the government says that there's a terrorist cell in the US that they *know* is about to stage a 'dirty bomb' attack, & that for national security, the elections have to be 'delayed'. Bush goes on TV & says "I promise to relinquish power as soon as this is over, but right now we can't risk the safety of the country by having an election yadda yadda." That's how it can go down.
  • Sure, but that's entirely extra-constitutional. It simply can't be done within the US constitution. The view of executive power that the administration has proposed is over-broad, but they are still claiming constitutional justification for it. That's a very different thing than what you're proposing.
  • Well, I think there's a great deal of argument over whether their current actions are justified by the constitution or not, so that is not a definitive view. It is possible my scenario could be justified by some twisted interpretation of the constitution also. It would just take some bit of sophistry to do so. And, of course, a suitable 'incident'.
  • >>One of the things you can do is to make your displeasure known to you congressperson and senators. Except that they don't care what you think, or even how you vote. Their allegiance is to their future employers, the lobbyists. The only thing that can fix this now is to bring back the guillotine, quickly.
  • Except that they don't care what you think, or even how you vote. They do if they get enough blowback. No, each letter and e-mail to them isn't a precious snowflake that they spend hours contemplating, but believe me, I've seen it happen and it works -- if they get flooded with enough calls and e-mails and letters saying PULL YOUR NUTS OUT AND IMPEACH THIS ASSHOLE NOW, then they start to fear for their jobs, and suddenly it's back on the table. I once saw an entire city council completely reverse its unanimous position on a land development deal that would have made the city millions and created untold number of jobs because of outcry over one news story about the 100-year-old dairy farm that was being yoinked away from its family under eminent domain to make way for the business. Enough people in the community screamed, and in a matter of hours they'd all gone from pro-business spin to pro-family spin. It works, if they're scared enough. Thing is, most politicians are in it for the career. They're in it for power and government benefits and privilege and to see how high they can go before they bail for the private sector. You threaten to cut that run short, they'll blow you like a $1000-a-night hooker on ecstasy and tell you you're the most beautiful and wise person they've ever met while doing so.
  • PULL YOUR NUTS OUT AND IMPEACH THIS ASSHOLE NOW You're implying they have the balls to do this? My take is that 85% of them are in the pocket with $$ and power promises on this one. These suckers follow the poll--they know how unpopular Little Hitler is. Good time to solidify their popularity with the folks back home by taking a stance, but you don't hear squat. The other 15% are too junior, too chicken, too impotent or hopeful they'll pick up some scraps.
  • I really think if BushCo tries a coup of the American government, the military would bring them down. I mean, I cant say for definite, and the president is Commander-In-Chief but I'm thinking the generals wold be smarter than to allow a dictator to rule them. Then again, I could be totally wrong.
  • I just remembered that I saw headlines earlier this week saying we can expect an attack here in the US soon. Here's one of those articles.
  • darling, your description of J. Caesar's rise to power does not sound dissimilar at all to our current leadership's rise to power, at least to my ears.
  • If we impeach the bastids, then what? It goes to the Senate to convict, right? And I think they need a 2/3 majority for the Senate to convict, which isn't going to happen is it?
  • I really think if BushCo tries a coup of the American government, the military would bring them down. I don't think BushCo would pull a coup in the classic sense. No, I would gather to believe that, considering such a scenario were true, they would have a rather sophisticated plan to "pull the blinders" over not only the citizens, but those in the armed services as well. For fucks sake, look at what they've gotten away with thus far! An exeggerated grab for power is not without reach. A new war in Iran or an attack on the "homeland" would be enough for them to pull the strings to the next level. The military would surely fall in line and fight the fight. Booyah!! I pray that I am proved wrong, but my eyes have yet to deceive me...
  • You mudbloods are such idiots. You can't impeach Bush without first finding his twelve Horcruxes. If I knew that Dumbleclinton's Army was so full of morons I never would have signed up.
  • Mormons?
  • Additional evidence to support my current belief/s. The groundwork is almost all in place - - it now becomes a matter of timing...
  • "It simply can't be done within the US constitution." The secession of any given State or group of States was legal under the constitution as it stood in 1860/1; that right was revoked by a (Northern) Congress after the North won the Civil War, dragging the South back by force and THEN legitimizing its action. (I compare the Civil War to a husband who simply will not allow his wife to leave him and live: it matters little who is "in the right" to begin with, once you've started chasing her with a gun in your hand the love in your marriage is over.) By this example I mean the U.S. Constitution has never stopped the group in power from doing what they think should be done. If you diss their Authority enough they will chase you down and shoot you, then pass an law (with whatever Congress they allow) saying what they just did was okay. The idea that the U.S. has ever been qualitatively different from your average "republic" is just advertising.
  • If we impeach the bastids, then what? It goes to the Senate to convict, right? And I think they need a 2/3 majority for the Senate to convict, which isn't going to happen is it? The impeachment proceedings, and the subsequent trial in the senate, would force the White House to release all the documents they're currently saying they don't have to release. The "executive privelege" excuse won't work in an impeachment trial. Wheteher the senate gets a 2/3 vote to convict or not is irrelevant. It will force the truth to come out...and that truth might be damning enough that Republican senators have no choice but to impeach the entire administration.
  • There is no system of government that cannot be corrupted.
  • Sure, BigDavey, but point I'm trying to make is that there is a whole lot of difference from claiming constitutional authority for some action and simply putting the constitution aside. Lincoln may have largely ignored constitutional precident, hell he suspended habeas corpus in large areas of the country, but he did contest an election, an election that he knew he was likely to lose. Unconstitutional claims of constitutional authority are qualitatively different from claims that the constitution has no authority. The situation in the US is bad, but it ain't nearly that bad.
  • Congress will never impeach this lot. It will take something monumentally bad to leak out, or some further horrific blunder by BushCo, for them to do so. The Democrats are both too cowardly & too happy to let the GOP continue to implode to do it. I think the major motivation is to let the GOP fragment further so that the next election is delivered to the Dems.
  • It will take something monumentally bad to leak out, or some further horrific blunder by BushCo, for them to do so. Just what would it take, after all the past abuses, incompetences, horrors and lies? A leaked video of Bush & Cheney drinking a virgin's blood? It would be spinned into an humorous piece by Fox.
  • It would have to be something that would directly impinge on the lifestyles of the majority of apathetic Americans.
  • Or instituting the Draft.
  • In my life, BushCo has already instituted the draft. And if I can get the damn barkeep's attention, I'll have him top this one off.
  • Just what would it take, after all the past abuses, incompetences, horrors and lies? Just a little semen on a dress....
  • It would have to be something that would directly impinge on the lifestyles of the majority of apathetic Americans. And this is why we will not see anything change anytime soon. "They" know how to waltz the walk. As long as the gas flows, the 'puter boots up, the drive-thru serves - - the average American is bound to put up with a heck of a lot more before running into the street yelling REVOLUTION! Stocks continue to surge! Celebrities continue to enthrall! Malls continue to buzz! Constitution? We don't need no stinking constitution!! *cracks open a Bud*
  • It once took so much less, Some semen on a dress, denial and a lie. Impeachment, why we'd hardly try In times gone by. And when the Congress said That Bill was getting head While they were high and dry, They wished it had been they In times gone by.
  • Lovely, Ralph. Yes, we have our bread and circuses. Why revolt?
  • Finely crafted, Ralph. BlueHorse is right. Panem et circenses all the way. This is the way it ends. No bangs, just whimpers.
  • *gives Ralph a treat for that beauty*
  • ...all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
  • Archive Sues to Recover 5 million Emails Washington DC, September 5, 2007 - The National Security Archive today sued the White House seeking the recovery and preservation of more than 5 million White House e-mail messages that were apparently deleted from White House computers between March 2003 and October 2005.
  • *pulls out a cast iron skillet and ball-peen hammer*
  • There is no constitutional requirement for a President to issue a new executive order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous executive order. Rather than violate an executive order, the President has instead modified or waived it. If I were a framer of the Constitution, I wouldn't think to put that requirement in writing either, because it would seem to me that it's one of those things that goes without saying to any anyone with a basic respect for rule of law. Of course, I probably also wouldn't foresee that the reins of goernment would be so thoroughly seized by such individuals.
  • Bunch of babies. Do they believe in the due process of law or don't they?
  • TUM - no, they don't. This has been another episode of simple answers to simple questions.
  • I've been locked inside my building for the next 30 minutes, just because Chimpy is next door. Viva America!
  • I love the headline link: McCain: It’s ‘Ambiguous’ Whether Bush’s Warrantless Wiretapping Program Was Illegal, ‘Let’s Move Forward’ "Let's Move Forward" has been the slogan of this criminal administration. Looks like McCain will be right in line with their ethos. When they can't distract you with "Let's Move Forward" then it's "Terrierorst Alert" or "Support the Troops."