Attorney general: Bush blocked review of spy program

TalkBack 6 of 12:: Next »; « Previous

Thread View
Flat View

president's precedent: ((( "Hamdan versus Rumsfield has nothing to do with the
wiretaps. That was about the use of tribunals." )))

A Supreme Court case is rarely just about the case at hand.
Unless a decision is crafted so narrowly and specifically as to
preclude precedent (as in Bush v. Gore, for example), the
Constitutional questions answered in a case are used as the
legal basis for decisions made by lower courts in similar cases.

The [contradictory] justifications used by the Bush
Administration in the Hamdan case are identical to their
justification for skirting the FISA laws: that (a) the AUMF
provided the President with the proper authorization, and that
(b) as Commander-in-Chief, he inherently had that power all
along. The Supreme Court roundly negated both arguments with
their Hamdan decision, so any FISA-related lawsuit making its
way through the federal court system is going to run into the
brick wall of precedent.

((( "If the president had broken a law every Democrat in
Congress would be calling for his impeachment." )))

The Democrats are currently out of power, and the rubber-
stamp Republicans in Congress will NEVER exercise their
oversight roll so long as there is a Republican President. The
very same people who were up in arms about Bill Clinton's
girlfriend are willing to give Bush a pass on the lies he told that
lead this country to war. Any call for impeachment would be a
wasted effort in the current environment.

Once the Democrats retake Congress this November, though, all
bets are off.; Posted by: buddhistMonkey Posted on: 07/19/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use