• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Mukasey another Gonzales

Tex

Well-known member
After watching the Justice Department Oversight Committee hearing going on right now, the only conclusion you can come to is that we are no longer a nation of laws, but a nation of king george.

Attorney General Mukasey is not willing to enforce the law when it is not what the administration wants or against itself. This makes the law subservient to the administration, not the administration subservient to the law.

Mukasey points out several real problems we have in our nation right now. One is that the quality of our judges, Mukasey for instance, is very, very suspect. He doesn't believe in the rule of law, rather the rule of the administration he serves. Loyalty is thus put in his line of command, not in the law and following the Constitution. This is the same problem that Gonzales had. It makes the rule of law in the U.S. a farce. Mukasey was touted as an honorable judge before his confirmation hearing. Obviously this was incorrect or his honor is for sale, something very troubling for the quality of the judges we have sitting at the highest level of the government.

How a man like this was approved by the Senate is also troubling. It shows the inability of the Senate to approve men of character who can not or will not carry out the law of the land.

The last recourse is for Mukasey to be impeached by the House of Representatives, just as they should have done to Gonzales (who went out with a big party, not the tail between his legs as should have been the case for the obfiscation of his duties to the country).

Brad DeLong's Weblog Archive Page

« Why Oh Why Are We Ruled by These Criminals? | Main | The Future of Latin America: Another Such Victory and We Are Lost »
December 18, 2005
Impeach Attorney General Gonzales for Lying to Congress

Impeach Alberto Gonzales for lying to Congress. Impeach him now:

Think Progress: According to President Bush's radio address today, as White House counsel, Alberto Gonzales personally approved Bush's program for warrantless domestic wiretaps. By circumventing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, those wiretaps violated federal law.... During his confirmation hearings for Attorney General in January 2005, Sen. Russ Feingold asked Gonzales about this precise issue:

SEN. FEINGOLD: I -- Judge Gonzales, let me ask a broader question. I'm asking you whether in general the president has the constitutional authority, does he at least in theory have the authority to authorize violations of the criminal law under duly enacted statutes simply because he's commander in chief? Does he -- does he have that power?

After trying to dodge the question for a time, Gonzales issued this denial:

MR. GONZALES: Senator, this president is not -- I -- it is not the policy or the agenda of this president to authorize actions that would be in contravention of our criminal statutes.

In fact, that was precisely the policy of the President.

And immediately afterwards:

SEN. FEINGOLD: Finally, will you commit to notify Congress if the president makes this type of decision and not wait two years until a memo is leaked about it?

MR. GONZALES: I will to advise the Congress as soon as I reasonably can, yes, sir.

Is there any reason for Alberto Gonzales to continue to serve as Attorney General?

December 18, 2005 at 04:32 PM in Moral Responsibility, Politics: Bushisms, Politics: Civil Liberties, Utter Stupidity | Permalink
TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/106400/3876880

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Impeach Attorney General Gonzales for Lying to Congress:

» Gonzales Defends Domestic Spying from Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said President Bush has the authority to conduct "very limited" su [Read More]

Tracked on December 19, 2005 at 01:08 PM
Comments

Who of the founding fathers said: Gentlemen you have your republic if you can keep it. To me it sounds like we have lost it. The pres said to congress, impeach me if you can.
I think our republic is down the tubes.

Posted by: dilbert dogbert | December 18, 2005 at 05:07 PM

Why haven't House Democrats started to demand impeachment hearings? The president and his attorney general have violated FISA. Even if a declaration of war was passed, the president would have only 15 days to conduct warrantless surveillance (50 USC 1811).

The president and cabinet officers swore to uphold the Constitution. That includes the 4th amendment.

Posted by: Christopher ball | December 18, 2005 at 07:14 PM

Well, allegedly the White House has notified the heads of the Intelligence Committees about the NSA wiretapping. Does that count on question 2?

Posted by: trotsky | December 19, 2005 at 08:11 AM

'Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither' - Benjamin
Franklin.

I don't know whether Iraqis have more freedom now than a few years ago, but I do know that US citizens have less now. Well, our "freedom fighting" president has at least accomplished something here.

Posted by: pat | December 19, 2005 at 08:20 AM

So we have a president willing to break the law, the Senate to approve Attorney Generals who will not enforce it, and a House of Representatives who will not take up issues so important to the continuation of our democracy---the rule of law, not the rule of king george.

This is as bad as the king georges that parliament battled when moving from a monarchy to a republic.

We have a House of Representatives who don't have the courage to save our country. They will probably just use their power to continue selling the public interest to the highest bidder or their self interest.

We have to demand more from our leaders.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Tex
We have a House of Representatives who don't have the courage to save our country.

we have been saying that all along ... that the Democratic leadership is the party of Surrender... :roll: :wink:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
One of the interesting aspects that came up on C-SPAN tonite--Where the US used to be thought of as the worlds leader for intolerance of violation of human rights-- now the US and Bush Administration can no longer use or argue moral issues, slave and/or child labor, and human rights as a block or even negotiating issue in trade agreements- or try to push human rights in 3rd world or Communist nations....Nor can they take issue when a neighboring African country moves into another country and kills millions in the name of freeing them.... The US/Bush Administration are now looked on by the populace of the world as hypocrites if we say/do anything....

This comes about since the US and the Bush Administration is now listed on the Worlds Human Rights Watch's top violators list...This comes about because of GW's allowal of the use of torture, secret prisons, holding political prisoners without habeus corpus or trials, etc, etc- and his wars of conquest in Iraq and Afghanistan in which thousands have been killed...

How far backward will this move us in our influence on the world stage... :???:
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
One of the interesting aspects that came up on C-SPAN tonite--Where the US used to be thought of as the worlds leader for intolerance of violation of human rights-- now the US and Bush Administration can no longer use or argue moral issues, slave and/or child labor, and human rights as a block or even negotiating issue in trade agreements- or try to push human rights in 3rd world or Communist nations....Nor can they take issue when a neighboring African country moves into another country and kills millions in the name of freeing them.... The US/Bush Administration are now looked on by the populace of the world as hypocrites if we say/do anything....

This comes about since the US and the Bush Administration is now listed on the Worlds Human Rights Watch's top violators list...This comes about because of GW's allowal of the use of torture, secret prisons, holding political prisoners without habeus corpus or trials, etc, etc- and his wars of conquest in Iraq and Afghanistan in which thousands have been killed...

How far backward will this move us in our influence on the world stage... :???:
:lol2: You just keep reaching don't you oldtimer. Which prison would you rather be in, an American one or a Cuban, Venezuelan, Chinese, etc. You need to quit believing everything on TV. Here's what the human rights watch dislike about my lovely country.
http://www.hrw.org/doc/?t=usa
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
One of the interesting aspects that came up on C-SPAN tonite--Where the US used to be thought of as the worlds leader for intolerance of violation of human rights-- now the US and Bush Administration can no longer use or argue moral issues, slave and/or child labor, and human rights as a block or even negotiating issue in trade agreements- or try to push human rights in 3rd world or Communist nations....Nor can they take issue when a neighboring African country moves into another country and kills millions in the name of freeing them.... The US/Bush Administration are now looked on by the populace of the world as hypocrites if we say/do anything....

This comes about since the US and the Bush Administration is now listed on the Worlds Human Rights Watch's top violators list...This comes about because of GW's allowal of the use of torture, secret prisons, holding political prisoners without habeus corpus or trials, etc, etc- and his wars of conquest in Iraq and Afghanistan in which thousands have been killed...

How far backward will this move us in our influence on the world stage... :???:

Wondering if you know of the Order that Buckwheat signed today?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
One of the interesting aspects that came up on C-SPAN tonite--Where the US used to be thought of as the worlds leader for intolerance of violation of human rights-- now the US and Bush Administration can no longer use or argue moral issues, slave and/or child labor, and human rights as a block or even negotiating issue in trade agreements- or try to push human rights in 3rd world or Communist nations....Nor can they take issue when a neighboring African country moves into another country and kills millions in the name of freeing them.... The US/Bush Administration are now looked on by the populace of the world as hypocrites if we say/do anything....

This comes about since the US and the Bush Administration is now listed on the Worlds Human Rights Watch's top violators list...This comes about because of GW's allowal of the use of torture, secret prisons, holding political prisoners without habeus corpus or trials, etc, etc- and his wars of conquest in Iraq and Afghanistan in which thousands have been killed...

How far backward will this move us in our influence on the world stage... :???:

Wondering if you know of the Order that Buckwheat signed today?

Do you mean this order? At least Obama can still travel the world without facing arrest for War Crimes - something GW can't do anymore...Something his own advisors (including Colin Powell) told him would happen if he went ahead with violating the SCOTUS ruling on detentions without any or periodic oversight- and then torture of those detainees....



Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama announced Monday that the United States will resume using military commissions to prosecute alleged terrorists held at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility.

In the announcement, the president said his administration remains committed to closing the controversial detention facility but will rescind its previous suspension on bringing new charges before military commissions.The commissions are military proceedings rather than trials in civilian courts.

Obama also called for prosecuting Guantanamo detainees in U.S. criminal courts when appropriate, and issued an executive order calling for periodic reviews of suspects held under indefinite detention.

The steps followed through on Obama's previous call to reform the process of prosecuting or holding Guantanamo detainees to make it more in line with international laws and standards, according to senior administration officials who briefed reporters on condition of not being identified by name.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
One of the interesting aspects that came up on C-SPAN tonite--Where the US used to be thought of as the worlds leader for intolerance of violation of human rights-- now the US and Bush Administration can no longer use or argue moral issues, slave and/or child labor, and human rights as a block or even negotiating issue in trade agreements- or try to push human rights in 3rd world or Communist nations....Nor can they take issue when a neighboring African country moves into another country and kills millions in the name of freeing them.... The US/Bush Administration are now looked on by the populace of the world as hypocrites if we say/do anything....

This comes about since the US and the Bush Administration is now listed on the Worlds Human Rights Watch's top violators list...This comes about because of GW's allowal of the use of torture, secret prisons, holding political prisoners without habeus corpus or trials, etc, etc- and his wars of conquest in Iraq and Afghanistan in which thousands have been killed...

How far backward will this move us in our influence on the world stage... :???:

Wondering if you know of the Order that Buckwheat signed today?

Do you mean this order? At least Obama can still travel the world without facing arrest for War Crimes - something GW can't do anymore...Something his own advisors (including Colin Powell) told him would happen if he went ahead with violating the SCOTUS ruling on detentions without any or periodic oversight- and then torture of those detainees....



Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama announced Monday that the United States will resume using military commissions to prosecute alleged terrorists held at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility.

In the announcement, the president said his administration remains committed to closing the controversial detention facility but will rescind its previous suspension on bringing new charges before military commissions.The commissions are military proceedings rather than trials in civilian courts.

Obama also called for prosecuting Guantanamo detainees in U.S. criminal courts when appropriate, and issued an executive order calling for periodic reviews of suspects held under indefinite detention.

The steps followed through on Obama's previous call to reform the process of prosecuting or holding Guantanamo detainees to make it more in line with international laws and standards, according to senior administration officials who briefed reporters on condition of not being identified by name.


What country has Bush been indicted on war crimes?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
“Obviously, we haven’t gotten it closed. And let me just step back and explain that the reason for wanting to close Guantanamo was because my number one priority is keeping the American people safe. One of the most powerful tools we have to keep the American people safe is not providing al Qaeda and jihadists recruiting tools for fledgling terrorists. And Guantanamo is probably the number one recruitment tool that is used by these jihadist organizations.”



George Bush’s war crime becomes Barack Obama’s footnote

“Hope” and “change” may have been the twin messages of Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign, but the pledge that best embodied the central theme was his promise to shutter the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba within one year of taking office.

For the American and international left, Gitmo was the most powerful symbol of everything that was wrong with the Bush presidency and the U.S. war on terrorism. They maintained it was an evil place, where innocent bystanders who had been caught up in America’s imperialist aggression in the Middle East could be held indefinitely, incarcerated without cause and helpless against maltreatment. At Gitmo, the story went, torture was commonplace, defilement of the Koran and Islam were daily occurrences and the military tribunals that would hear suspected terrorists’ cases were rigged against the defendants.

Never mind that most of this was delusional fantasy, Gitmo had to go.

In that spirit, on just the third day of his presidency in January, 2009, President Obama signed an executive order directing officials to close Guantanamo “as soon as practicable, and no later than one year from the date of this order.” On Monday, Mr. Obama signed another executive order that, in all practical senses, countermands his 2009 directive. Sitting in the shade of a mesquite bush on his ranch in Crawford, Tex., former President George W. Bush would have every right to think, “I told you so.”

Monday’s order basically concedes the detention facility will remain open for years to come, perhaps even decades, as an active part of American’s counterterror efforts.

Not only will many existing prisoners remain there for years – perhaps even the rest of their lives – it is possible new prisoners will be added as the U.S. rounds up suspected terrorists around the world.

Mr. Obama also restarted the military trials he had suspended two years ago, and which he and his supporters had so derided as being contrary to American notions of justice. In 2007, Mr. Obama insisted Bush-era policies on Gitmo and military trials undermined “our Constitution and our freedom” and claimed there was no reason to accept a “false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand.”

But on Monday, the Obama administration went so far as to create a new category of confinement at Gitmo called “indefinite detention.” It was created by administrative fiat, without Congressional approval.

Why? At least 48 of the 172 remaining detainees cannot be tried, either in military or civilian court. It is impossible to find or present evidence against them. Because of this lack of admissible evidence, many still have never been charged, despite having been in detention for nearly a decade. Yet, because U.S. intelligence agencies contend these worst-of-the-worst terror suspects are such serious threats to U.S. national security, Mr. Obama’s executive order permits them to be held indefinitely, without trial. His order would permit them to remain in custody even if they ultimately got a hearing and were acquitted.

Imagine the outraged wailing and charges of bigotry, unconstitutionality and injustice if Mr. Bush were still in office and had done the same thing.

Yet there has been barely a peep from the left. On Tuesday, there was no mention of the Gitmo order on the homepage of MoveOn.org, one of the three major leftwing Democrat websites that had led the outraged campaign against Bush’s war on terror. On DailyKos.com there was a brief link under “More Headlines.” Only the Huffington Post carried what might be considered a significant story.

Frankly, I’m glad Mr. Obama and his officials have wised up to the threats to America and western civilization that are abroad in the world. I’m glad he has reversed his former naive stance and is taking the threats seriously. I’m just curious why it’s treated as a war crime for Mr. Bush to detain terrorists, but when Mr. Obama adopts the same policy it is worth barely footnote.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/03/08/lorne-gunter-george-bushs-war-crime-becomes-barack-obamas-footnote/


“Obviously, we haven’t gotten it closed. And let me just step back and explain that the reason for wanting to close Guantanamo was because my number one priority is keeping the American people safe. One of the most powerful tools we have to keep the American people safe is not providing al Qaeda and jihadists recruiting tools for fledgling terrorists. And Guantanamo is probably the number one recruitment tool that is used by these jihadist organizations.”
 

Mike

Well-known member
Imagine the outraged wailing and charges of bigotry, unconstitutionality and injustice if Mr. Bush were still in office and had done the same thing.

Buckwheat gave himself and his successors the power to incarcerate a Gitmo prisoner for life even if he is acquitted by a jury.

Imagine if Bush had done that!! Talk about skewing the Constitution!!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I remember back when he was still President-- I watched State Dept officials testify to Congress that he, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and a couple of the attorneys that authorized the torture (in violation of International Laws) were being advised to do no out of country travel because there had been charges filed ( International Red Cross) alledging torture ( Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib , and other out of country US run prisons)- and that out of country they would be subject to arrest.....

Bush Cancels Visit To Switzerland Due To Threat Of Torture Prosecution, Rights Groups Say

GENEVA, Feb 5 (Reuters) - Former U.S. President George W. Bush has cancelled a visit to Switzerland, where he was to address a Jewish charity gala, due to the risk of legal action against him for alleged torture, rights groups said on Saturday.

Bush was to be the keynote speaker at Keren Hayesod's annual dinner on Feb. 12 in Geneva. But pressure has been building on the Swiss government to arrest him and open a criminal investigation if he enters the Alpine country.

Criminal complaints against Bush alleging torture have been lodged in Geneva, court officials say.

Human rights groups said they had intended to submit a 2,500-page case against Bush in the Swiss city on Monday for alleged mistreatment of suspected militants at Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. naval base in Cuba where captives from Afghanistan, Iraq and other fronts in the so-called War on Terror were interned.
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
How does the Swiss government have the authority to arrest anyone for alleged crimes that may or may not have been committed on another continent?

If someone allegedly jaywalks in Glasgow, Montana, does that mean his ass could be arrested for it if he were to travel to the Kingdom of Tonga??

Sounds to me like more BS from the libtard left.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I remember back when he was still President-- I watched State Dept officials testify to Congress that he, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and a couple of the attorneys that authorized the torture (in violation of International Laws) were being advised to do no out of country travel because there had been charges filed ( International Red Cross) alledging torture ( Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib , and other out of country US run prisons)- and that out of country they would be subject to arrest.....

Bush Cancels Visit To Switzerland Due To Threat Of Torture Prosecution, Rights Groups Say

GENEVA, Feb 5 (Reuters) - Former U.S. President George W. Bush has cancelled a visit to Switzerland, where he was to address a Jewish charity gala, due to the risk of legal action against him for alleged torture, rights groups said on Saturday.

Bush was to be the keynote speaker at Keren Hayesod's annual dinner on Feb. 12 in Geneva. But pressure has been building on the Swiss government to arrest him and open a criminal investigation if he enters the Alpine country.

Criminal complaints against Bush alleging torture have been lodged in Geneva, court officials say.

Human rights groups said they had intended to submit a 2,500-page case against Bush in the Swiss city on Monday for alleged mistreatment of suspected militants at Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. naval base in Cuba where captives from Afghanistan, Iraq and other fronts in the so-called War on Terror were interned.



Like I said,....


What country has Bush been indicted on war crimes?

what part of "intended to submit", do you not understand?


they have not even done a preliminary investigation.






Swiss law requires the presence of an alleged torturer on Swiss soil before a preliminary investigation can be open. Because Bush canceled, the complaints could not be filed as the basis for legal jurisdiction no longer existed.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Yet Buckwheat is still on the Taliban/Al Quada side:

Feds Request Leniency For Terrorist Who Still Backs Killing Of Americans
ABC News ^ | March 8, 2011 | RICHARD ESPOSITO


The U.S. government formally requested the early release of a convicted terrorist from federal prison, even though the terrorist admitted that he continued to support the killing of U.S. soldiers serving in Muslim countries.

Mohammed Babar, born and raised in New York City, was arrested in 2004 and pled guilty to four counts of providing material support to al Qaeda and one count of providing funds to Al Qaeda. After Babar had served four years and eight months, he was released on bail in late 2008.

In late 2010, the government filed a sealed request for leniency for Babar because of his "extraordinary cooperation" in terror investigations, asking for an "appropriate reduction" in his sentence even though federal sentencing guidelines indicate a sentence of 30 to 70 years in prison. The letter, now unsealed, notes that he was critical in securing conviction in four cases in three countries.

After the request, a judge sentenced Babar to 10 years of supervised release and a court fee of $500.

"According to Babar," says the request for leniency, dated Nov. 23, 2010, "he still supports today the killing of American military service members on battlefields in Muslim countries. Babar has advised that he also supports the killing of Americans (both military and civilian) in Muslim countries 'occupied' by the United States."

Babar joined a fundamentalist Muslim group called al-Muhajiroun while a student at the State University of New York-Stonybrook in 2000. Nine days after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, Babar moved to Pakistan "to provide support to the Afghan jihad," according to the leniency request.

In November, a British television report described him as a "Taliban New Yorker" who helped U.K. citizens travel to Pakistan and then to Afghanistan to fight for the Taliban.
 

TSR

Well-known member
So maybe they are waiting for him to appear so they can conduct the preliminary investigation. Is he going?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
TSR said:
So maybe they are waiting for him to appear so they can conduct the preliminary investigation. Is he going?


I bet you were hoping they would arrest him for the duration of their investigation, were you?

Maybe they'll start an investigation the next time obama steps foot in Switzerland too.

He should have to prove his innocence, after they have found him guilty.
 
Top