"They also conclude that citizens and noncitizens could be designated "unlawful enemy combatants" by the president on the basis of secret evidence."

What like FDR?

"How did they ever get away with it?"

What, writing a paper?

They didn't actually do it.

That said, you'd think they would have been hung for lying us into a war.

Wow! A template for Obama administration.

That is exactly what FDR did with the japs here in the US. Sounds to me like it wasn't Bush that invented it.

They may not have done it, but just writing the paper is pretty scary. The fact that they felt they had to go to those lengths, and were willing to trample on our rights, is pretty damning of the administration. Yes, other administration have tried similar measures, including Lincoln with the suspension of habeus corpus, but it does not make it right.

These guys were really freaked out about the terrorists. We have been in truly dangerous situations where the existance of the nation as we know it was in deep trouble, and the government did not take some of these actions.

I smell Dick Cheney.......

They researched back files and found PRECEDENTS for these action recommendations. Were they implemented or just findings, since I'm NOT in jail it must be just findings, huh? I think we cry to loud over this! A basis for discusions, nothing more! Where's the beef?

Why don't we focus on the ECONOMY, Oh, sorry, there ISN'T one is there! While you were out, the Economy dropped, bye! Catch it on its' way down, please!

"Wow! A template for Obama administration."
#3 | Posted by Liberty at 2009-03-06 12:56 PM

I think that was what many had tried to communicate to the blindly obedient. But apparently many of the Extremist Taliban like members of the "party" bought into the idea that there was going to be a thousand year "republican" majority.
And what did these real Conservatives receive in return for their warning and defense of Constitutional Principle?

They were assaulted with verbal accusations of being a traitor in league with al-Qaeda!

If Obama uses the structure put in place by the Bush admin (to keep you safe, of course) ---- then those who attacked the one delivering the warnings have only Themselves to Blame!
However I doubt Hanmboughboortz will aver admit they were a part of the persecution of those who eventually were proven right.

And I Say to them: Enjoy the Fruits of Your Labor!

hmm, bush and cheney, nazis, who would have thought?

Bush was no republican!

yes herr bush was a CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN. The clan of the ignorant rallied around him and kissed his ass. Never said a bad word.

What does Alex Jones think about this? Curious Danes want to know.

Rush Limbaugh is the head of the party. Surely this was all his idea.

hmm, bush and cheney, nazis, who would have thought?

Hmmm. Obama and Hilter are much alike. Hilter nationalized big business in the 1930's much like Obma is doing today. Hilter had strong zero tolerance gun control laws much like what Obama is calling for. Both were populist candidates popular with the working class who came to power during bad economies and were worshipped like gods by their supporters

yes herr bush was a CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN. The clan of the ignorant rallied around him and kissed his ass. Never said a bad word.

#10 | Posted by Georgeisadrunk

By who's standards?

There were many that tore into him about his spending. None were democrats.

This is the deal brokered by the current administration, with Obama's hand-picked White House counsel, Gregory Craig.

"In what appears to be a clear conflict of interest, Craig represented Rove in his recent book deal, while Craig's law partner, close associate and mentor, Emmet Flood, is representing Bush in executive privilege matters before the Washington D.C. Court of Appeals, where Bush administration officials have been charged with the political firings of U.S. attorneys for failing to act on orders to prosecute.

Craig also engaged in an act of subterfuge to get Republican whistleblower Jill Simpson, who courageously stood up against the travesty of justice in the Bush gang's political imprisonment of former Alabama governor Don Siegelman, to spill all the details of her case against Rove and the other Justice Department conspirators."

Once again, we see a vivid display of the "continuity" that has been a hallmark of the new administration in so many areas. Obama's top legal adviser and his law firm is deeply entangled with Karl Rove and George W. Bush, specifically on the very issue of the recent "compromise": the goonization of the Justice Department.

We are going the way of the Roman Empire, one corrupt deal at a time.

he ran as a conservative. Please point me to his congress and show me where they did not give him a blank check? dont spend a lot of personal time looking

And what did these real Conservatives receive in return for their warning and defense of Constitutional Principle?

Fine. I was always suspicious of compassionate or real conservative label. When you hold your principles and stick to themyou need not apologize or accept acknowledgements. Conservatism as it is defined in modern terms is in its nature humane, compassionate and fair. One can not but hope that everything will come to a balance again, some day, in the future, perhaps soon, or whatever.

Stuff never happened, did it? Attorneys write opinions to clients about what they think the limits of the law might be based on their analysis of the facts, which doesn't mean that the client would push things to the max. Further, if things were pushed, they would be tested in Court, with the Supremes deciding what is lawful, and what isn't.

The real travesty is that the memos were released in the first place. Now, some attorneys may not tell the client about what they think the law is on an area, without having to worry about political backlash. Well done Mr. President.

We are going the way of the Roman Empire, one corrupt deal at a time.

-----------

Wrong. America already IS the Roman Empire. Since WW1 all power has rested within the federal reserve, the military industrial complex, and the various intelligence agencies. It's just that you morons haven't seen it until now.

The Sky is Falling! The Sky is Falling!
Look! Terrorists! Run for your lives!

Stuff never happened, did it? Attorneys write opinions to clients about what they think the limits of the law might be based on their analysis of the facts, which doesn't mean that the client would push things to the max. Further, if things were pushed, they would be tested in Court, with the Supremes deciding what is lawful, and what isn't.

#18 | Posted by somoco at 2009-03-06 02:03 PM | Reply |

The notion that "stuff never happened" is false.

"They also conclude that citizens and noncitizens could be designated "unlawful enemy combatants" by the president on the basis of secret evidence. And once that happens, they could be locked up indefinitely and tortured, without charge, access to counsel or any procedure through which to challenge the detention or treatment."

This happened to 2 US citizens I'm aware of. Padilla, and that engineer from Intel.

The real travesty is that the memos were released in the first place. Now, some attorneys may not tell the client about what they think the law is on an area, without having to worry about political backlash. Well done Mr. President.

#18 | Posted by somoco at 2009-03-06 02:03 PM | Reply |

Sure lets ignore the "client" is the president of the United fucking states whom is typically immune to politics? lol

Knighthawk, I stand corrected.

No, point is that attorneys should be free to express their opinions on the law without regard to the politics. Yoo will be finished by his memos, and that is not right.

The Sky is Falling! The Sky is Falling!
Look! Terrorists! Run for your lives!

----------------

LOOK!

Watch love connection.

Watch 300 channels of it!

bill hicks

Repeal the Patriot Act.
Repeal the MCA.

No, point is that attorneys should be free to express their opinions on the law without regard to the politics. Yoo will be finished by his memos, and that is not right.

#24 | Posted by somoco at 2009-03-06 02:43 PM | Reply |

I tend to agree with you on this point, but I think it makes a HUGE difference when your client is the president of the united states which affects the lives of a great many and uses said memo's to the benefit or derision of others.

The lawyers should know they're opinions will be accountable at some time in the future. Just maybe such a thing would prevent injustice.

"...Hanmboughboortz will aver admit they were a part of the persecution of those who eventually were proven right.

#7 | Posted by Redneckville at 2009-03-06 01:06 PM | Reply | Flag

What language do they speak in Redneckville?

Sorry to post from the article, but the debate should not be about the relevancy of a legal pov.

""In a way, what's most shocking is just how outrageously bad the office's legal arguments were. The 2001-2002 memos mischaracterize previous Supreme Court decisions, ignore crucial legal precedents and contain gaping holes in logic. To accept the theories the Office of Legal Counsel came up with, you need to assume that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had it all wrong when they rebelled against Britain's King George III in 1776. You need to believe, more or less, that the 225 years of American jurisprudence between 1776 and 2001 amounted to one giant mistake.

The memos are so embarrassingly foolish that the Office of Legal Counsel itself was ultimately forced to repudiate them. In October 2008, the office advised that "caution should be exercised before relying in any respect" on its own previous advice about domestic surveillance or the domestic use of the military. A week before President Obama's inauguration, the office issued another "never mind" memo, stating that "certain propositions stated in several memos respecting ... matters of war and national security do not reflect the current views of this office.""""

Seems to me that it was more a case of a desperate attempt to align the law with existing or desired policies.

No, point is that attorneys should be free to express their opinions on the law without regard to the politics. Yoo will be finished by his memos, and that is not right.

#24 | Posted by somoco at 2009-03-06 02:43 PM | Reply

When in comes down to trashing the constitution in such an egregious manner he should be finished.

he ran as a conservative. Please point me to his congress and show me where they did not give him a blank check? dont spend a lot of personal time looking

#16 | Posted by Georgeisadrunk

obams says he is governing from the middle and you call yourself intellegent, it don't mean shit. That didn't take long.

When in comes down to trashing the constitution in such an egregious manner he should be finished.

#30 | POSTED BY 2008 AT 2009-03-06 03:28 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

I haven't read them. Did you? In what way were they egregious? In what manner did they misrepresent prior authority? Did they come at all close to representing the state of the law, or a position that should arguably be the state of the law? What gives you the creds to pass judgment? Are you a constitutional lawyer?

Would your opinion of them as being "egregious" if those opinions were written by someone working as an attorney for the Obama folks?

This just in: Richard Simmons is gay!

Is he? or are you just stereotyping guys who dress in fancy costumes, prance around, and talk with a lisp. that could describe anyone, even you.

prance around, and talk with a lisp. that could describe anyone, even you.

I thought Barney Frank was out of the closet.

Is he?

#34 | Posted by somoco at 2009-03-06 04:33 PM | Reply

He is. So is Jim J Bullock. So was Liberace.

No, point is that attorneys should be free to express their opinions on the law without regard to the politics. Yoo will be finished by his memos, and that is not right.

#24 | Posted by somoco at 2009-03-06 02:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sorry, but his opinions were such laughably bad law and so poorly written that he should be finished.

Hilter nationalized big business in the 1930'

No he didn't you moron.

He sucked up the big business, gave them lots of government munitions contracts (no bid, of course)and eventually gave them slave labor workers, who cost them only slightly less than wetback labor costs walmart and various meatpackers.

"Hmmm. Obama and Hitler are much alike..." - TIMBCI

Exactly - Obama would also have been furious that Jesse Owens won that Olympic race, right?

Timbiciles view of history shows that he has read nothing on the period. I'd recommend Rise and Fall of the 3rd Reich for starters, unless you enjoy talking from the side of your asshole...

Timbiciles view of history shows that he has read nothing on the period.

#41 | Posted by Shawn

Timbicile's view of history shows that he has read nothing...period.

There now. That's better.

How is this any different than what Obama is doing right now. Using a crisis to his advantage.

Be fair now SanAntonioRogue.

The fact that he can read this blog(more or less), tells us that he has at least read My Pet Goat...

and this along with the 'truth squad' all proves that some of you need to read a little history as well..

for instance...
think back a little and imagine that lincoln had had his so called truth squad..he and grant and SHERMAN FOR SURE would have all been found to be war criminals.

and throw in truman and fdr as well

fdr rounded up people and threw them into camps
he also captet bombed thousands of civilians in germany

and truman...killed how many thousands of innocent japaneese with only two bombs..

of course dems wont bother to even think about the point im making because of their still blind hatred of anything bush.

"Hmmm. Obama and Hilter are much alike. Hilter nationalized big business in the 1930's much like Obma is doing today. Hilter had strong zero tolerance gun control laws much like what Obama is calling for. Both were populist candidates popular with the working class who came to power during bad economies and were worshipped like gods by their supporters"

Please stop using history to make a point. It scares people. Truth is sometimes scary.

We prefer to ignore it & handwring later.

Thanks,
The left

#46 | Posted by HATEBIGGOV at 2009-03-07 12:46 PM |

It's quite impressive how a thread that outlines the bush leagues attempts or preparation to negate many of your fundamental rights turns into an obama is a nazi discussion. You are either a)cheap provocateurs, B) woefully ignorant of history C) scared ignorant bitches.

If you feel you DO have a valid point in stating that obama is like hitler, please make it. If not, at least try to be more imaginative with your slags.

If you feel you DO have a valid point in stating that obama is like hitler, please make it. If not, at least try to be more imaginative with your slags.

I don't think I'll be taking any notes on imagination from you & CERTAINLY no history lessons.

Having said that, how many times have we heard the Nazi label pitched at Bush without any of the logical, historical, FACTS that were posted here. "BUSH IS A NAZI" pitched around by emotional libs hell-bent on painting Bush as the devil & offered as complete truth . I'm sure they felt their feelings were justified even if not the least bit rational. Seeing things through the spectrum of history does not appeal to those who deal in emotion instead of logic all the time. It sounds like you may need to read something other than your revisionist history & get your ass off your shoulders.

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."
President-elect George W. Bush, at a photo-op with congressional leaders during his first trip to Capitol Hill, Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000

some people thought he was kidding around

"""Having said that, how many times have we heard the Nazi label pitched at Bush without any of the logical, historical, FACTS that were posted here. """

so you're admitting to not having a point and knee jerking? trolling? K.

""" It sounds like you may need to read something other than your revisionist history & get your ass off your shoulders."""

I didn't really revise anything except claim that your little rant was over the top. I might at some point in the past few years stated that the bush league's approach was at times flirting with fascism, but again, you make a rather facile point of stating that I don't know history when all I pointed out was that your accusation of obama - adoph was possibly made because of lack of knowledge on hitler, his bio, his approach and his tactics.

BTW, you're scoring pretty good on the dittohead meter with that last post:

Defend bush - check
Accuse others of changing the reality of the bush leagues performance - check
Use the word revisionist - check
Accuse a lefty of using emotion over logic - check
Accuse a lefty of having his head up his ass - check.

Right on point, Pancho.

Hmmm. Obama and Hilter are much alike. Hilter nationalized big business in the 1930's much like Obma is doing today. Hilter had strong zero tolerance gun control laws much like what Obama is calling for. Both were populist candidates popular with the working class who came to power during bad economies and were worshipped like gods by their supporters

#13 | Posted by timbci

lol

You really should have finished high school, dude.

some people thought he was kidding around

#49 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2009-03-07 05:01 PM | Reply | Flag

Um, he did step down on January 20 which many here in the DR seemed convinced would not happen. And otherwise scant evidence of any dictatorship.

It constantly amazes me that people take Timbci seriously. Same can be said of Fwthom. They do only one thing, try to get a rise out of people. Now, mocking them back in kind, that I do understand.