Monday, May 01, 2006

You know you're living in a dictatorship when telling the truth becomes a crime

by Len Hart, the Existentialist Cowboy

If that's not tyranny, what is? As Bush descends into ratings hell, his "absolutist" rhetoric is ratcheted up. Math buffs would say the two are inversely proportional. Even as he descended into the "30's", Bush and his Bushevik regime were defending "Stalinesque" rule with words like "unitary executive","inherent powers", and "executive privilege." Now Bush wants to prosecute reporters for telling the truth about his failed administration.

It's not bad enough that Bush has arrogated unto himself the power to modify statutes with so-called "signing statements". It's not bad enough that Bush has orchestrated an unprecedented crack down on dissent to include Soviet-style prosecutions of reporters on espionage charges; it's not enough that Busheviks have taken aim on the internet itself! Bush is now enforcing —as "law" —measures that have not even passed both houses of Congress. There is a phrase for this: rule by decree! Another word is "tyranny". In response, Rep. John Conyers is taking the so-called "President" to court. Conyers, and a distinguished list of co-plaintiffs, will challenge in court the dictatorial and unconstitutional powers that Bush has arrogated unto himself. It would appear that the "third act" has already begun.
As some of you may be aware, according to the President and Congressional Republicans, a bill does not have to pass both the Senate and the House to become a law. Forget your sixth grade civics lesson, forget the book they give you when you visit Congress - "How Our Laws Are Made," and forget Schoolhouse Rock. These are checks and balances, Republican-style.

Congressman John Conyers

At issue is the GOP budget bill that cuts funding for student loans and medicaid. According to Conyers, the bill struggled to make its way through Congress and House Republicans preferred not to make GOP members vote on it again. The GOP merely certified the measure was the same as a Senate bill and sent it to Bush for his signature. The measure, in fact, differed. Despite warnings, Bush signed it and will now enforce it as if it were the "...law of the land."
Several public interest groups have sought to stop some parts of the bill from being implemented, under the theory that the bill is unconstitutional. However, getting into the weeds a bit, they have lacked the ability to stop the entire bill. To seek this recourse, the person bringing the suit must have what is called "standing," that is they must show they were injured or deprived of some right. Because the budget bill covers so many areas of the law, it is difficult for one person to show they were harmed by the entire bill. Thus, many of these groups have only sought to stop part of it.

—Congressman Conyers

There is one group that is harmed by the measure as a whole: members of the House of Representatives. Conyers is going to court on behalf of the House!

Clearly —this is a significant development in the ongoing effort to check Bush's dictatorial power grab. This is one branch of government going to court to check an unconstitutional power grab by another. How this bill fares in the courts will affect every U.S. citizen. Anyone with an interest in stopping the Bush dictatorship had best pay attention to the progress of this lawsuit.

Here's the irony: Bush's most egregious power grabs have occurred since falling from grace. His approval ratings were already in the 30's when he declared that he was "above the law" and did not need warrants to spy on American citizens. Since that time, Bush is now poised to prosecute those who dare to make public his program of widespread domestic surveillance.
... the Bush administration is exploring a more radical measure to protect information it says is vital to national security: the criminal prosecution of reporters under the espionage laws.

White House could prosecute journalists in news leak stories

His NeoCon constituency puts forward a dubious "unitary executive" theory, citing Bush's "inherent powers" during a time of war. Nevermind that war was never declared, was not authorized by the U.N. Resolution that Bushies often point to, and is, in fact, a violation of the Nuremberg Principles. Nevermind that the attack and invasion itself is a crime against the peace. As such, it violates U.S. Criminal Codes, Section 2441.

In fact, Bush has made of the "Presidency" a totalitarian regime in which telling the truth about the regime has been made a crime by decree. If this is not tyranny, then what is? If truth is officially suppressed, then only lies are left. A regime premised upon a pack of lies is not legitimate.

Not surprisingly, the Busheviks are covering their tracks with Stalinist tactics: official secrets. "Official Secrets", of course, are whatever Bush says they are. As we write, the Bush dictatorship has ordered the reclassification of millions of documents to prevent them being seen by American citizens. Anyone citing, quoting, or making public these documents to reveal the truth about Bush's illegal, unconstitutional coup d'etat will be prosecuted. The charge: espionage!

The Bush administration is not a "Presidency", it's a criminal conspiracy; the GOP is not a political party, it's a crime syndicate.

An update:
Bush in ‘ceaseless push for power’

By Caroline Daniel in Washington
Published: May 1 2006 19:30 | Last updated: May 1 2006 19:30

President George W. Bush had shown disdain and indifference for the US constitution by adopting an “astonishingly broad” view of presidential powers, a leading libertarian think-tank said on Monday.

The critique from the Cato Institute reflects growing criticism by conservatives about administration policy in areas such as the “war on terror” and undermining congressional power.

“The pattern that emerges is one of a ceaseless push for power, unchecked by either the courts or Congress, one in short of disdain for constitutional limits,” the report by legal scholars Gene Healy and Timothy Lynch concludes.

That view was echoed last week by former congressman Bob Barr, a Republican, who called on Congress to exercise “leadership by putting the constitution above party politics and insisting on the facts” in the debate over illegal domestic wiretapping of terrorist suspects. ...



6 comments:

benmerc said...

Len,
Another informative post, gee...why ain't this stuff in the news papers?...you know....That "Liberal media".
I have been watching John Conyers over the past few years, and he is in my eyes one of the few true Patriots and Statesmen left in this system.

He has repeatedly taken the powers that be to task, and many times laboring over arcane or redundant laws and legalize...to help protect our rights in the Constitution and the balance of power that is designed to prevail within the system. He is doing what the rest of Congress should be doing, and with little help or fan fare.

When we get out of this mess I certainly hope Congressmen Conyers gets his due and the respect he deserves. The reality is I don't think he gives a damn about accolades, and what not... he just wants to see justice. But I bet he sure could use a hand from other members in the "House". A decent man working for his country and constituency.

Anonymous said...

This "ceaseless push for power" on the part of Bush that you refer to Len is going to continue. The American people have twigged to the incompetency of Bush, but not yet to his wilfulness. Regrettably, they are likely to be educated only after the fact. Robert Fisk has just done a brief interview with Sy Hersh in which he makes some interesting comments about where this wilfulness is headed:

Bush has a messianic vision - and intends to go down in history (probably he has chosen the right direction) as the man who will have "saved" Iran.

In Washington, "advocating humanity, peace, integrity is not a value in the power structure ... my government are incapable of leaving (Iraq). They don't know how to get out of Baghdad. We can't get out. In this war, the end is going to be very, very messy - because we don't know how to get out. We're going to get out body by body. I think that scares the hell out of me."

It's all put neatly by one of Hersh's sources in the Pentagon: "The problem is that the Iranians realise that only by becoming a nuclear state can they defend themselves against the US. Something bad is going to happen."


Nuclear attacks against Iran are clearly still on the table. And that this admin has learned nothing from recent public objections to its attack-Iran policy can be gauged by the fact that Sec.Rice has been touring the globe insisting that Iran meet its obligations (they're doing so!) and that Iran poses some kind of near term threat (they don't, at least not in the short term).

So we have a continuing full court press from the same team that brought the world forged Niger uranium documents, and that buried the uncomfortable NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) that exposed these lies.

Further evidence: Ahmed Chalabi, the man who helped provide cooked intelligence on Iraq to the Pentagon and the NYT in the lead-up to war, is once again being engaged in US policy decisions. He was convicted in absentia in 1992 by a Jordanian court for counterfeiting and bank fraud of $200 million. He has burned the CIA on multiple occasions and is seen by them as an Iranian agent. The FBI is investigating him for passing classified material to the Iranians. Chalabi plays both sides. So why use him? This from Larissa:

Chalabi's close working relationship consisted of a small cabal of hawks operating out of an ultra-secretive group called the Office of Special Plans; more specifically, Chalabi's closest contacts were then Undersecretary of Defense Policy Douglas Feith, then Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Both Feith and Wolfowitz have had their clearances pulled in the past for leaking classified information.

The likely reason: to defeat any diplomatic dialogue with Iran.

And then there is Manucher Ghorbanifar. The former Iran-Contra arms dealer has two CIA 'burn notices' against him (which means twice has has mislead the CIA so agents are forbidden to deal with him). Yet Cheney and the DOD have recently re-employed him as a human intelligence asset in monitoring Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program. Ghorbanifar was also present at the controversial discussions in Rome in 2001, and later in Paris -explicitly prohibited by the State Dept and CIA - with neocon Michael Ledeen. The purpose: regime change in Iran.

We can dispute some of the details here, but not the underlying fact: the same team that brough you Iran-Contra is back in business stronger than ever and doing everything, as before - off the books and for their own ends - but who are committed to attacking Iran.

All this and a President who speaks with God....

benmerc said...

I agree Fuzzflash...
Len sets up a great space with plenty of incentive from his writes and the posters that frequent. I have picked up much coming here, and it has enabled my ideas, thoughts, and understandings...by giving them a place to develop.

So, we keep the watch and work towards the better days ahead, at least that is what we should aim for. And because of places as this, we know we are not alone as progressive motion IS the way the world should work.

Unknown said...

All I can add to all of the above is that all of you add immeasurably to this humble forum —the great comments, links, perspective and wisdom. All of your comments have made me glad I decided to take the plunge into blogging. What an education you've all been! And I like the celebratory dinner idea. The stalwarts over at NPR's "How's Bush Doing" board deserve an invitation as well. What a fight those guys have waged...and won! One day, we shall all "sabre the champagne" and drink a toast to Voltaire and Sarte and all the other champions of liberty and humanity.

Anonymous said...

Thanks guys. I actually thought Len was going to ban me for blog hogging (but then I noticed others weren't jumping in so I thought I'd feed the blogger anyway). Yeah, champagne at the Louvre or in London, at the right time, sounds great (I'm not fussy, Florence or St Petersburg are also ok). Keep in mind though that I'm 12,000 miles from anywhere here in the land of Oz. Time to start paddling. Cheers to all.

Anonymous said...

There's a good discussion on Chalabi, Judy Miller and media disinfo here