Yoo-Schmoo!

It doesn't matter what "doctrine" Bush is following--two centuries of law and court rulings, most recently endorsed by such otherwise Bush-friendly justices as Scalia and by comfortable majorities of even the present SC, have made it crystal clear that the president never escapes the duty to obey the law. 

Sadly, a Gallup poll would probably find that a clear majority of Americans thinks the president has license to disobey the law.  But he doesn't. 

Posted at December 16, 2005 2:02 PM in response to Spying on Americans and John Bolton

No, a thousand times NO!   The president absolutely is without any power to issue executive orders that violate the law!

How tragic that the meme is out there infecting our citizenry.
 
See above--not only the president who gave, but the staff who carried out, this order must be prosecuted. 

Posted at December 16, 2005 1:54 PM in response to Spying on Americans and John Bolton

Of course it's impeachable, and must be impeached. 

But it is equally important that all those who obeyed the president's unlawful order be prosecuted and jailed.  (It's a 5 year sentence.)

NOTE ALSO: the law permits civil suits against those who violate this law, with punitive damages.  Whoever was "tapped" and knows it must bring that suit, and kindred spirits everywhere must support these suits financially or with legal services pro-bono. 

Posted at December 16, 2005 1:49 PM in response to Spying on Americans and John Bolton

Closely related is the NYT revelation that the president ordered wiretaps on Americans that were plainly illegal.  Senator, will you be as forceful in demanding accountability for that? 

I urge you to demand that DOJ prosecute all those who obeyed the president's unlawful order. 

Posted at December 16, 2005 1:43 PM in response to PATRIOT UPDATE

Not to over-value it, or give it more credibility than we can presently document, but see Madsen's November 11 posting, suggesting that Brewster-Jennings may have been actively sidetracking or preventing WMD's from being planted in Iraq. 

Outrageous?  You can call it that if you like, as Miss Marple used to say.  But there it is--more plausible than the administration's fading meme that they didn't even know she was covert.  They had to know that, considering their sources; and--knowing it--they had to know the damage to WMD intelligence that would be caused by the outing they were getting reading to out with.  Knowledge of the intended consequences makes intent for those consequences difficult to rule out.   

Posted at November 18, 2005 10:48 AM in response to If It's Good Enough for the Times ...

Permit me first to join the others in thanking you and Valerie Plame Wilson for your dedicated and effective public service. 

May I then ask, also: do you consider it possible that another explicit motive of the "outings" of Valerie Plame was actually the destruction of Brewster-Jennings? 

Posted at November 18, 2005 9:26 AM in response to If It's Good Enough for the Times ...