Should the president be permitted to continue violating laws?

Question

During a national emergency the president may need to circumvent specific laws for a limited period of time, and he can obtain permission from the Supreme Court, the FISA Court, and Congress to do so.
However, President George W. Bush has repeatedly violated numerous laws and the Constitution.
His doing so sets a very bad example for the public. I have heard people say that because the president is not following the law, they are not obligated to follow the law.

The supremacy of the law in human affairs, known as the rule of law, states that individuals and nations may not (conveniently) respect the laws one day and not respect them the next. Like the law of gravity, all laws must be respected at all times, and by every member of society; from presidents, to executives, to business owners, to employees, to consumers, to homeles individuals and beggars.
The 9-11 attack and the so-called Patriot Act have intimidated Americans so much they are afraid to question the president's actions.

Answer 1

Clarify exactly what was not done according to what law?

Answer 2

The president did not create the patriot act. Congress did.
The president does not have to report to the FISA court in times of War.
The president does not need the permission of the Supreme Court to do his Job as described in the Constitution. They are an entirely different branch of government that cannot cross into the executive branch no matter how much you do not like him.

The problem you seem to have is that you dislike this president so much, that you would conveniently blame him for any and everything that has gone "Not your way"

So far, everything he has done has been approved by the congress and all the court systems that needed to be involved until the treasonous act created by the New York Times.

I know this is hard for you to understand and follow, but we are at war! War was declared on Afghanistan with the Taliban. (Start of War on terrorism) The conflict in Iraq stemmed from a UN resolution 1441 and has been underway. Fortunately, for us, the war on terrorism is being fought there and NOT here.
The choices we had to fight this war were small. Fight it here and they attack any and every innocent person in this country, or we take the fight to them.
With the patriot act, we have the permissions to share information with all branches of government. (Something the Liberals complained that was not happening. Now that it is, they complain that it is?)
The government started passing bills and laws allowing certain top-secret things to happen to trip up the terrorist and bring them to justice. (Liberals complained that we where not doing this too. Now that we are, they want to tell the whole world and you complain that it is Illegal. Oh, By the way, IT WAS APPROVED BY EVERYONE!!! All three branches of Government!)
Now the Liberals have told everyone our secrets! WHY???? Because they HATE President George W. Bush SO much that they are willing to DESTROY this country to get rid of him.

My suggestion to you as well as your commie Liberal buddies. Either STUDY freaking History and learn what is going on, or leave OUR Country and join some communist country that will take your sorry excuse of a way of life.

Here is something you may want to consider and research.
Every man woman and child has a natural instinct for self-preservation. (Meaning they will do whatever it takes, including running to keep from being killed)
Our Military men and women (Both existing and new recruits) know from the start that there is a good chance they are going to be killed going to war, yet they go and fight! WHY?? Is this not a violation of Human Nature and The laws of man? NO! People will fight for what they believe in and for. If it is right, they will fight!
I am just amazed that in the two wars we have going on that we have lost less the 3000 men and women! This kind of War has never happened! Usually casualties are about 3000 or more on day 1!
Learn your history and figure out what country you are for. Patriotism is not what you are doing.

Answer 3

Carlos, are you willing to go back and prosecute every living ex-president for wire tapping? Because they all did it. This administration has been doing it in an effort to keep our citizens safe.

Your "question" states that 9/11 has intimidated us into not questioning authority. So what was our excuse before 9/11? Corruption did not begin that day. That doesn't excuse anything Bush may have done, but none of these things-all of which went on before W-raised an eyebrow before now. I think you suffer from that liberal illness known as selective hypocrisy. It's all well & good when the Democrats are in office. What's a little lie under oath...it was a Democrat, after all, not a republican.

Double standard. It doesn't suit you.

Answer 4

The only way I would ever want a president with total power and decision making. Is nuclear war then only if were getting bombed.

Think this president GWB is out of line and abusing the system, using 911 an the word terrorist to stroke the American people.

My area is losing hundreds of jobs on a weekly basis and has a 14% unemployment rate, even illegals cant get work.

we just need our Representatives to step up, if it was Clinton he would be tried and sitting in a Federal pen right now or hung for treason against the American people.

Answer 5

No, the President should not be permitted to continue to violate laws. However, the facts which you have asserted are false and misleading.

Assuming that you are accusing Pres. Bush of violating the law in order to pursue the war on terror, you are wrong for a number of reasons.
1. We are not in a state of "national emergency," we are in a state of war. However, Congress had authorized Pres. Bush to pursue terrorist by any means necessary in order to combat terror and protect our Nation.

2. This leads us to the fact that Pres. Bush did have permission to pursue and defeat terrorism and terrorists who threaten and threatened our nation.

3. I do not believe you that you have heard people say that because the President is not following the law, they are not obligated to follow the law. However, if this is true, these people are not in a position with official duty to acquire the requisite immunity to break the law. Also, they are incorrectly assuming that Pres. Bush has broken the law without being able to identify which law he had broken.

This leads us to your assumption that Pres. Bush is breaking the law. Which Article of the Constitution? Which provision? What statute has he broken? The answer is, NONE. In our country, is a man not guilty until proven otherwise? What evidence do you base your conclusions on?

3. "The supremacy of the law in human affairs, known as the rule of law, states that individuals may not (conveniently) respect the laws one day and not respect them the next." The rule of law is not known as "the supremacy of the law in human affairs." This does not make sense. The "rule of law" in the United States is known as "Common Law" which is based on the English common law system. Also, the "rule of law" is also based on statutory law, regulations, and the Constitution. The rule of law is not necessarily supreme in human affairs and it does not state that individuals and nations may not respect the laws one day and not respect them the next. When laws are not respected due to one's breaking of the law - the law and instruments of the law are used to enforce the law by various forms of punishment.

The 9/11 attacks and Patriot Act have not intimidated Americans to the point of being afraid to question the President's actions. For example: you have accused the President of breaking laws, have you been imprisoned? The New York Times has published sensitive information in regards to methods used by American intelligence organizations to track terrorists, has it been imprisoned? No.

Furthermore, The Patriot Act was signed into law by President Bush, but was written and passed by Congress first. Do you not know how a bill becomes a law?

Your argument is false because it is based on false, unprovable and unjustifiable assertions. Do some research next time.

Answer 6

The President is doing an admirable job.He hasn't come close to doing what other Pres. have done.
Even our"sainted"Abraham Lincoln,during the Civil War would arrest and jail dissidents against the war.Woodrow Wilson jailed Germans in WWI, and of course Franklin Roosevelt Intered(put in prison camps Japanese,and Japanese-Americans just for being ...Japanese.Bush is trying to catch not you ,not me, but funders of terrorism. The Guys in Camp Gitmo weren't just walkin'down the street, they took up arms against us.They aren't in an army,so they are not POWS, they are just thugs.

Answer 7

imposing a blockade over a sea coast isn't legal lower than global regulation save in certain circumstances with regards to armed conflict: warfare might want to be declared (imposing a unilateral blockade is, in and of itself, an act of warfare) or Israel might want to be performing as a belligerent occupier (something which it strongly denies). Israel has declared a unilateral blockade round Gaza, arguing that that's in a state of warfare with Hamas. even if, that's commonly agreed that particular products – mutually with nutrition, water, and medical components for the ill and wounded – are to be authorised by skill of the blockade and that banning those issues isn't authorised lower than global regulation. besides, except for a binding decision by using the United international locations protection Council, that's prohibited for a State to implement a blockade antagonistic to ships flying the flag of yet another State interior the extreme seas.

Answer 8

If he broke the law, stop complaining and do something about it. I would love to see someone actually stop talking and bashing, put their balls on, and do something about it!

I am sick of Liberal nut-jobs just balking out talking points that they heard their favorite celebrity say last week, without doing a little research of their own to learn that the only thing the President is guilty of is defending the country. Which he is sworn to do!!

If you can't do anything to charge him on, just tell him "thank you" and shut up. Get out of our way, and let the rest of America do the job.

Answer 9

I personally don't give a SH#T what laws get broken by whom when it come to tracking peoples $ or listening to phone calls because I ain't got nothing to hide. It is all you elitist, dope smoking liberals who get all bent out of shape about your right to privacy which by the way does not exist gets violated why. Is it because you are ashamed of the things you do behind closed doors? Or, is it because you are afraid the other liberals may find out that secretly behind closed doors you really do listen to Rush, Orielly and Hannity and don't always disagree with them?

Answer 10

No, especially not when he's extending a war way beyond its logical conclusion and using it as an excuse. Some of his extreme tactics might have been justified if we were in the midst of World War III, but this situation doesn't call for this abuse of power.

Answer 11

There are many people who would make fun of the prospect of changing their destinies. This is due to the fact that it believes that no one gets more that exactly what is written in his fate.