Is bush accountable to the Constitution?

Question

6) Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, kidnaping, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners to obtain false statements concerning acts and intentions on governments and individuals and violating within the United States, and by authorizing U.S. forces and agents elsewhere, the rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

HOLBROOK -



"Dear Members of Congress:

We are scholars of constitutional law and former government officials. We write in our individual capacities as citizens concerned by the Bush administration's National Security Agency domestic spying program, as reported in The New York Times, and in particular to respond to the Justice Department's December 22, 2005, letter to the majority and minority leaders of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees setting forth the administration's defense of the program.[1] Although the program's secrecy prevents us from being privy to all of its details, the Justice Department's defense of what it concedes was secret and warrantless electronic surveillance of persons within the United States fails to identify any plausible legal authority for such surveillance. Accordingly the program appears on its face to violate existing law."

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18650

The basic legal question here is not new. In 1978, after an extensive investigation of the privacy violations associated with foreign intelligence surveillance programs, Congress and the President enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Pub. L. 95-511, 92 Stat. 1783. FISA comprehensively regulates electronic surveillance within the United States, striking a careful balance between protecting civil liberties and preserving the "vitally important government purpose" of obtaining valuable intelligence in order to safeguard national security. S. Rep. No. 95-604, pt. 1, at 9 (1977).

With minor exceptions, FISA authorizes electronic surveillance only upon certain specified showings, and only if approved by a court. The statute specifically allows for warrantless wartime domestic electronic surveillance—but only for the first fifteen days of a war. 50 U.S.C. § 1811. It makes criminal any electronic surveillance not authorized by statute, id. § 1809;

LET ME REPEAT THAT:

"but only for the first fifteen days of the war."

To Holbrook:

Uh....did you actually READ any of that before you posted it? I'm not a "Constitutional Scholar" but I do have a brain and even I can see where bush violated each and every one of them.

I can't help a sycophant - you're on your own.

Answer 1

everyone in the USA is accountable to the constitutions and if bush broke any of it he would be out by now so no arm char laws he has the best telling him what is right and wrong!!!

Answer 2

To Holbrook - Yes, we're all very impressed. However, CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLARS all over the country have, indeed, stated that bush has violated these sections of the Constitution.

Answer 3

Why would he be accountable to a "goddamn piece of paper"?

BTW, you would think that a historian would know how to spell or at least know how to spell check especially if his father holds a doctorate degree.

Answer 4

These are not POW's but enemy combatants. There is a difference. If another 9-11 can be prevented, I don't care what happens to the enemy combatants. Why don't you take them in to your house if you love them so much? And besides, the lawyers in this country have done far worse things than this. Murders get off because of technicalities.

Answer 5

Obviously not! Apparently, when you become a member of Congress; You lose your B*LL$!!!!!

Answer 6

Yes.

Answer 7

Yes, but he has some advantages since he is the President of the U.S.

Answer 8

Yes, and so is every other American. Are you trying to tell us you are against Gitmo? If so, i wonder if you are for the terrorist slowely sawing off the heads of their prisoners, on t v , for the world to see.

Answer 9

Absolutely! *sm*

Answer 10

Yes but the unfortunate thing is we are held accountable for HIS interpretation of it