Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Bush and the Courts: A Round-up of Major Rulings in 'War on Terror' Cases
signonsandiego.com — Mark it down for the history books: A non-partisan summary of significant court cases where it was ruled Bush's "War on Terror" policies violated the US Constitution and/or exceeded his executive authority.
spinchange- 619 diggs
- digg it
- seks03, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3does it even matter to that jack ass what the courts do? he'll sign a law that will get him and his buddies off in the end ala Nixon
- DrDragun, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4if it wasn't an election year inc, he'd b so impeachd
- thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -16/+3You have to have done something that is an impeachable offense first.
Also, he can't pardon himself. - knomevol, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2no, he cannot. check article VI of the United States Constitution.
- chicofaraby, on 10/11/2007, -3/+38@ thcobbs
"You have to have done something that is an impeachable offense first."
Something like ordering torture.
Something like starting a war of aggression.
Something like ordering illegal wiretaps.
Something like using federal money for political campaigning.
Something like firing US attorneys to obstruct justice.
Something like destroying federal records to cover up a criminal vote caging scheme.
Something like bribing journalists with tax dollars to support your policies.
Something like kidnapping foreign nationals.
Or did you mean something like a blowjob? - thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -19/+6Something like ordering torture. -- I can't condone water boarding... but seriously... sleep deprivation is torture?
Something like starting a war of aggression. -- Oh, you mean an aggressive act like Saddam violating the terms of a peace treaty?
Something like ordering illegal wiretaps. -- They weren't illegal when he ordered them... They were within the law he was using...
Something like using federal money for political campaigning. -- That was a staffer giving a presentation... she was fired... (good)
Something like firing US attorneys to obstruct justice. -- proof?
Something like destroying federal records to cover up a criminal vote caging scheme. -- proof?
Something like bribing journalists with tax dollars to support your policies. -- proof?
Something like kidnapping foreign nationals. -- you mean capturing foreign nationals on battlefields?
Or did you mean something like a blowjob? -- Oh, you mean like Perjury and Obstructing justice? - DrDragun, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10LMAO cobbs that's the best comeback you can generate in 42 minutes?
I wouldn't hate ya if u weren't trying to defenend pre-emptive (non defensive) war and the vote caging.
@chico, don't try to downplay the perjery though, calling it "just a blowjob" will get you burned every time - 3tcp, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1LOL yuor reply wuz not immediate, either ur dum or u don't spend all day watching digg waiting for someone to reply to your posts
@drdragun, go play in traffic plz - SocialPoison, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13@thecobb
You tool...
"Something like ordering illegal wiretaps. -- They weren't illegal when he ordered them... They were within the law he was using..."
A previous administration set up a secret court... controlled by the Judicial branch... for this EXACT purpose. The whole idea was "hey, I need to get permission to do these wiretaps, but I can't let the bastards know I'm doing it." Hence, the secret court. Bush didn't use it, he just authorized the wiretaps when he did NOT have the authority to do so.
Something like firing US attorneys to obstruct justice. -- proof?
It's coming out right now... and guess what... it's for obstruction of justice. I don't think Bush is going to get it on this one, but a lot of people under him will.
Oh... and
"Or did you mean something like a blowjob? -- Oh, you mean like Perjury and Obstructing justice?"
On both counts he was given a not-guilty verdict... or weren't you paying attention?
Seriously dude... drink some more of the fox news koolaid then DIAF. - kolobcreek, on 10/11/2007, -9/+3@thcobbs
You're correct. The Dems aka "Emotional Thinkers" have developed a new strategy.
1. Take some facts
2. Add *****
and vuala instant made up scandal.
These are the same people that say "America has no right to play World Police" then later that same day.... "We need to stop the violence in Darfur by sending troops tomorrow"
Not to mention that the completely forgo to fact that Clinton didn't fire eight prosecutors but 93 that were appointed during the 16yrs of Regan and Bush Sr administrations.
WHAT HYPOCRITES - Bdog2g2, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3kolobcreek
They're simply taking a page outta the Bush/Cheney "How to ***** Over the Word" book. Its funny how when the "Emotional Thinking" democrats do it, the Republicans call foul. However in this case, they didn't have to add the "*****" to the facts, the administration already put it in with the facts
So I ask; When is a double standard not a double standard? I guess the answer when its a Republican pulling it off. - kolobcreek, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@Bdog2g2
WTF are you talking about. I don't understand a thing your are saying. It sounds like you're regurgitating propaganda you heard somewhere else.
I think I'm dumber now from reading that. At no time during your rant did you use a fact. That is exactly my point. You guys keep propagating words and slogans that have no substance. And their only effect is to play on people's emotions. And it is by this you hope to change politics in America? Our democracy is certainly facing perilous times.- Bdog2g2, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"1. Take some facts 2. Add ***** and vuala instant made up scandal. "
And by facts or propaganda you mean statements like the above? So the whole Clinton investigation lead by Ken Starr and sponsored by, the then, Republican Congress was much better, because it was in the best interest of the Country. *****, Ken Starr had the scrape the bottom of the bucket to find him on anything to bring him up on anything substantial. See below
"In early 1998, Starr won authorization to expand his investigation to include the Lewinsky scandal, and questions about Monica Lewinsky's relationship with Clinton quickly overshadowed Whitewater matters." -http://www.answers.com/topic/whitewater-scandal?cat=biz-fin
So you tell me who's the pot and who's the kettle.
And speaking of "regurgitating" , it would appear you couldn't construct enough of a rant, so you had to dive into psuedo-quoting the principal from Billy Madison
- Bdog2g2, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"1. Take some facts 2. Add ***** and vuala instant made up scandal. "
- venicerocco, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17Wow. Look at what we've become: Actually celebrating the fact that the Federal government cannot lock us up indefinitely without trail.
- kolobcreek, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@venicerocco
Some times its just damn fine police work.
- kolobcreek, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@venicerocco
- sub420, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2who cares? nothing the courts do, or anything you, or anybody else says or does will ever change or stop anything. it wont make any difference whatsoever. whatever the govt wants to do, it will do. its been like that since govt originated, and it will be like that forever. its sad, but thats the world we're living in.
- chicofaraby, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2What a whiner.
- DrDragun, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9obv u dropped out before the history class where they talk about checks and balancez
- BbIT, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Many people care sub420. Viva La Revolucion!
- warox, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2sub420, while pessimistic, has a valid point. The gov't will do what the gov't wants, and ultimately the common man can not change that.
Where I disagree is that we as the governed make no difference whatsoever. If you don't care, you definitely won't make a difference, but if you do, you just might. We HAVE to care. We HAVE to make sure the right people with the right opinions are put in power, and we HAVE to make sure injustices, blatant disregard for rights and illegal and immoral conduct are revealed.
Where that gets scary is when you start considering disinformation practices, media manipulation, voting manipulation, and so on. Then we start to get back to the idea that the common man can not change anything. - 3tcp, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3As long as it's a 2 party system and every election is between a giant douche and a turd sandwhich the options are pretty limited. It will be hard to make a difference by caring when it's so rare that any kind of reform movement gets enough support to actually make some reforms.
- AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -1/+2DrDragun - I fail to see what an upcoming election has to do with the fact he can be impeached.
Clinton was impeached when there was an election coming up, and he stayed in office through the end of his term..- DrDragun, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6cuz the democrats only hold the senate by 1 seat. that's why it's a joke they're branded a "do-nothing congress". It's not a democratic congress, that's why; it's a split congress. The votes are almost 50-50. Everything (war funding bill to set deadlines, immigration reform package) gets split along partisan lines and it's never enough to override a veto from G-dub.
In any case, Harry Reid and co. don't want to march and fail again and again, or the "do nothing congress" label will stick to the Democrat party despite the fact that it's basically a split congress.
- DrDragun, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6cuz the democrats only hold the senate by 1 seat. that's why it's a joke they're branded a "do-nothing congress". It's not a democratic congress, that's why; it's a split congress. The votes are almost 50-50. Everything (war funding bill to set deadlines, immigration reform package) gets split along partisan lines and it's never enough to override a veto from G-dub.
- THENORMOK, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Buy all the guns you can - there will be a need for them soon enough.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1That's not a great way to greet news of people actually challenging Bush through the courts.
- 3tcp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5The supreme court also ruled a lot of FDR's new deal unconstitutional until he packed the court with supporters and was able to get the stuff through.
I'm just saying'. If we get another president who supports an authoritarian federal government like Clinton or McCain we may end up with something similar happening with this. - SocialPoison, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1...oops (del)
- nevetS, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2This shows failures, but no victories.
Wasn't Massoui convicted? And the shoe bomber dude? And let's not forget the DC Sniper - who was definitely a terrorist. Surely there had to be more victories than that? Right?
Hello? Anyone?- 3tcp, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5When the bush administration wins it isn't really a victory. I'd say many of those wins were just failures of the judicial system to enforce the constitution and, consequently, failures by the presidency to stay within the boundaries of its role in a 3-branch government. Bush's victories have been state power vs freedom, the department of homeland security vs liberty, cronyism vs fiscal responsibility and fear-mongering vs optimism.
The Bush administration hasn't gone to court over anything that made me feel like they were on my side.
- 3tcp, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5When the bush administration wins it isn't really a victory. I'd say many of those wins were just failures of the judicial system to enforce the constitution and, consequently, failures by the presidency to stay within the boundaries of its role in a 3-branch government. Bush's victories have been state power vs freedom, the department of homeland security vs liberty, cronyism vs fiscal responsibility and fear-mongering vs optimism.
- nevetS, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Hey - let's not forget Paris Hilton and Martha Stewart.
- Franky66, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1A firm constitutionalist is running for President. Only canidate to vote against the Iraq mess from the beginning. Wanted Bin Ladin instead and still does, without policing the world, fuleing more war. Only one canidate is standing against a replay in Iran......Were does you candiate stand on Iran? Most would be suprised if they would turn off the TV and do some research for themselves. Forget party lines...find the one who doesn't vote party lines...both sides are corrupt. Wake up before its four more years of politics as usual.
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by