The Next Prez's Superpowers
Will a new president give back the authority that Bush and Cheney grabbed for the executive?
As President Bill Clinton assumed office in January 1993, I held out great hope that the Immigration and Naturalization Service's long-standing effort to deport my clients—eight people arrested in Los Angeles in 1987 for distributing magazines for a faction of the Palestine Liberation Organization—might finally come to an end. We'd begun the case under President Reagan, and continued under the first President Bush. We had consistently prevailed in the federal courts, before judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents. The fbi director had admitted that none of our clients had engaged in any criminal activities, and that they were arrested only for their political associations. Surely the new Democratic administration—where some of my best friends were going to work—would abandon this ill-conceived effort?
-
Exit Strategy: How to Fix a Post-Bush Nation
It's time to start putting the US back together. Herewith, our wide-ranging guide to the country's most urgent, yet fixable, problems.
-
Pursuit of Habeas
What Bush learned from the Sheriff of Nottingham.
-
How to Fix America: A Guide for the Next First 100 Days
Valerie Plame Wilson, The Wire's David Simon, and 18 other experts on what the next president can do to clean house—pronto.
Hardly. Instead of dropping the case, the Clinton Justice Department took it all the way to the Supreme Court, where it obtained a favorable ruling written by none other than Justice Antonin Scalia. The Clinton administration also aggressively used secret evidence to seek the deportation and detention of numerous Arab and Muslim immigrants, despite repeated court rulings that such tactics violated the Constitution. And after the Oklahoma City bombing, Clinton signed into law the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which "streamlined" habeas corpus for all prisoners (accused terrorists or not), created a special court to remove "alien terrorists" (again using secret evidence), and made it a crime to provide "material support" to blacklisted groups, effectively resurrecting the McCarthy-era tactic of guilt by association.
So: While there may be many reasons to support Barack Obama, don't assume that a Democratic president will necessarily transform the counterterrorism policies of the current administration. Government officials do not as a rule like to give up power, and President Bush has grabbed plenty of power for the executive branch since 9/11. Democrats in particular often feel vulnerable to being portrayed as soft on crime or terrorism, and far too many tack to the right on these issues, as Clinton did. If the problem is to be fixed—and it is essential that we fix it—it will only be because of sustained and popular pressure for change.
Don't get me wrong. I hope a President Obama will be more attuned to civil liberties than Clinton was. And I have no doubt that Obama has historically been better than McCain in this arena. But the project is an enormous one. The list of Bush and Cheney's insults to the Constitution could go on forever, but the low points include:
- They authorized the use of what they call "enhanced interrogation techniques," and what the rest of the world knows to be torture.
- They asserted the right to lock up anyone anywhere in the world—even US citizens arrested at home—without a hearing, access to lawyers or the courts, or the protections of the Geneva Conventions.
- They dramatically expanded surveillance powers while bypassing judicial oversight, and ordered the National Security Agency to wiretap Americans without warrants—flaunting a statute that made such conduct a federal crime.
- They kidnapped suspects and rendered them to countries with a track record of torture.
- They disappeared other suspects into secret cia black sites, where they were subjected to brutal interrogation tactics specifically authorized in White House meetings.
- They locked up in post-9/11 "preventive detention" more than 5,000 foreign nationals in the United States, virtually all of them Arab or Muslim—not one of whom stands convicted of a terrorist offense today.
- And they asserted that when the president "engages the enemy" as commander in chief, he is for all practical purposes above the law.
Thankfully, some parts of the Constitution remain, including the one limiting presidents to two terms.
There is reason to hope that we are ready for change. A growing consensus recognizes that the Bush administration's post-9/11 actions have not only compromised some of our most fundamental principles, but have actually made us less safe. They have made it nearly impossible to bring to justice some of the worst actors we have captured; rendered it more difficult for our allies to cooperate with us for fear that they will be tainted by our actions; and given Al Qaeda the best recruitment propaganda it could have imagined. Even President Bush admits that Guantanamo is a public relations disaster (he hasn't quite admitted that it is a human rights disaster), and should be closed. And the administration has had to retreat on its positions on torture, unchecked presidential power, the detention of enemy combatants, and the Geneva Conventions.
Then there is the Supreme Court, which has now ruled against the administration in all four of the "terrorism" cases in which it has issued an opinion since 9/11. It found—twice—that the Guantanamo detainees have a right to challenge the legality of their detention. It rejected the administration's claim that it could hold US citizens as enemy combatants without a hearing. It ruled that the Geneva Conventions govern the conflict with Al Qaeda, and that the military tribunals violated those conventions and US military law. And in its June decision in Boumediene v. Bush, the court for the first time ever ruled against the president and Congress acting together on a matter of national security and, in another first, extended constitutional rights to foreign nationals outside US territory. While we cannot pin our hopes on a court that is one justice away from becoming the most conservative in our history, this track record should give some backbone to those in the next administration who seek to turn the tide.
But the most important reason for hope is the remarkable job that civil society groups—from Human Rights First and the aclu to the Muslim Public Affairs Council and the Center for Constitutional Rights—have done in standing up for the principles that characterize this country at its best. By bringing lawsuits, issuing reports, holding press conferences, and mobilizing members, they have given citizens opportunities for constructive engagement with one of the most important issues of our generation—what democracy will look like in the face of the threat of terror.
It was not always so. In the McCarthy era, for example, the aclu was more consumed with purging itself of Communists than defending civil liberties—and most of the other groups doing crucial work today didn't even exist.
Civil society, of course, is just a fancy term for "us." It is the citizenry, mobilized. And as Judge Learned Hand, perhaps the greatest judge never to be on the Supreme Court, once said, "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it...While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it." The question is whether the audacity of this hope will give way to the politics of terror. The answer lies in us.
Page 1 of 1 
You write of a very real concern. Your is an observation much like one I heard expressed on Bill Moyers Journal. The guests were Constitutional scholar Bruce Fein, who wrote the first article of impeachment against President Bill Clinton, and author John Nichols. These powers are indeed inherited by the next president.
It doesn't matter who wins the "election". They aren't going to roll back the Bush agenda.
FREE AMERICA
REVOLUTIONARY (DIRECT) DEMOCRACY
I will quickly get to the substance of the San Bernardino
County Court child support participation program concerning that described in participant # 0710000329227.
The amount was odious to begin with. Plus, I am confident
that the amount of $1183.00 per month was created by way of fraudulent
information and omissions of crucial facts by both the judge concerning the
aforementioned participant # paperwork and Candie L. Putnam, formerly Candie L. Salas.
Mrs. Putnam was fully aware of my income at the time of this
judgement. It was approximataly $24000 per year in 1992. After personal
income taxes collected by international corporations who do business as both the International Monetary Fund and it's subordinate collection agency, The Internal Revenue Service, my net wages were approximately $1500 per month. Mrs. Putnam not only knew this, but was possibly coerced by a judge into commiting such fraud such that not to tell the judge that $1183.00 per month was approximately 77% of my, Joseph J Salas, total net wages.
Now concerning the de-facto government that the United States
currently operates as, and it's subordination to the Foreign Power United
Nations and it's sister financial firms World Bank and the IMF as well as
The International Bar Assosiation, I hearby demand to recieve on paper, what control over my person is owned by the private enterprise described above.
Please pardon my essay structure for a moment, but the judge
does operate within a largely foreign owned system which includes the IRS.
The Judge who handled this odious participant program had access to
information accumulated by the Internationsl Monetary Fund and it's
subordinate service provider, The Internal Revenue service.
This judge, as well as the current Candie L Putnam were malicious, odious
and fraudulent in coming to such a conclusion that I, Joseph J Salas, would not fall heavily into a supplemental debt on top of the one I, Joseph J Salas, was already born into.
Also, I will need to see on paper, just what power described by the
Constitution of the United States of America that the above described group of international corporations holds over my persons means of any form of transportation and travel as well as any and all matters
of personal finance.
If public laws 89-719 and 94-564 do not exist, I will need to
see it on paper as well. For they describe much of the San Bernardino
County Court's afiliation and sub-ordinance to The foreign power known
as the United Nations. There should be no conflict of interest
concerning this request.
And concerning all debts described in participant #
0710000329227, I, Joseph J Salas, demand, in writing and on paper, just what authority that the United Nations, World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the International Bar Association have over my person to garnish wages, place liens on bank accounts, impede on any form of travel as well as any other form of reprisal it feels it has the authority to place upon any US citizen in the event of non participation to these requests
for participation.
Respectfuly,
____________________
I didn't try to avoid participation for the first few years. But eventually, I resorted to working for cash. This led me into the arms of a white collar criminal program that is/was used to gather money for our de-facto government. (89-719) The final episode had a verichip implanted into my midsection during non-related surgery. And for what it is worth, I'm still trying to sheild the identity of a certain individual who best be kept anonymous.
Anyways, this was pretty much the draft/demand/request/complaint that will be sent to the aforementioned court very soon.
And I post this just in case of any NI typo-s. lol
Barack Obama is on record saying that on his "first day of office" he will review every single Signing Statement for legality. He's going to be a busy man.
The Bush Administration, as grabbastic as they are, are just more expert than the ones who came before them. Congress has participated in making itself largely obsolete. They have been co-opted by the imperial president with his own private Ministry of Propaganda, Faux "News".
This is a timely MJ piece, and I fear it may still be online the day that Bush seizes $700 bn from the US Treasury by Executive order, suspends Congress and locks them out with tanks in the street, and then postpones the national elections until some further date for "national security reasons."
Ha ha. The best "October surprise" ever. Sounds ludicrous, right? Or does it?
-Wexler
PS There sure have been a couple of off-the-wall posts here, something to do with some court case, another one talking about shutter speed? WTF is up with that?
[deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]R[deleted]o[deleted]l[deleted]l[deleted] [deleted]b[deleted]a[deleted]c[deleted]k[deleted] [deleted]t[deleted]h[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]B[deleted]u[deleted]s[deleted]h[deleted] [deleted]a[deleted]g[deleted]e[deleted]n[deleted]d[deleted]a[deleted]![deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]F[deleted]R[deleted]E[deleted]E[deleted] [deleted]A[deleted]M[deleted]E[deleted]R[deleted]I[deleted]C[deleted]A[deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]R[deleted]E[deleted]V[deleted]O[deleted]L[deleted]U[deleted]T[deleted]I[deleted]O[deleted]N[deleted]A[deleted]R[deleted]Y[deleted] [deleted]([deleted]D[deleted]I[deleted]R[deleted]E[deleted]C[deleted]T[deleted])[deleted] [deleted]D[deleted]E[deleted]M[deleted]O[deleted]C[deleted]R[deleted]A[deleted]C[deleted]Y[deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]<[deleted]b[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]/[deleted]>[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]I[deleted]f[deleted] [deleted]O[deleted]b[deleted]a[deleted]m[deleted]a[deleted] [deleted]a[deleted]n[deleted]d[deleted] [deleted]B[deleted]i[deleted]d[deleted]e[deleted]n[deleted] [deleted]a[deleted]r[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]e[deleted]l[deleted]e[deleted]c[deleted]t[deleted]e[deleted]d[deleted] [deleted]t[deleted]h[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]r[deleted]u[deleted]l[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]o[deleted]f[deleted] [deleted]l[deleted]a[deleted]w[deleted] [deleted]w[deleted]i[deleted]l[deleted]l[deleted] [deleted]b[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]p[deleted]r[deleted]e[deleted]v[deleted]a[deleted]i[deleted]l[deleted] [deleted]a[deleted]n[deleted]d[deleted] [deleted]t[deleted]h[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]c[deleted]o[deleted]n[deleted]s[deleted]t[deleted]i[deleted]t[deleted]u[deleted]t[deleted]i[deleted]o[deleted]n[deleted] [deleted]w[deleted]i[deleted]l[deleted]l[deleted] [deleted]b[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]r[deleted]e[deleted]s[deleted]t[deleted]o[deleted]r[deleted]e[deleted]d[deleted],[deleted] [deleted]i[deleted]f[deleted] [deleted]M[deleted]c[deleted]C[deleted]a[deleted]i[deleted]n[deleted] [deleted]a[deleted]n[deleted]d[deleted] [deleted]P[deleted]a[deleted]l[deleted]i[deleted]n[deleted] [deleted]a[deleted]r[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]e[deleted]l[deleted]e[deleted]c[deleted]t[deleted]e[deleted]d[deleted],[deleted] [deleted]I[deleted] [deleted]f[deleted]e[deleted]a[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]w[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]w[deleted]i[deleted]l[deleted]l[deleted] [deleted]f[deleted]o[deleted]r[deleted]e[deleted]v[deleted]e[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]r[deleted]e[deleted]g[deleted]r[deleted]e[deleted]t[deleted] [deleted]w[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]e[deleted]v[deleted]e[deleted]n[deleted] [deleted]l[deleted]i[deleted]v[deleted]e[deleted],[deleted] [deleted]I[deleted] [deleted]l[deleted]o[deleted]o[deleted]k[deleted] [deleted]f[deleted]o[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]w[deleted]a[deleted]r[deleted]s[deleted] [deleted]a[deleted]n[deleted]d[deleted] [deleted]n[deleted]o[deleted] [deleted]r[deleted]u[deleted]l[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]o[deleted]f[deleted] [deleted]l[deleted]a[deleted]w[deleted].[deleted]
[deleted]h[deleted]t[deleted]t[deleted]p[deleted]:[deleted]/[deleted]/[deleted]w[deleted]w[deleted]w[deleted].[deleted]f[deleted]e[deleted]d[deleted]u[deleted]p[deleted]u[deleted]s[deleted]a[deleted].[deleted]c[deleted]o[deleted]m[deleted]/[deleted]
[deleted]P[deleted]o[deleted]w[deleted]e[deleted]r[deleted] [deleted]t[deleted]o[deleted] [deleted]t[deleted]h[deleted]e[deleted] [deleted]P[deleted]e[deleted]o[deleted]p[deleted]l[deleted]e[deleted]
Wexler, Once again you are off the deep end. Bush, an imperial president, locks out the Congress? Are you off your meds?
There has been a peaceful transition of power in this country for a littl eover 200 years. I suspect the next to be NO different.
So, let's address the "FAUX" news network. Which one do you speak of? Do you refer to the three letter alphabet soup news networks; ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN? Cam MOther Jones be considered one, if I use the initials MJ, like you? Maybe you speak of the four letter alphabet soup news stations, CNBC & MSNBC? Oh, I get it now. You're speaking of the FOX news network, or the FNC. This is Ruperts network.
But wait, did he endorse Obama?
"Murdoch said he had played a role in the endorsement by the New York Post, one of his global stable of papers, in endorsing Obama during the Democratic primary with Hillary Clinton in New York."
I'll give you a little something here. Most CEO's, CFO's are that of the sterotypical used car salesman adn junkies; both would sell their mothers down the road for a buck. My point being, if it is FOX news you speak of, stand up and say so. Because...we all just know that MJ, as you, has no political bias. It is strictly the news.
Once again, please! The fact that you have an opinion is great. This is still America. You are allowed to. Remember that Constitution thing in Philadelphia in 1787?
And, Marc, that's AMERICA, not AMERIKA. Look it up. It's called a representative republic. If you want pure Democracy, I hear Peru, Columbia and Bolivia are of such. Hasta luego!
My last post was done in haste, but the song remains the same. The transfer of power between presidents every four to eight years has gone peacefully for two centuries now. So much so that people from around the world spend their lives seeking out this country as a place to live their lives in peace. There is no reason to believe otherwise at this point. For any loon to imply otherwise is just ludicrous. Are mental stabilities in play here?
The United States will get past this economy as we have prevailed in through every other historical economical crisis in our history.
Now, on a purely theoretical level, I agree with Wexler on one specific, singular point. The Congress as we know it today, is wholly obsolete. However, it is not due to an imperial president. It is simply an apathetic and uninformed electorate. And, this is simply due to the United States being a prosperous nation with an unending supply of optimistic citizenry.
At most, let's have a constitutional convention; at least, vote the BUMS out. If it is more important for your incumbent candidate to win than to lose over new ideas, whether in your own party or otherwise, than you get what you vote for.
For you Gen X'ers, educate your children on THE CONSTITUTION, not the perverse ideas on an MJ blog, or any other source. Get it straight from the horses mouth.
Personally I don't think so. McCain none at all. Obama, possibly some. Using Clinton as the Democratic example, no not at all. Clinton was a US president. Dem/Rep? Pretty much in the meat of the matter, the same.
Many of the powers excersized by the executive are fascist and unConstitutional. As other fascist powers have done in the past they claim that protections of liberties and rights do not pertain in some circumstances. Claiming security and defense of the people as the need to take away rights and liberties. We're on the same path as any empire. Even in Jimmy's rant below, he calls for the dissolution of the legislative ("wholly obsolete".
You don't make it to one of the two candidates for the presidency in America without towing the line. Making each president pretty much like the last. There have been a few exceptions but not in the past several decades.
Yes Mr. Cole. I think we can all agree. The answer lies in us. We must make the change happen. But as Jimmy states, we're all fed lies and distortions by the media and government. So most of the citizenry have an incorrect idea of reality. The reason media reform is so desperately needed.
When is someone going to have the guts to ask the Presidential candidates whether or not they will abide by the Constitution and assure us that the President is subject to the law and not above the law? In other words why in hell hasn't anyone had the guts to indite Bush?
Nobody's indicting Bush because the Republicans wouldn't cooperate (remember, Dems have
Republican and Democratic
Republican and Democratic presidents. The fbi director had admitted that none of our clients had engaged in any criminal activities, and that they were arrested only for their political associations. Surely the new Democratic administration—where some of my best friends were going to work—would abandon this ill-conceived effort?
The fbi director had
The fbi director had admitted that none of our clients had engaged in any criminal activities, and that they were arrested only for their political associations. Surely the new Democratic administration—where some of my best friends were going to work—would abandon this ill-conceived effort?
