Bush Is Not Above the Law... But He Thinks He Is
Bush Is Not Above the Law
My call for impeachment of Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez and Rice is based on my reading and understanding of our Constitution, our statutory laws, and the moral and ethical issues raised by Bush's conduct while holding our highest political office.
Apparently, I am not the only one that believes, based on facts and events, that President Bush and his cronies are not above the law. Impeachment is warranted. Impeachment should be pursued for the good of our nation. It undermines our nation and our way of life when we let this man remain in office.
My call for impeachment of Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez and Rice is based on my reading and understanding of our Constitution, our statutory laws, and the moral and ethical issues raised by Bush's conduct while holding our highest political office.
Apparently, I am not the only one that believes, based on facts and events, that President Bush and his cronies are not above the law. Impeachment is warranted. Impeachment should be pursued for the good of our nation. It undermines our nation and our way of life when we let this man remain in office.
LAST August, a federal judge found that the president of the United States broke the law, committed a serious felony and violated the Constitution. Had the president been an ordinary citizen — someone charged with bank robbery or income tax evasion — the wheels of justice would have immediately begun to turn. The F.B.I. would have conducted an investigation, a United States attorney’s office would have impaneled a grand jury and charges would have been brought.
But under the Bush Justice Department, no F.B.I. agents were ever dispatched to padlock White House files or knock on doors and no federal prosecutors ever opened a case.
The ruling was the result of a suit, in which I am one of the plaintiffs, brought against the National Security Agency by the American Civil Liberties Union. It was a response to revelations by this newspaper in December 2005 that the agency had been monitoring the phone calls and e-mail messages of Americans for more than four years without first obtaining warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, as required by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
In the past, even presidents were not above the law. When the F.B.I. turned up evidence during Watergate that Richard Nixon had obstructed justice by trying to cover up his involvement, a special prosecutor was named and a House committee recommended that the president be impeached.
And when an independent counsel found evidence that President Bill Clinton had committed perjury in the Monica Lewinsky case, the impeachment machinery again cranked into gear, with the spectacle of a Senate trial (which ended in acquittal).
Laws are broken, the federal government investigates, and the individuals involved — even if they’re presidents — are tried and, if found guilty, punished. That is the way it is supposed to work under our system of government. But not this time.
Last Aug. 17, Judge Anna Diggs Taylor of the United States District Court in Detroit issued her ruling in the A.C.L.U. case. The president, she wrote, had “undisputedly violated” not only the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution, but also statutory law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Enacted by a bipartisan Congress in 1978, the FISA statute was a response to revelations that the National Security Agency had conducted warrantless eavesdropping on Americans. To deter future administrations from similar actions, the law made a violation a felony punishable by a $10,000 fine and five years in prison.
Yet despite this ruling, the Bush Justice Department never opened an F.B.I. investigation, no special prosecutor was named, and there was no talk of impeachment in the Republican-controlled Congress.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home