Elliott @ 56

Eli @ 51

Is there any reason they can’t be prosecuted in an actual (i.e., non-partisan) court of law in 2009?

only if we can extradite from Paraguay and Dubai

They can’t be extradited from Paraguay for “political” crimes.

I believe the term is “extraordinary rendition.”

Ya know – I am a NY’er and Chuck is my Senator and mostly I thought he was a blowhard, but maybe not? *slinks away*

Helen, I think you would be mostly right about our Senator Chuck. Good time for both of us to encourage him in writing or phone calls.

College students, shit you must be kidding. In Georgia Zell engineered the “Hope Scholarship” that allows middle class and up kids to go to college tuition free. Guess where the money comes from? The lottery. Athens is full of huge SUV’s with “W” stickers up and down frat row, the bars are full and the students have virtually no chance of being asked to do a goddamn thing. A couple of grads have been killed in Iraq and when they ask for a moment of silence at football games the drunk morons can’t shut the fuck up for one minute. Draft their pampered asses and you’ll get some action.

what % are the the judicially drafted serving(kicking doors vandalising getting shot at ill eqi etc)in the theatre of occupation now.
they won’t be reserve units.
army instead of jail?

If neither side backs down and this reaches the Supreme Court, I expect the court will craft a very narrow ruling favoring one side or the other. If they rule by precedent, they’ll find for the Congress.

But whichever way the court rules, I expect the ruling will be so narrow as to neither confirm nor deny Executive Privilege. The court will do its best not to set any precedents at all. The sole aim of this (cowardly) court’s ruling would be to get this specific issue off their plate as quickly as possible.

And if there is any opening for them to rule on (or punt) the case without specifically addressing Executive Privilege, they’ll jump at the chance.

This is the time for the Congress to remind the President, his speechwriters, the media, and the country, that the elected members of our Legislative Branch of government are the American people, and represent everyone in the nation by acting as the heart and soul of our federal government under the Constitution’s inspired design. There’s no ‘third person’ in the equation, as Bush tried to pretend in his statement Tuesday evening, when he warned “partisan Democrats” not to keep him from doing the “people’s” business. [The “people” Bush speaks of are those same “Democrats” and their fellow citizens represented by each Member of Congress - Bush doesn’t get to decide what business of the Congress should be or will be conducted - the Members of Congress (otherwise known as We, the People) decide that for themselves, under our Constitution.]

The Democrats Bush belittles as partisan politicans (from his assumed position of apolitical ‘purity,’ of course) are the same “American people” whose business Bush claims to have uppermost in mind. The people through their Congress must beg to differ with his disingenuous rhetoric, as we are quite capable of knowing which business of ours we find it most urgent and necessary to conduct. [In other words, it is time for Congress to reclaim the principled high ground of actually representing the people who elected them, rather than the corporations who fund their campaigns, and to proudly stand up and represent us, with flags flying.]

Bush, as the elected head of the Executive Branch, was chosen by the people to faithfully execute our will as expressed through the votes of our representatives in Congress. First comes Congressional will, then comes Presidential veto or execution, not the other way around.

[Senators, I now know you are capable of this, after reading many of your floor speeches last Wednesday about Iraq. Use the same script, adapted to the occasion; Senators Schumer and Feingold, in particular, covered the Constitutional fundamentals clearly and powerfully, and Senator Durbin asked some profound rhetorical questions about the vital role our Legislative Branch plays in our system of government. Please maintain your momentum, in the democratic spirit of our Founders.]

What the fuck was Bush thinking when he spoke today?????????????????????????????

I believe that today marks the beginning of the end for Bushco. And the line that Bush drew in the sand today that was so extreme that he cannot possibly back down from today’s position. If he does back down, which he will be forced to do because the NYT has just landed a haymaker on the middle of his chin, he will have lost all face and credibility for even staking out today’s obscenely ridiculous position…much less for backing down to the fucking Democrats in Congress.

It’s over folks — it’s over.

Since he always like to bring everything back to 9/11, let me offer this analogy: Bush just flew his Administration into one of the Twin Towers (The Congress of the United States of America and the United States Department of Justice). We saw it – we saw it live – we saw or heard it through many different forms of communication. Remembering back those long hours until each of the Twin Towers fell, we all really knew that it was only a matter of time until those Towers fell. And they did.

George W. Bush, 43rd President of the United States, just flew the Bush Administration into oblivion. It’s now only a matter of time until the Bush Administration collapes. I’m thinking months, definitely by the end of this current year. Wow.

What the fuck was Bush thinking????????????????

Knut Wicksell @ 5

I’m scared. Really for the first time. If Congress doesn’t win this one, we can kiss off our democracy. It really is stand up and be counted time. In my fantasies as a younger person, I always asked myself what I would do when the time came. The time has come.

Well, the only silver lining would be that it makes the Republicans even *more* unpalatable and unelectable than they are now, as they explicitly become the Above-The-Law Party.

You assume there will be an election.

Suzanne @ 211

OKkiddo, Rice was National Security Advisor – not Sec of State (that was Powell) – when the Iraqi war began. Still, she said nothing.

I know. But that might even make Ms. Rice’s case even worse. And she sure didn’t, as far as I know, advise Bush of the folly of invading Iraq while at NSA. And unless I’m missing something, Ms. Rice has not advised the prez, in her present capacity, to leave Iraq. ;0)

Nor has she resigned. It is not unreasonable to assume she approves.