The Blog of toussaint

i consider myself a Constitutionalist.  i believe that it is one of the greatest documents ever written - if we only had a President that would follow it.  Whenever the Supreme Court issues rulings, i find myself re-reading them to see where they get the authority or lack thereof, to make such rulings.  As i was doing this yesterday, i noticed a lot of laws that Bush was breaking or ignoring.

  Although i think that there are plenty of grounds for impeachment, i am not calling for that to be done because Cheney would take over.  The smartest decision "the decider"  ever made was to pick Cheney as V.P. because no one would want to have him as president.  He can't even figure out if he is a member of the Executive branch or if he is part of the Legislative branch unless he is claiming Executive Privilege not to tell us which one of his big oil friends was in the room when the first energy bill was written. 

 Which laws has Bush broken you ask?  Let us start with the Preamble and work our way through to see if you agree with me.

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Establish Justice? He believes he can lock up any one forever as long as he calls them "enemy combatants".  This country feels a lot less tranquil since he has been in office.  By not securing our ports, he has not provided for our common defense.

Article I

Section 1. All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Bush has tried to legislate by the use of "signing statements".  Like on the anti-torture law, he used some pretty tortured logic to say that, yeah no torture unless i deem it necessary.  He can not do that unless he vetoes a law, then the Constitution says he may send it back to fix his objections; he can't fix them himself and carve out exceptions for himself.  The laws of this land apply to everyone, including King George!

Section 9. 

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

In the Terry Schivo case, he convened Congress to make them pass a bill of attainder(this section means that you can't pass a law that only applies to one person). And we all remember Senator Spector going crazy on the floor of the Senate when Bush wanted to say that enemy combatants have no standing to challenge their incarceration.  To those who might say, what about the exclusion of invasion?  Well, these people were mostly captured on foreign soil so that does not apply.

Article 2- Section 1. 

Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

i submit that by breaking the above and below sections of the Constitution he has violated this oath, unless the best of his ability is pretty low (which, i have to say, the best of his ability usually is).

Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.

He refused to receive Arafat, who was the ambassador to the Palestinian people, as well as the president of Iran when he came to the U.N.  He has not seen to it that the laws are executed or we would not be hearing from the right everyday to enforce the immigration laws and protect the border.

Article 3- Section 2. 

The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.

The detainees in Guantanamo have never and probably will never get a trail by jury as long as he is president.  The term jury is a precise legal word and the military tribunals he and Congress have proposed don't fit the bill which is why even this coservative court struck down the first military tribunal system he had put into place.

Article 4-Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.

A lot of our Republican friends like Buchanan and Rush would argue that the border states have been invaded by illegal immigrants and Bush has done nothing to stop it.

Article 6. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

i can't prove that he has done that personally, although i have my suspicions, but his representatives like Monica Goodling have testified to Congress that she had a religious test when she was hiring immigration judges.

  Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

By approving the tapping of our phones and e-mails without going through the FISA court,  we were subject to searches that had no probable cause, and even if they did have cause, they @#$! sure did not have a warrant.

Amendment V 

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

There has been no due process for those in our "secret" prisons or for those held as enemy combatants.

Amendment VI 

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

The few enemy combatants who have had a trial have not had a  speedy or public one,  the jury was partial at best because they were held by military officers, some of whom have friends who have died in Iraq or Afghanistan(God rest their souls).  Most of the people have never been charged let alone known what they are being held for; they can't confront witnesses that don't exist; and since they are not allowed to speak to anyone, they can't provided witnesses in their defense.   And until the Supreme Court mandated it, they were denied lawyers.

Amendment VIII 

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

i don't know what you call water boarding but it is at the very least unusual.

Amendment XIV 

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 

Do i really have to say again what he is doing in Guantanamo Bay is wrong?

Well, that is a lot of stuff, toussaint, but most of your charges hinge on the illegality of what he is doing to the detainees. You are right, but i would say that what he is doing violates so many of our laws and core American values that it is undeniably weakening our democracy and threatening our way of life.