Skip to main content

View Diary: Newsweek: Yoo said Bush could order civilian massacres! (299 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Former President (sick) George W. Bush (0+ / 0-)

    I think you mean.

    What Yoo forgets is that holding the country together isn't easy if the government commits crimes. If the President isn't bound by the law, why should anyone else be?

    And, if you read this carefully, it doesn't really justify anything the Bush Administration did in regards to torture (or wiping out villages of innocent civilians, for that matter). We aren't at war. In the unlikely event he thinks that being commander-in-chief excuses such behavior, he must admit that Bush never had a war to give him those powers.

    Let me quote the Constitution (lest you be insecure about this):

    The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States...

    [Article II, Section 2, Clause 1]

    He gets to control the army and the navy (and by implication, the official armed forces of the U.S., which includes the other three branches of the military) and he gets to control the militia when in times of actual service to the U.S.

    This doesn't give him control over civilians. He has no special military authority whatsoever outside of any actual war zone. It doesn't give any part of the government special powers to do wiretaps or arrest and hold people or anything else that would derive from the requirements for waging war, except and unless there is an actual war (which would mean, as the Constitution says, that there has been a declaration by Congress of war).

    In short, Yoo is full of it.

    And apparently, so is Obama. For his administration to put out any document with this weak of an argument, then it makes me wonder where his head is. He should go find it and have this thing re-written.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site