I don't think anyone has posted on this yet I caught it at
War Room on Salon Title "Torture Ban? What Torture Ban?" it seems that Bush has declared himself the right to ignore it. That's right the big debate the huge vote, the last minute maneuvers all for naught in Bushworld.
Boston Globe "Bush could bypass new torture ban"
Elisa Massimino, Washington director for Human Rights Watch, called Bush's signing statement an ''in-your-face affront" to both McCain and to Congress.
The rest is even more unfucking believable
''The basic civics lesson that there are three co-equal branches of government that provide checks and balances on each other is being fundamentally rejected by this executive branch," she said.
''Congress is trying to flex its muscle to provide those checks (on detainee abuse), and it's being told through the signing statement that it's impotent. It's quite a radical view."
On December 30th Bush issued a signing statement President's Statement on Signing of H.R. 2863, the "Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006"
which states
The executive branch shall construe Title X in Division A of the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power, which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President, evidenced in Title X, of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks. Further, in light of the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2001 in Alexander v. Sandoval, and noting that the text and structure of Title X do not create a private right of action to enforce Title X, the executive branch shall construe Title X not to create a private right of action. Finally, given the decision of the Congress reflected in subsections 1005(e) and 1005(h) that the amendments made to section 2241 of title 28, United States Code, shall apply to past, present, and future actions, including applications for writs of habeas corpus, described in that section, and noting that section 1005 does not confer any constitutional right upon an alien detained abroad as an enemy combatant, the executive branch shall construe section 1005 to preclude the Federal courts from exercising subject matter jurisdiction over any existing or future action, including applications for writs of habeas corpus, described in section 1005.
Translation: I can do any fucking thing I want to, any one I want, and no fucking congress is going to stop me. And no they don't have any fucking rights. These are fucking enemy combatants, DO YOU HEAR ME ENEMY COMBATANTS AND TERRRERRESSSTTSS
Oh you ask, What is a signing statement? Well in a Washington Post Story on 1/1 Alito lays it out quite nicely.
In a Feb. 5, 1986, draft memo, Alito, then deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Counsel, outlined a strategy for changing that. It laid out a case for having the president routinely issue statements about the meaning of statutes when he signs them into law.
Such "interpretive signing statements" would be a significant departure from run-of-the-mill bill signing pronouncements, which are "often little more than a press release," Alito wrote. The idea was to flag constitutional concerns and get courts to pay as much attention to the president's take on a law as to "legislative intent."
"Since the president's approval is just as important as that of the House or Senate, it seems to follow that the president's understanding of the bill should be just as important as that of Congress," Alito wrote. He later added that "by forcing some rethinking by courts, scholars, and litigants, it may help to curb some of the prevalent abuses of legislative history."
Go read the statement in almost every provision that was meant to put some restraint on Presidential Power he nullifies it. It is the most unbelievable thing I have ever read. He claims Presidential authority to overturn at least 10 provisions of the Act.
But what do we expect from George Branding Iron Bush
It added that a former president of Delta revealed, "the branding is done with a hot coathanger. But the former president, George Bush, a Yale senior, said that the resulting wound is 'only a cigarette burn.
If he could do it as a frat president do you think anyone is going to stop him know.