Tag: George W. Bush

Shame of the Nation, continued.

“‘Here…comes…that famous General Taguba — of the Taguba report!’ Rumsfeld declared, in a mocking voice.” Well, the agency and the time may have changed, but it’s increasingly clear we still have a lot to answer for, thanks to the actions of those who would claim to protect our way of life. The inimitable Sy Hersh of The New Yorker (who also played a role in 1974 in getting the CIA docs released — take that, Woodward) reports in with the tale of General Antonio Taguba, the head of the Army’s original investigation into Abu Ghraib who, like so many other truth-tellers in the administration, was eventually hung out to dry for his candor. Hersh’s frightening and sadly plausible piece not only makes clear that Rumsfeld, Dubya, et al had more knowledge of the nightmare of Abu Ghraib than they’ve publicly let on, but also suggests that those repellent images we’ve all seen from the prison may only be the tip of the iceberg of the horrors that occurred in our country’s name. “Taguba said that he saw ‘a video of a male American soldier in uniform sodomizing a female detainee.’ The video was not made public in any of the subsequent court proceedings, nor has there been any public government mention of it.“

Nope, can’t have those either.

Think I’m being shrill? Ok, here’s another: After listening to former Attorney General John Ashcroft discuss internal differences over Dubya’s illegal surveillance program yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 13-3 to issue subpoenas for White House and Justice Department documents regarding the eavesdropping system. “The White House made no move to comply.“

Speech Impediments.

“I am also still convinced that voters originally liked George W. Bush’s inarticulacy: At least he didn’t sound quite as smooth, and ultimately meaningless, as everyone else. Only with time did his natural-born inability to speak English begin to produce infuriating phrases of truly unique pointlessness.” Slate‘s Anne Appelbaum surveys the sad state of political rhetoric in this country, concluding that, while “the brightest new hope for the English language is Barack Obama,” “[n]o good writer, however eloquent, can possibly survive a two-year presidential campaign.“

I have to agree, it is pretty bad out there. The main problem, and it’s no secret, is that most speeches today prize concepts over imagery. Read classic nineteenth-century political speeches today — Lincoln’s Second Inaugural, say, or Bryan’s Cross of Gold — and they’re flush with vivid imagery and extended metaphors. But, be it due to video killing the oratory star, the need for shorter, quicker, soundbites, or just a general fuzziness about the basic principles undergirding contemporary legislation, most speeches today languish in abstraction and platitudes. (The work of former Dubya speechwriter Michael Gerson is a notable exception in this regard.)

RNCmail: Off the Radar.

It’s not just Karl. Newly released information finds that as many as 88 officials in the Dubya White House have been (illegally) using RNC e-mail addresses as a back-door way to discuss official business off the record. “‘As a result of these policies, potentially hundreds of thousands of White House e-mails have been destroyed, many of which may be presidential records,’ the report said.“

Signs of Trouble.

“‘At least it makes clear the signing statements aren’t solely for staking out a legal position, with the president just saying, “I don’t have to do these things, but I will,”‘ Fein said. ‘In fact they are not doing some of these things. You can’t just vaporize it as an academic question.‘” Also in the administration malfeasance department, a new study by Congress’s Government Accountability Office finds that more often than not Dubya has been ignoring the laws he’s flagged in signing statements as not in tune with his imperial mood. “‘The administration is thumbing its nose at the law,’ said House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), who requested the GAO study and legal opinion along with Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.). ‘This GAO opinion underscores the fact that the Bush White House is constantly grabbing for more power, seeking to drive the people’s branch of government to the sidelines,’ Byrd said in a joint statement with Conyers.”

Rule of Law 1, Dubya 0.

“The President cannot eliminate constitutional protections with the stroke of a pen by proclaiming a civilian, even a criminal civilian, an enemy combatant subject to indefinite military detention…To sanction such presidential authority to order the military to seize and indefinitely detain civilians…would have disastrous consequences for the constitution — and the country.” In what should have been a no-brainer, a federal appeals court rules 2-1 in the case of al-Marri v. Wright that Dubya can’t hold US residents indefinitely on suspicion alone. [Full opinion, and the dissent by a Bush appointee.] “The panel tailored its opinion to Marri’s circumstances; it does not directly apply to the more than 300 foreign nationals held as enemy combatants in the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. But lawyers for some captives noted that the same flaws the court found in the administration’s classification of Marri were true for Guantanamo detainees.”

More Subpoenas Sent.

“By refusing to cooperate with congressional committees, the White House continues its pattern of confrontation over cooperation. The White House cannot have it both ways–it cannot stonewall congressional investigations by refusing to provide documents and witnesses while claiming nothing improper occurred.” After e-mails surface showing their involvement in responding to the persecuted prosecutor fervor (and after an attempt to hold a no-confidence vote on Gonzales is derailed by the Senate GOP), former White House counsel (and Supreme Court nominee) Harriet Miers and former White House political director Sara Taylor are subpoenaed by the House and Senate Judiciary committees to ascertain what they know about the scandal. “‘This subpoena is not a request, it is a demand on behalf of the American people,’ Conyers said.”

Carter Gets it.

“I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history.” Jimmy Carter calls out Dubya’s foreign policy as the worst ever. (As noted earlier, several prominent historians have already come to that conclusion.) “Asked how he would judge [Tony] Blair’s support of Bush, Carter said: ‘Abominable. Loyal. Blind. Apparently subservient.‘” Well, maybe he’ll do better at the Bank. Update: Or does he? Carter backs down.

Friends to the Immigrant?

The big news last Friday: Dubya and the Senate came to a deal on immigration reform, although the compromise — supported by Democratic Senators Kennedy, Feinstein, and Salazar as well as Republicans such as McCain, Graham, and Martinez — faces some major implementation issues and potential fire from both sides of the issue. Among the critics: Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama: “Without modifications, the proposed bill could devalue the importance of family reunification, replace the current group of undocumented immigrants with a new undocumented population consisting of guestworkers who will overstay their visas, and potentially drive down wages of American workers.“