Is the Pentagon violating the law?
So Blognonymous asks... First: Is this a violation of the McCain Amendment's requirements. Second: Does Bush think he's going to get away with it, again, because he issued a signing statement? And third: Is this the test case that we've been waiting for?
who knew they would do this to themselves
Hamas Militants Storm Palestinian TV Facility
Dhana:When one is an unrestrained unitary executive, one feels that one is untouchable by the laws of the land.
Why am I not surprised?!
I think that you're an anonymous coward who believes that inserting off-topic news from Bu$hCo's propoganda arm (i.e., Faux News) is somehow going to change minds around here.
Perhaps you'd have the courage to tell us who you are?
Those signing statements--very weak.
Bush can't even keep Mary Cheney on the reservation any more. He's done.
Sumo, I think that, as with so many things, they're trying to stall any final announcement till a time when noone's looking.
SA, "Dread Pirate Roberts" LOL! Living like a king in Patagonia, huh?
"The executive branch shall construe Title X in Division A of the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power, which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President, evidenced in Title X, of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks."
In general the statement says he intends to ignore the law whenever he wishes.
Knighterrant, it certainly looks that way doesn't it. Actually there have been a number of congressional pushes over the last 2 years that have attempted to relax the law to conform to powers that Bu$hCo has already claimed, legal or not.
Hey, and thanks for the text of that signing statement.
What time is it? and Is Dick Cheney anywhere near the building?