Bush and torture

[Hustle Wimmins]

Has anybody heard anything about after signing the McCain bill banning torture, Bush later made it legal to use torture under presidential orders. The way I understood the NPR story about this was that the way he did it was that it wouldn't be prosecutable by congress or the court system. Anyone else hear this?

[AuralAssassin]

He did it in a "signing letter" which is the unchecked ability for the president to add anything he wants to the bill which he signs... so basically, he advocated torture anyway...

the only check now, would be the supreme court.

[Deff Gordon]

haven't you guys seen 24??? you gotta do what you gotta do.

[AuralAssassin]

Originally Posted by nitetripp

haven't you guys seen 24??? you gotta do what you gotta do.

yet another means to keep our heads in the clouds.

[Hustle Wimmins]

Originally Posted by AuralAssassin

He did it in a "signing letter" which is the unchecked ability for the president to add anything he wants to the bill which he signs... so basically, he advocated torture anyway...

the only check now, would be the supreme court.

In between starting this thread and posting this, I did a search on NPR.org and found an audio byte on signing letters. For those who don't know, a signing letter is used when a president signs a bill that he likes overall, but may not agree with in totallity. He attaches the letter to the bill and it acts as a get out of jail free card for him and any acts covered by the letter aren't procecutable by congress. It's only procecutable by the supreme court(whom Bush Sr and W are currently packing). I was ambivalent about Bush before, but now I am not happy with the man.

[PETA]

Originally Posted by MrMentallo

In between starting this thread and posting this, I did a search on NPR.org and found an audio byte on signing letters. For those who don't know, a signing letter is used when a president signs a bill that he likes overall, but may not agree with in totallity. He attaches the letter to the bill and it acts as a get out of jail free card for him and any acts covered by the letter aren't procecutable by congress. It's only procecutable by the supreme court(whom Bush Sr and W are currently packing). I was ambivalent about Bush before, but now I am not happy with the man.

"Packing the Court" is generally a reference to FDR's threat to increase the number of seats on the court and fill them with enough of his supporters to shift the court's opinion to permit his Depression era expansion of Executive power and authority. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_packing

What GW is doing is what every President does when a vacancy opens - it is neither novel nor new or odd nor any other attribution you'd like to give it. It is par for the course if I may make a golfing metaphor

[AuralAssassin]

Alito is turning out to be a lot less of a conservative activist than he was portrayed as, as well.

I totally fucking hate Bush, but Alito is a good guy for the job, it seems.

Originally Posted by xian

"Packing the Court" is generally a reference to FDR's threat to increase the number of seats on the court and fill them with enough of his supporters to shift the court's opinion to permit his Depression era expansion of Executive power and authority. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_packing

What GW is doing is what every President does when a vacancy opens - it is neither novel nor new or odd nor any other attribution you'd like to give it. It is par for the course if I may make a golfing metaphor

[PETA]

Originally Posted by AuralAssassin

Alito is turning out to be a lot less of a conservative activist than he was portrayed as, as well.

I totally fucking hate Bush, but Alito is a good guy for the job, it seems.

Alito is an Originalist judge though he was a conservative advocate (advocates argue for a preferred outcome) - the difference is that a conservative activist like a liberal activist may well have a preconceived notion of what they would like the outcome to be and shape their interpretation of the law to fit that outcome.... Originalists look at what the law says and render a decision on that basis. Originalists give more deference to the elected branches and will go so far as to permit horrible results if that is what the law permits or directs... again, owing to that deference, the horrible result permissible at law must be corrected by the legislature so that it doesn't yield that horrible result - not by the bench.

[AuralAssassin]

I tend to agree with this. I'm not pro-abortion, but I'm also pro-choice. I would never try and influence someone to make any decision unrelated to myself. That being said, I think Abortions are covered NOT in the US Constitution, but are a state issue.

Originally Posted by xian

Alito is an Originalist judge though he was a conservative advocate (advocates argue for a preferred outcome) - the difference is that a conservative activist like a liberal activist may well have a preconceived notion of what they would like the outcome to be and shape their interpretation of the law to fit that outcome.... Originalists look at what the law says and render a decision on that basis. Originalists give more deference to the elected branches and will go so far as to permit horrible results if that is what the law permits or directs... again, owing to that deference, the horrible result permissible at law must be corrected by the legislature so that it doesn't yield that horrible result - not by the bench.