Bill Press insists upon rule-of-law:
There's no doubt Bush and Cheney broke the law, in several areas. Within days of Sept. 11, Bush gave orders for the NSA to tap the phones of American citizens without getting a warrant from the FISA court. That was clearly against the law, and Bush and Cheney knew it.
When Ambassador Joe Wilson embarrassed Bush by exposing the lies he told about Iraq's seeking to purchase yellowcake uranium in Niger, the Bush White House retaliated by unmasking his wife's identify as an undercover CIA agent. That was clearly against the law, and Bush and Cheney knew it.
When the first "terrorist suspects" were rounded up in Afghanistan and Pakistan, they were brought to Guantanamo Bay, where some of them were tortured. The use of torture, in fact, has now been confirmed by Susan Crawford, the top Bush administration official in charge of deciding whether to bring Guantanamo Bay detainees to trial. Torturing prisoners of war – even if it's called "enhanced interrogation techniques" – is clearly against both U.S. law and international law, and Bush and Cheney knew it.
And the list goes on. Clearly, George Bush and Dick Cheney violated many of the laws they took an oath to uphold. The question is whether they should be prosecuted for their crimes or simply allowed to walk away.
The answer, I believe, depends on whether we believe in the rule of law or not. If we do, there's no choice: The Justice Department must prosecute. Otherwise, we send the dangerous message that, once you achieve a certain level of political power in this country, you can operate outside the law with impunity.
He left out the fact Bush waged war(s) without a Congressional declaration, violating the very clear Constitution, surely a bigger crime than the ones Press mentions.
Of course, we all know what the outcome will be. There will be no trial. There is no rule of law in this country—hasn't been for many, many years. Those in power do pretty much what they want, and the rest of us take it up our—
Above the law
Bush Jr. governed as if he were above the law far too often. However, lots of people complained about it, including Congress, SCOTUS, and the press. Obama-the-Usurper has taken this power to a whole new level, completely ignoring any rule-of-law. What's worse is that very few are complaining about it. The pansies in Congress, with few exceptions (one?), are gleefully coasting into tyranny. The SCOTUS is a joke, of course—has been for a very long time. The members of the mainstream press can't seem to catch their breath between their frenetic spasms of worship of their messiah, so they're not saying anything about the total abandonment of rule-of-law.
Truly, we have arrived. Any hint of the Republic is gone. We're an oligarchy now. The distinguishing factor, I think, is the death of rule-of-law. The oligarchy is above the law, not subject to it. This has been building for a while, of course, as Congress exempted itself repeatedly from the effects of its stupid legislation. The President has long exempted himself from being subject to the law...at least since Lincoln if not earlier. Even the press didn't sell out so easily, though, as it was mildly critical of Clinton and his constant foibles. With no governmental institution (and no Fourth Estate) embracing the rule of law, it seems a joke to consider us a Constitutional Republic anymore.
The Republic is dead. Long live the Usurper.