Comments on: Government's Battle Of The Branches

Andrew Cohen: Congress Is Suffering For Not Standing Up To The White House

[feelfree1]

jdweymouth,

Re: "1.As I said before, treason is clearly defined in Article III in the United States constitution as:

"a. Levying war against the United States"

Fraudulently seizing power by way of election fraud, and dismantling the U.S. Constitution seems to meet this criteria.

"b. Giving aid and comfort to its enemies."

Bush routinely offers such support to Cheney, Gonzales, Rice etc. This clearly qualifies.

Re: "2. He did not lie. There were no cell in Iraq, but neither are there any in Syria, because they don%u2019t need to operate as a cell in these countries."

Hard to tell what the *** your are talking about here, but the Bush League case for war was unmistakably based on a mountain of known lies.

Re: "3. There is no such thing as an illegal war."

Wars which conform to applicable international law and to the U.S. Constitution, are by definition, legal. Wars based in deception, hatred, fear, ignorance, and which violate such laws, are not legal, as I have already explained to you.

[feelfree1]

jdweymouth,

Re: "4. I don't like Kissinger at all"

Agreed.

Re: "5. In the comment made by Goering, your point was that Bush has dragged us along in a war where he claims we have been attacked. We have been attacked many times over. Our embassy in Lebanon, our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the U.S.S. Cole in South Africa, the 1993 bombing of the WTC, and finally the WTC on 9/11. We have been attacked. They started it, and we're going to finish it."

You are pretty mixed up about chronology and about the perpetrators here. I suggest that you set your blind hatred and fear aside and do some reading.

Re: "Don't you want it to come to a victorious conclusion?"

What the hell are you talking about?

[jdweymouth]

"I would never accept an illegitimate treasonous fraud as my leader"-posted by feelfree1

1.As I said before, treason is clearly defined in Article III in the United States constitution as:
a. Levying war against the United States
b. Giving aid and comfort to its enemies.

2. He did not lie. There were no cell in Iraq, but neither are there any in Syria, because they don%u2019t need to operate as a cell in these countries. Why? Because it%u2019s not illegal.

3. There is no such thing as an illegal war.

4. I don't like Kissinger at all, but I could have used different words. Those words were exaggerations. He is definitely anti-American like many others in State.

5. In the comment made by Goering, your point was that Bush has dragged us along in a war where he claims we have been attacked. We have been attacked many times over. Our embassy in Lebanon, our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the U.S.S. Cole in South Africa, the 1993 bombing of the WTC, and finally the WTC on 9/11. We have been attacked. They started it, and we're going to finish it. Don't you want it to come to a victorious conclusion?

[regkearney]

The American people returned a majority of Democrats to Congress because they want to see a change of policy not symbolic acts such as non-binding resolutions.

Senator McCain is correct: those opposed to not a War on Terror but Bush's misguided adventure ought to vote to cut off funding for an escalation of American forces in Iraq.

Remember it took twenty years before American "leaders" accepted the reality that US forces could not win in another country's civil war. They could only contribute to the body count.

[feelfree1]

ObservantX,

Re: "These PNAC thugs have been kicking us in the face ever since the 2000 election. It's time to kick back!"

Indeed it is!

[observantx]

To be very brief: Congress needs to grow a pair and a spine. What are they so timid about? They can supeona, request documents under the freedom of information act and many other avenues of securing testimony and information. This genuflecting at the door of the Oval Office must cease! There are supposed to be three EQUAL branches of government. The Congress needs to start acting like an equal and demand that Herr Gonzalez comply with their requests for information and not settle for anything less.

These PNAC thugs have been kicking us in the face ever since the 2000 election. It's time to kick back!

[feelfree1]

jdweymouth,

Re: "I don't call for a disgracful American withdrawl from Iraq"

Whether you call for it or not, the damage has been done, and the outcome of the illegal lie-based misadventure remains the same.

Re: "Kissinger is an immoral lier, and I don't care about what he says. I wouldn't truts him if he said good morning."

Hey, look at that! We agree on something!

Re: "all I said is you should give your leader more support"

I would never accept an illegitimate treasonous fraud as my leader.

www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html

Re: "we know where liberals stand on morals in regard to their country don't we?"

Speak for yourself. I don't know this, but I am not very interested either.

[jdweymouth]

ADDENDUM-feelfree1: Kissinger was the one who let the Vietnamese dictate terms after Vietnam, I have never cared for him.

[jdweymouth]

feelfree1:
I'm disgracing myself? That's comedy. I don't call for a disgracful American withdrawl from Iraq, I don't criticize any sitting president in the way you do (never have, never will), I don't call for peace in harmony in the face of an ememy that makes Hitler look like a nice guy.

About your Kissinger quote; Kissinger is an immoral lier, and I don't care about what he says. I wouldn't truts him if he said good morning. I didn't say you instigated war; all I said is you should give your leader more support. Nobody is trying to make you support your country in the face of an enemy that hates you. Why would they? That would be a moral thing for you to do, and we know where liberals stand on morals in regard to their country don't we?

[feelfree1]

jdweymouth,

"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy." -- Henry A. Kissinger

You are disgracing yourself.

[feelfree1]

jdweymouth,

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

[jdweymouth]

Part 2/2
It isn't the Bush who began usurping the power of congress; it was Franklin Roosevelt, and later Kennedy. Every president since then has made use of the wide powers, but these powers are not without limits. Bush has done nothing more to widen the breach than ay other president before him. As a matter of fact, the last one that abused worse than GWB could even hope to was: Bill Clinton, and he abused it so badly that there was talk of making constitutional amendments limiting the president's traditional powers. Anyway, congress still has much power collectively, but they don't see a need to exercise some of it, specifically: the power of impeachment, and removal from office. George Bush hasn't done anything worthy of impeachment: he invaded Iraq with congressional approval, the spy programs are directed against terrorists and it it's extremely hard to mistake a terrorist from something else, and all those in Gitmo: the authorities got warrants. You say he "lied", you mean he made a mistake? He didn't know there were no WMDs (there may or may not have been, but we didn%u2019t find them), but you claim he did. The only thing that supports these allegations is your unfounded hatred. This is a fact; the president of the United States deserves more support from within. No, you give him hatred, and give our enemies sympathy. As I said: professional ethics.

[jdweymouth]

Part 1/2
Rafterman1, SusanHelit, feelfree1:
First of all, the only way to commit treason is to give aid and comfort to the enemy, or to levy war against the United States. That's written in Article III of the constitution. You obviously don't know what you're talking about when you say "checks and balances", and "Bush has thrown aside our constitution".

If a foreign national comes to the U.S. to levy war against it, they don't have any rights, if a citizen is found to be doing the same, they are guilty of treason. Funny you don't mind the idea of loyal Americans, who are trying to protect your freedom, getting thrown in prison with no rights, but you can't stand it when foreigners or traitors are imprisoned: professional ethics. Your constant complaining and statements such as those things I%u2019ve covered, this could be considered giving aid to the enemy. That borders treason. The Hague and Geneva conventions stipulate that uninformed guerrillas, and insurgents are not provided protection by those particular commissions, so the administration isn't guilty of anything. Your conspiracy theories, and accusations that the war is being played is so baseless, I don't know how even morons could come up with it.

[oleander8]

Don't be too smug, Mr Cohen. All the news medias should also be suffering for not reporting that "the emperor has no clothes". You all suffer a huge credibility challenge.

[susanhelit]

There's very good reason for separation of powers that the founding fathers set up.

Destroying it, ignoring it, calling it foolish as the Bush administration does should be getting every true American up in arms.

[rafterman1]

"while war-crimes and treason proceedings are prepared against him"

That's not far off the mark. Direct and knowledgable violation of the constitution by the executive is considered treason. They are walking the borderline. Will Bush and company turn back before it is too late? I have to believe even Republicans in congress are getting tired of being told they are meaningless.

[feelfree1]

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has thumbed his nose at U.S. obligated international treaties, U.S. law, and the U.S. Constitution.

He has overseen the justification of torture, wrongful imprisonment, mass-murder, and the routing of our Bill of Rights. He has openly admitted to ignoring restrictions on spying on Americans, because he found the applicable laws to be too restrictive. Gonzales has zero legitimate authority to do any of these things.

Gonzales should be hog-tied on the Senate floor, and immediately shipped to Guantanimo Bay, while war-crimes and treason proceedings are prepared against him.

[bluestardad]

GOD bless you Nancy; You are hitting a nerve keep it up. Swing the Sword of Truth and all corruption will fall before it! Corrupt Republicans, Gay Bashing, anti gay sausage smoking fundamentalist Preachers, Page Porking, American Soldiers being Killed for Oil and Halliburton Contracts, Mark Foley, Mr. Hammer, shooter Cheney and the Bend over Bush Boy TexasDickTater! Hey Spud Boy, Take that If you aren't for us you are against us sound bite and pound it upyourasssideways America is not buying it!