Secret Bush memos made public by Obama

Secret Bush memos made public by Obama

www.msnbc.msn.com

Document says no warrant needed to search and seize terror suspects

WASHINGTON - The Justice Department on Monday released a long-secret legal document from 2001 in which the Bush administration claimed the military could search and seize terror suspects in the United States without warrants.

The legal memo was written about a month after the Sept. 11 terror attacks. It says constitutional protections against unlawful search and seizure would not apply to terror suspects in the U.S., as long as the president or another high official authorized the action.

Even after the Bush administration rescinded that legal analysis, the Justice Department refused to release its contents, prompting a standoff with congressional Democrats

(visit the link for the full news article)

Whew, this guy REALLY wanted to do the worst job he could of done. He spent 8 years just picking apart our government, more then it already was. What happen to the investigations on the Wire tappings... Did they just fade away?

SOMEONE needs to try this man for war crimes, and the plethera of other charges that i couldn't even gather the energy to full post.

www.msnbc.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Agreed.

Bush showed a flagrant disregard for Constitional Law and human rights when he was in...

Unfortunately, Obama isn't doing much to break the mold.
Sure, he is speaking of correcting things... Like closing Gitmo, setting withdrawl date and releasing memos..
But he has already said he doesn't want anyone to pursue charges and he is ramrodding the Bush bailout doctrine down our throats.
After all, as Thomas Jefferson said, economic manipulation is more dangerous than standing armies in regards to liberty.

Obama isn't any better, thus far.

They all need to go. We need to replace the CONgress with PROgress.

[edit on 2-3-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

Even within the founding fathers there was debate over such issues, and with more extreme positions on both sides. So, the fact that some may disagree with the view and relative course Bush took means nothing in establishing what's "right", that is subjective.

Obama may be the Executive now, yet releasing internal arguments is detrimental, one cannot give free opinions if he, or she, may be held liable, perhaps not criminally, but politically, academically, socially etc... after the fact. Regime change in Washington is common, watching one's back after the pendulum swings is petty and stupid. Decisions had to be made, and they were, and the results achieved (domestically). Looking retroactively through a biased view and criticizing is premature and irresponsible, but it does make for good politics.

As eloquent as you try to make yourself, you are deliberately obfuscating the issue.

The issue isn't whether George W. Bush thinks that the Constitution would allow him to hold a terror suspect without cause...

The issue is the fact that "terror suspect" is an undefined term.

The issue is that George W. Bush thinks that he can hold ANYONE HE DEEMS FIT without cause.

AND THIS is what is unconstitutional.