Replies: 32 Comments

Comment #1: cali said on 4/27/06 @ 7:23pm ET...

Thank you Congressman Conyers
I don't think that thank you is enough
for all you do. If there's anything we can do please let us know
You are truly amazing

Comment #2: MAX 1 said on 4/27/06 @ 7:52pm ET...

Thank you Congressman Conyers,

You are a true patriot to the American governing system. Accountability to the people IS a patriotic duty when one acts as a civil servant.

I am a firm believer that those in high places MUST be held to high standards. Mistakes like this aren't mistakes when the decision made was made by the highest paid elected Official of the land.

The Oath of the President requires the president to uphold the law, not thumb his nose at the law, when he sees fit or how he deems it necessary to do so. Just like evidence, the president can not pick and choose which laws he wishes to uphold and which laws to ignore and which laws to remake into his idea of US Law.

Comment #3: unspun said on 4/27/06 @ 9:26pm ET...

Thank you Congressman Conyers!

Will the lawsuit address the issue of whether the altered version of the bill was deliberately sent to the White House, or that it may have been signed with the knowledge that it was the altered version? I'm just curious as these issues were raised in the Wall Street Journal Article and in Representative Waxmans Statement of March 30.

Comment #4: Nolip said on 4/27/06 @ 11:00pm ET...

Bush signs something into law that isn't a law as both Houses of Congress don't pass the same bill because he's the emperor and the decider so he decides to do whatever he pleases...what's next..Bush sets Congress on fire?

Congressman Conyers, please continue to hold this Administration accountable for its shameless disregard for the laws of this land which Bush swore to uphold but has shone in his two term fiasco how much he truly disdains the law.

Comment #5: DTW 06 said on 4/27/06 @ 11:01pm ET...

Congressman Conyers,

Thank you and the other courageous Americans who have stood up for accountability. I have always been taken aback by the hypocracy of those who claim to be "tough on crime" while simultaneously robbing the American people. And to think this is starting in Detroit, and state legislators around the country.

Could this be the beginning of a government "of the people."

"A government deriving its energy from the will of society...is the government for which philosophy has been searching, and humanity been fighting, from the most remote ages." - James Madison

QuestionItNow

Comment #6: DTW 06 said on 4/27/06 @ 11:11pm ET...

He's the "Decider."
He's a Divider.

Not a planner,
just a scammer.

Not a thinker,
a luster of power.

Do it his way
or hit the highway.

He declaired "Mission Accomplished"
at the kick-off of this War.

We must all pick up after him
Isn't that the greatest sin?

R.E.B.

Comment #7: DTW 06 said on 4/27/06 @ 11:13pm ET...

"In World War II, the complete defeat of all enemies of the United States and its coalition of allies was inevitable approximately three years after the beginning of hostilities.

In the American Civil War, the turning point took place in 1863 at Gettysburg, approximately two years after the start of hostilities.

In World War I, the turning point happened when 3 Million American soldiers arrived and turned the tide of the 3 year long stalemate. The war was over about one year later.

Our Revolutionary War turned after about 3 years.

The War on Terror, which has a start date of September 11, 2001, has now gone on for four and one-half years, and the beginning of the war is not over yet. ..."

From OhioDem1's How to Sell A War

Comment #8: Kitty Gambler said on 4/28/06 @ 2:48am ET...

Since all the plaintiffs and all the defendents maintain offices in Washington DC, wouldn't it make a lot more sense to file the lawsuit in that juridiction instead of in Detroit?

Someone please enlighten me.

Comment #9: koryannder said on 4/28/06 @ 7:07am ET...

I'll do something for this topic after I post my last comment from two threads ago, because it answers a question and outs an important point of view in play.

Clapton #14 No "Documentation per se, but I think the info is pretty good - I was referring to the article"Blood is thicker than Blackwater" by Jeremy Scahill on pp 11-18 0f the May 8 edition of The Nation. I quote from the last paragraph on p.12 "According to former Blackwater officials, Blackwater, Regency, and ESS were engaged in a classic war-profiteering scheme. Blackwater was paying its men $600.00 a day but billing Regency $815.00, according to the Raleigh News and observer.(emphasis added)

As to the 0.7 kiloton TNT explosion in the Nevada desert, while it would make an impressive plume, and scatter fallout for quite a distance downwind, and while it may be excellent theatre, it will be of real value only to DuPont, Hercules, or whoever is producing the explosives. As a data source, it would be very limited, because, as nukes go, it is rather a trifle. I cannot help but think that it is designed to impress Iranians, and as such, would be a dismal failure. The problem with the current Administration, as with most western Administrations, is that they simply cannot believe the twin characteristics of middle eastern thought coupled with Islamic belief, and so can lead themselves into incredible contretemps. I refer to the attitudes "Never forgive! Never forget!" and "Human life is valueless." AND "Everything that happens is as Allah wills it!" It is totally impossible to defeat that combination, and the sooner our jerks in power recognize that, the sooner we'll get out of the morass they have gotten us into. Believers in the Islamic creed will fight to the very last Iraqi or Iranian, and consider that God willed it thus. They will NOT accept defeat. The only sane thing we can do is pull out, before their irregular troops arrive here. So there.

Now as for the arrogance of power, which simply does what it feels like because it can, see Susan Douglas' "Back Talk" piece in the May "In These Times" entitled "Congenital Liars and Hypocrites." She puts the whole schmear into neat perspective in a single page. The FACT is that you can not believe anything this "Administration" says - and a ship of liars deserves sinking. THIS is the POINT that should be made in EVERY "Opposition" political speech from now to November; "How can you trust a Government to Govern wisely, when you cannot trust a word it says?"

Comment #10: Truth_in_action said on 4/28/06 @ 8:26am ET...

I just want to add my thanks again, Congressman JC. Please keep the pressure on this President and Administration.

President Bush is in a huge dereliction of duty by signing this into law. He swore to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." In this case (and others) he knowingly abused that trust. Here is his oath of office. I do not know whether he use the word "swore" or "affirmed" or how that change in wording might make any difference. Does anyone know?

Kitty #8 I was wondering about jurisdiction, too, but I'm sure there is a very good reason. We'll wait and see.

Comment #11: JRH said on 4/28/06 @ 8:33am ET...

Thank you for being a human bent on justice and truly fulfulling the ideals of your office, Mr. Conyers. I can't say it enough.

Comment #12: Truth_in_action said on 4/28/06 @ 8:43am ET...

BradBlog obtained a copy of the Complaint before filing and has a timeline as well. Unspun, #3, check it out and see if the wording you are looking for is in it. I haven't had time yet to look it over.

See both Complaint (prior to filing) and timeline here.

Comment #13: Ohiodem1 said on 4/28/06 @ 9:50am ET...

TIA # 10 - He swore on a stack of 3 bibles.

What a . . . I cannot think of an appropriate word. Hypocrite or hubris are insufficient to describe it.

Rep. Conyers, good that you are challenging this unconstitutional behavior. Do you think the Orginalists will stand with you on this? Or will they be stonewalling Republicans?

Comment #14: Nolip said on 4/28/06 @ 10:28am ET...

"OFFICIAL IMPEACHMENT TEXT

WHEREAS, Jefferson's Manual section LIII, 603, states that impeachment may be set in motion by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State; and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has intentionally misled the Congress and the public regarding the threat from Iraq in order to justify a war against Iraq, in violation of Title 18 United States Code, Section 1001 and intentionally conspired with others to defraud the United States in connection with the war against Iraq in violation of Title 18 United States Code, Section 371; and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has admitted to ordering the National Security Agency to conduct electronic surveillance of American civilians without seeking warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, duly constituted by Congress in 1978, in violation of Title 50 United States Code, Section 1805; and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has conspired to commit the torture of prisoners in violation of the UN Torture Convention and the Geneva Convention, which under Article VI of the Constitution are part of the "supreme Law of the Land"; and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has acted to strip Americans of their constitutional rights by ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to legal counsel, without charge and without opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the President of a U.S. citizen as an "enemy combatant", all in subversion of law; and

WHEREAS, In all of this George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, subversive of constitutional government to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the State of ___ and of the United States.

Be it resolved that George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States. "

Be It Resolved: You Can Impeach the President

Comment #15: unspun said on 4/28/06 @ 10:36am ET...

TIA, #12: Thanks for the link. I will be carefully reading the Bradblog post.

I'm listing to the new Neil Young album right now--it's powerful.

Comment #16: Alma said on 4/28/06 @ 10:58am ET...

USA Today has an article on JCs' law suit against the Pres.
11 House members to sue over budget bill

Comment #17: Amos said on 4/28/06 @ 12:10pm ET...

Thank you Congressman Conyers for your hard work on finding these criminals in the administration and keeping them on the run, smoking them out, and all of the other clichés used by this administration in the name of national security. They can run but they cannot hide with American justice on their heels. Thank you again, sir.

Comment #18: ljm said on 4/28/06 @ 1:23pm ET...

Good thinking JC and good luck!!

Comment #19: Citizen J said on 4/28/06 @ 2:21pm ET...

JC, you continue to be DA MAN. Endless thanks for your honesty, integrity, and honor during a time in which they are sorely lacking in most of our "honored" representatives and senators.

John Conyers, House Judiciary Chair. Say it a couple of times, savor it. Delicious, isn't it...

Comment #20: Rusty said on 4/28/06 @ 3:07pm ET...

It's very encouraging that JC hauling Bush into court for violating the Constitution is getting a lot of attention.

It's even more encouraging that January 2007 isn't all that far away, and we're going to get to watch busloads of subpoened Bushites hauled into the Judiciary Committee hearing room to explain under oath to Chairman John Conyers Jr. why they are so fond of fascism, treason, torture, bankrupting the country, spying on innocent Americans, bribes, stealing elections, obstruction of justice, racism, corruption, fraud, warmongering, war profiteering, drowning American cities, crucifying the middle class, poisoning the earth, infesting federal agencies with criminally incompetent cronies, and spending a lot of quality face time with hookers.

In a related development, Neil Young's new album, which is debuting today all over the Internets, provides plenty of extra motivation and inspiration for those of us weary of GOP fascism, treason, torture, bankrupting the country, spying on innocent Americans, bribes, stealing elections, obstruction of justice, racism, corruption, fraud, warmongering, war profiteering, drowning American cities, crucifying the middle class, poisoning the earth, infesting federal agencies with criminally incompetent cronies, and spending a lot of quality face time with hookers.

Next week, if JC records an album and Neil Young takes Bush to court, we could shut down this fascist GOP government ahead of schedule so Tahoe could finally get some rest.

Comment #21: bill_o_carolina said on 4/28/06 @ 3:37pm ET...

Fantastic Mr. Conyers! Thank you for your unwavering efforts to defend and protect our democracy from the Fascists occupying our WH!
You are an American hero!

Comment #22: clbrune said on 4/28/06 @ 4:21pm ET...

If I recall, the differences between the bills are minor; however, the law is the law. I'm glad Congressman Conyers, and others, are trying to uphold our laws.

Probably would have had five more democrats, but they got arrested in Sudan for protesting genocide (of course, no Republicans joined in...party of Values, I guess)

Comment #23: unspun said on 4/28/06 @ 4:47pm ET...

I first heard about the fact that the President had "signed the wrong Bill" when I took an estate planning class. The lawyer in answering a Medicare question at the end of class stated that the signed version of the bill affected payment for durable medical equipment. Also, he said that lawyers weren't totally sure how to advise their medicare clients because of the legal issues with the Bill. He said "it's a mess". So, what's minor for some could be a big issue for others.

Comment #24: Doug Kenline said on 4/28/06 @ 5:22pm ET...

Representative Conyers,

As you may not be aware or perhaps are aware, one of your fellow members of Congress now has a blog ranked along with yourself among the best at Lawmakers.

I think it would be the right thing to do as the longest blogging member of Congress to make a post welcoming Congressman Jack Kingston to the blogosphere and sending a little bit of traffic his way.

Jack Kingston is the only other member of Congress besides yourself who meets the stringent requirments to be ranked among the best at Lawmakers.

Please recognize Congressman Jack Kingston for his blogging efforts in your next post.

Thank you very much.

Comment #25: cali said on 4/28/06 @ 8:12pm ET...

U.S.: FBI Sought Info Without Court OK
FBI secretly sought data on 3,501 people in ’05
The FBI secretly sought information last year on 3,501 U.S. citizens and legal residents from their banks and credit card, telephone and Internet companies without a court's approval, the Justice Department said Friday.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12536627/

Comment #26: Reed31463 said on 4/28/06 @ 9:41pm ET...

Thank you Congressman Conyers.

What a way to stop the funding of this administration. Walk up to the rotten apple cart, look at the two two wheels and see that someone put on an eliptical wheel on one side and a square one on the other, then kick both of them off.

And now for your listening pleasure, Soapbox4truth is a proud host of Neil Young's "Living With War" now streaming at Soapbox.

Comment #27: DTW 06 said on 4/28/06 @ 9:51pm ET...

#25 - Cali,

How may of those people were honest Americans standing up for the constitution? Will we ever know?

Comment #28: DTW 06 said on 4/28/06 @ 10:37pm ET...

"Age of Anxiety
2 Comments:

re: NSA "probable clause" issue Hayden spun out on yesterday:

In June, 2002, Republican Sen. Michael DeWine introduced legislation (S. 2659) which would have eliminated the exact barrier to FISA Hayden was abusing yesterday.

DeWine's legislation to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to modify the standard of proof for issuance of orders regarding non-United States persons from probable cause to reasonable suspicion. . . .

In other words, DeWine’s bill could have eliminated the "probable cause" barrier claimed by Bush cabal in their latest spin.

The Bush administration, in response, provided a Statement from James A. Baker,who "prepares and presents all applications for electronic surveillance and physical search under the Act to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court or Court)."

Baker, in his written statement, blatantly bragged about the Patriot Act on the ground that the 72-hour window stated IN the Patriot Act gave Bush the speed and flexibility he needed:

"The reforms in those measures (the PATRIOT Act) have affected every single application made by the Department for electronic surveillance or physical search of suspected terrorists and have enabled the government to become quicker, more flexible, and more focused in going “up” on those suspected terrorists in the United States.

... One simple but important change that Congress made was to lengthen the time period for us to bring to court applications in support of Attorney General-authorized emergency FISAs. This modification has allowed us to make full and effective use of FISA’s pre-existing emergency provisions to ensure that the government acts swiftly to respond to terrorist threats. Again, we are grateful for the tools Congress provided us last fall for the fight against terrorism. Thank you."

The Baker statement:

The Department of Justice has been studying Sen. DeWine’s proposed legislation. Because the proposed change raises both significant legal and practical issues, the Administration at this time is not prepared to support it.

Soooo…in 2002 the Administration refused to support elimination of the very barrier (”probable cause”) which Gen. Hayden claimed yesterday necessitated the circumvention of FISA. Doing so, they identified two independent reasons for opposing this amendment. The Justice Department was not aware of any problems:

"The practical concern involves an assessment of whether the current "probable cause" standard has hamstrung our ability to use FISA surveillance to protect our nation. We have been aggressive in seeking FISA warrants and, thanks to Congress’s passage of the USA PATRIOT Act, we have been able to use our expanded FISA tools more effectively to combat terrorist activities. It may not be the case that the probable cause standard has caused any difficulties in our ability to seek the FISA warrants we require, and we will need to engage in a significant review to determine the effect a change in the standard would have on our ongoing operations. If the current standard has not posed an obstacle, then there may be little to gain from the lower standard and, as I previously stated, perhaps much to lose."

Baker, who headed the FISA warrant program was not aware of any difficulties in obtaining warrants under the FISA "probable cause" standard, and the Administration did not support the DeWine amendment to do so.

"The Department’s Office of Legal Counsel is analyzing relevant Supreme Court precedent to determine whether a “reasonable suspicion” standard for electronic surveillance and physical searches would, in the FISA context, pass constitutional muster. The issue is not clear cut, and the review process must be thorough because of what is at stake, namely, our ability to conduct investigations that are vital to protecting national security. If we err in our analysis and courts were ultimately to find a "reasonable suspicion" standard unconstitutional, we could potentially put at risk ongoing investigations and prosecutions.

Bush Administration’s statement via Gen. Hayden as to why it was necessary to bypass FISA is a complete falsehood. Their current statement that the "probable cause" component of FISA was preventing it from engaging in the eavesdropping it needed is the opposite of what it told Congress when refusing to support the DeWine Amendment as documented by the Baker statement submitted to Congress in 2002.

The Baker/Dept. of Justice document is on the record here: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_hr/073102baker.html

By Begonia Buzzkill, at 3:11 PM, January 25, 2006

Hello Begonia,

So now they plan to have Alito in place just in time for the challenges to the executive branch's power grabs to reach the Supreme Court. Will the Democrats show some spine this time?

Thank you for visiting QuestionItNow
REB 84

By REB 84, at 10:49 PM, January 25, 2006

Comment #29: tahoebasha1 said on 4/28/06 @ 10:55pm ET...

Well, JC, looks like your danders really up! But, you know, this can't be the first time your "area" has been encroached upon, now can it? I.e., Congress authorized the use of military force in Iraq, if necessary, but did Congress authorize a declaration of war on Iraq? But good for you, anyway!

Knowing fullwell what escape artists we are dealing with, I can see it all now: attempted counterclaims, endless continuances, requests for change(s) of venue, requests for substitution of attorneys, endless discovery and responses thereto, and attempts at summary judgment. But, nonetheless, it is good, for if nothing else, it puts the Exec. Admin. on NOTICE! So, GOOD for you!

Comment #30: Truth_in_action said on 4/28/06 @ 10:58pm ET...

Jason Leopold of Truthout.org writes that Fitzgerald has already written up indictments for Karl Rove that he plans to present to the grand jury next week for their vote.

Jason states that Rove's attorney has now received a "target" letter about the potential indictments. Luskin, Rove's attorney, is not responding to calls about this story. You know if Luskin is not spinning a reply, then he's all out of spin!

Read the article here.

Comment #31: Alma said on 4/29/06 @ 11:21am ET...

TIA you just made my day. Time to make more cookies I think.

#24 Doug Kenline, The links for Congressman Jack Kingston didn't work for me.

#26 Reed, Cool, we have music now.

Comment #32: Doug Kenline said on 4/29/06 @ 1:48pm ET...

Yes apparently the Jack Kingston blog is having some technical difficulties. He's got himself a pretty decent blog when it works. Keep trying.

I might have to de-list him if he can't keep his act together over there.