Cheney Echoes Nixon: If The President Does It During Wartime, It Is Legal»

[ALien]

On Fox News Sunday today, host Chris Wallace asked Vice President Cheney, “if the President, during war, decides to do something to protect the country, is it legal?” “I think as a general proposition, I’d say yes,” replied Cheney.

Cheney went on to defend the administration’s actions over the past eight years:

CHENEY: There are bound to be debates and arguments from time to time and wrestling back and forth about what kinds of authority is appropriate in any specific circumstances, but I think that what we’ve done has been totally consistent with what the Constitution provides for.

Cheney’s answer is eerily reminiscent of former President Richard Nixon’s claim that “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” Nixon made the comment in his famous interview with David Frost, responding to a question about whether “there are certain situations” in which “the president can decide that it’s in the best interests of the nation or something, and do something illegal.”

Though Cheney thinks the administration’s actions have been “totally consistent with what the Constitution provides for,” numerous courts have ruled that the Bush administration has overstepped the bounds of the Constitution:

– In June 2004, The Supreme Court dealt a setback to the Bush administration by refusing to endorse the claim that “the government has authority to seize and hold suspected terrorists or their protectors and indefinitely deny them access to courts or lawyers while interrogating them.”

– In June 2006, the Supreme Court “rolled back the sweeping powers appropriated by the Bush administration in the war on terror, ruling it could not order military trials for Guantánamo detainees without the protections of the Geneva convention and American law.”

– In August 2006, U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled that “the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance program is unconstitutional, delivering the first decision that the Bush administration’s effort to monitor communications without court oversight runs afoul of the Bill of Rights and federal law.”

It’s ironic that Cheney’s Nixon comment came during an interview with Chris Wallace, considering that Cheney recently thanked Wallace for defending the Bush administration against comparisons to Nixon.

Transcript:

WALLACE: This is at the core of the controversies that I want to get to with you in a moment. If the president during war decides to do something to protect the country, is it legal?

CHENEY: General proposition, I’d say yes. You need to be more specific than that. I mean — but clearly, when you take the oath of office on January 20th of 2001, as we did, you take the oath to support and defend and protect the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

There’s no question about what your responsibilities are in that regard. And again, I think that there are bound to be debates and arguments from time to time, and wrestling back and forth, about what kind of authority is appropriate in any specific circumstance.

But I think that what we’ve done has been totally consistent with what the Constitution provides for.

READ MORE

[kidflash2008]

Cheney did admit to a war crime when he said he gave water boarding the OK. No one is calling for his or Bush's impeachment for their allowing torture. I guess if a BJ and an intern was involved, there would be hell to pay.

[raves475]

Why don't we the people ever get to vote on these issues? I thought this was our country not the governments. Like when we elect a new president, we like to think we're hiring them for a job, but I guess it's like giving an interview to somebody and then hiring them not only as your boss, but also as your mother and father.

[Mingus]

Representative democrasy. That's what the US has. Cheney has, not surprisingly, said almost exactly what Nixon said because he worked for him. He thinks exactly the same way Nixon did. Now, we're in the position we are because when Nixon lost, they let the Democrats have it until Lyndon Johnson left office. The undeniable support for civil rights (the hallmark of LBJ's administration, despite the allegations of corruption) and the love people had for Kennedy kind of made it a Democrat's paradise at the time.

They took that time to construct, allegedly, a plan that would allow them to enact martial law and become a dictatorship, essentially. It started with Reagan (an actor) who did a good job at masking open racism (or so it seems, with those high approval ratings, despite the fact he apparently scared the bejeezus out of everyone). It also helped that he had Alzheimer's. Made his speeches sound less racist, because no one would suspect it, and who would? He's got Alzheimer's. From what I've heard, they could have flashbacks to wars they never were in and then proceed to piss in the neighbor's garden.

For the layout of the plan I alluded to, here's a link. Read the Voice of the White House.

[kidflash2008]

The United States is a republic, not a democracy. Democracies are not a good form of government as majority rule does not let the minority have a say. Plus, do you really want the MTV crowd who couldn't tell you where most countries are located to run the country? There are many checks and balances in place that are supposed to stop a President from becoming a dictator. It was used when President Nixon broke the law, and was used when President Clinton lied about his BJ. President Nixon resign before impeachment, and Clinton was cleared of wrongdoing. The process tarnished both Presidents' terms, and they both worked harder to help with their images.
Unfortunately, the Congress and the Judiciary have not called out this administrations wrongdoing. It will be up for the history books to decide as any action taken by the new administration would look like they are out to get the Bush Administration. It should have been started while he was in office.