'Bush may be crossing the Rubicon from republic to dictatorship'

[Guest guest]

Fri, 17 Feb 2006 02:09:27 -0500

'Bush may be crossing the Rubicon from republic to dictatorship'

S

 

 

Miles Mogulescu: 'Bush may be crossing the Rubicon from republic to

dictatorship'

 

Posted on Thursday, February 16 @ 10:10:45 EST

Miles Mogulescu, The Huffington Post

 

Through the justifications it has put forth for warrentless

wiretapping, the Bush administration is almost literally crossing the

Rubicon, beginning the process of transforming the United States from

a republic into to a presidential dictatorship.

 

The warrantless wiretapping is dangerous, illegal and unconstitutional

by itself. These are criminal acts by the President, and in and of

themselves warrant impeachment and removal from office (whether or not

impeachment is politically practical under a Republican Congress.)

 

But the Administration's feeble rationales justifying this program are

even more dangerous. Bush and his surrogates claim that the President

has the constitutional right, as part of his inherent powers as

Commander-In-Chief during a time of war (an endless war in this case)

to do anything he chooses to do if he believes it protects national

security. In short, Bush claims the power of a dictator.

 

Where could this power grab lead? President Bush and his surrogates

have proclaimed many times that opposition to the Iraq war is

dangerous, demoralizes the troops, encourages the enemy, and threatens

America's chances for victory. If Bush believes that opposition to the

war threatens national security, why doesn't he have the right to act

against opponents to the Iraq war to protect national security?

 

 

 

Apparently government agents have already spied on a small Quaker

peace group. Why then shouldn't Bush have the power to wiretap the

phones of Iraq war opponents from Rep. Murtha to Cindy Sheehan? Why

shouldn't he have the right to infiltrate anti-war groups with

government informants? Why can't he place agent provocateurs in

anti-war groups to incite violent demonstrations in order to discredit

the anti-war movement which is harming national security? Why can't he

burglarize the offices of psychiatrists of leading anti-war figures to

find information with which to discredit them? Why can't he break into

the offices of the Democratic National Committee?

 

Wait a second; the government has already done all of these things in

the recent past. It was called Watergate and the COINTELPRO Program

(which lasted from 1956-71. The founding document of COINTELPRO

directed FBI agents to " expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or

otherwise neutralize " groups and individuals that opposed U.S.

government policy. The COINTELPRO program was investigated by a

bi-partisan Senate Select Committee whose final report stated that the

FBI " conducted a sophisticated vigilante operation aimed squarely at

preventing the exercise of First Amendment rights of speech and

association, on the theory that preventing the growth of dangerous

groups and the propagation of dangerous ideas would protect the

national security and deter violence. " The Senate investigation led,

among other things, to the passage of the FISA act which required a

warrant from a special court in order for the government to place

domestic wiretaps.

 

The Administration's rationale for warrantless wiretapping could

justify the reinstatement of any or all of the illegal activities of

the old COINTELPRO Program and the Watergate burglars. Even Nixon's

lawyers never claimed a constitutional power for the President to act

unilaterally in war time without regard to the Congress and the Courts

(although Nixon once famously said, " If the President does it it's not

illegal. " ) Bush provides the rationale to go even further. Since the

President has the right to take all actions he thinks necessary to

protect national security, why couldn't he censor newspapers that

oppose the Iraq War? Why couldn't he arrest Iraq war opponents, and

hold them without charges and without the right to a trial until he

decides that the " War on Terror " is over? Taken to the extreme, why

couldn't he torture Iraq war opponents based on his signing statement

to the McCain anti-torture Amendment which states that the President

can bypass this law if he believes doing so protects national security?

 

I'm not saying that these things will happen. I'm saying that Bush's

theory of President's unilateral war time powers could justify such

actions and more.

 

The Bush administration's legal theories are an invitation for denying

Americans their basic democratic rights. The American people must be

shown the danger. This should not be a Democratic vs. Republican issue

nor a liberal vs. conservative issue. It should be an issue for all

Americans who care about the survival of our republic. If Bush can't

be stopped now from wiretapping Americans without a warrant, then this

could be the beginning of the end of democracy in America as we know

it. Hopefully Congress and the courts, with pressure from the American

people, will overrule Bush's assertion of dictatorial power.

 

Copyright 2006 © HuffingtonPost.com, LLC

 

Source: The Huffington Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miles-mogulescu/bush-may-be-crossing-the-_b_15756.\

html