If his war policies and decision-making process are investigated, especially regarding treatment of detainees and warrantless wiretapping, President Bush is expected to invoke Executive Privilege. So, heres a little historical perspective to trigger your memory cells: FROST: So what in a sense, you're saying is that there are certain situations, and the Huston Plan or that part of it was one of them, where the president can decide that it's in the best interests of the nation or something, and do something illegal. NIXON: Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal. FROST: By definition. NIXON: Exactly....
Source: US v Nixon, 1974, excerpts from the David Frost interview http://www.landmarkcases.org/nixon/nixonview.html <http://www.landmarkcases.org/nixon/nixonview.html> For those of you who lived through this era, does this also sound familiar? ISG Report leaves Bush more isolated http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16179691.htm <http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16179691.htm> As the 109th Congress walks into history (good riddance), Pres. Bush is finding that GOP lawmakers are no longer willing to be silent accomplices, as did Oregons Sen. Gordon Smith, who faces reelection in 2008 in a blue state. Now that the GOP is in the minority, Bush has few supporters left within government. His most ardent supporters besides Cheney - remain the unelected architects of war, who are ironically contributing to the further ideological split of the party urging Bush to reject the ISG proposals. The White House is working to dispel any sense that Bush43 is in denial, depressed or detached. Spokesman Tony Snow has described the Decider as aggressive and assertive regarding the policy review and change in direction forced on him by voters Nov. 7, 2006 and the Bush41 rescue team. But after a private meeting with Bush about the ISG report, Democratic party leaders expressed frustration that he just doesnt get it: Bush began the meeting by comparing his to Harry Trumans presidency, preoccupied with his legacy, not focused on the immediate problem in the present that needs work, desperately. Democrats frustrated by Bush's reaction to Iraq report By William Douglas and Margaret Talev, McClatchy Newspapers, Friday, December 8, 2006 WASHINGTON - Top Democrats in Congress left a White House meeting with President Bush on Friday frustrated over what they perceived as his reluctance to embrace major recommendations from the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. Democrats stressed to Bush in separate meetings the dire need for the administration to revamp its Iraq policy, but they don't expect him to embrace all 79 recommendations made this week by the panel, which was chaired by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind. Bush said he talked about "the need for a new way forward in Iraq" in his morning session with leaders from both parties and chambers of Congress, "and we talked about the need to work together on this important subject." But some Democrats came away unconvinced that major changes were coming. "I just didn't feel there today, the president in his words or his demeanor, that he is going to do anything right away to change things drastically," Senate Majority Leader-elect Harry Reid, D-Nev., said following the Oval Office meeting. "He is tepid in what he talks about doing. Someone has to get the message to this man that there have to be significant changes." Instead, Bush began his talk by comparing himself to President Harry S Truman, who launched the Truman Doctrine to fight communism, got bogged down in the Korean War and left office unpopular. Bush said that "in years to come they realized he was right and then his doctrine became the standard for America," recalled Senate Majority Whip-elect Richard Durbin, D-Ill. "He's trying to position himself in history and to justify those who continue to stand by him, saying sometimes if you're right you're unpopular, and be prepared for criticism." Durbin said he challenged Bush's analogy, reminding him that Truman had the NATO alliance behind him and negotiated with his enemies at the United Nations. Durbin said that's what the Iraq Study Group is recommending that Bush do now - work more with allies and negotiate with adversaries on Iraq. Bush, Durbin said, "reacted very strongly. He got very animated in his response" and emphasized that he is "the commander in chief." Bush had a friendlier afternoon meeting with leaders from the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of 44 conservative House Democrats united primarily on fiscal conservatism. Bush apparently was feeling them out to see if their political agenda could dovetail with his. But even they stressed that they expect to see him revamp Iraq policy. "Obviously, he was most passionate in defending his position on Iraq," said Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark. "But we made it clear to him that the American people are ready for a new direction in Iraq. I think he's open to that. Maybe not all 79, but I think you'll see some of the recommendations from the Iraq Study Group implemented in the coming months." Bush has been cool to some of the report's main recommendations. He's said he won't deal with Iran until it verifiably suspends its nuclear enrichment program and won't sit down with Syria until it stays out of Lebanon's political affairs and prevents the flow of weapons and cash to insurgents in Iraq. And Bush has stressed many times that U.S. troops will stay in Iraq until they successfully complete their mission. Bush's reluctance to embrace the group's report may be reinforced by leading conservatives' strong opposition to it. The conservatives, who are important to his political base, particularly objected to the recommendation for direct talks with Iran and Syria. "Insult is added to injury with the absurdity that Iran and Syria then become members of something called the Iraq Support Group," said Bill Bennett, a leading conservative moralist. Dan Schnur, a Republican strategist in California, said the conservative reaction "may give the White House a little bit more political security to not embrace the entire report. That would have been much harder to do had there been broader bipartisan support for the panel's recommendations." Yet the conservatives' reaction is out of step with that of most Americans. Dissatisfaction with Bush's handing of Iraq has reached an all-time high of 71%, according to a new AP-Ipsos poll. A strong majority favors withdrawal of U.S. troops, with 60% favoring a 6-month deadline. In that environment, if Bush and conservatives insist on essentially staying the course in Iraq, they risk marginalizing themselves from mainstream opinion. That could be politically hazardous for Republicans in the 2008 presidential campaign, which begins in earnest 13 months from now. http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16198013.htm <http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16198013.htm> But, lest you think only partisans found Bush43 preoccupied with self, there was this from Lawrence Eagleburger, the hawkish former Sec. of State to Bush41 (who replaced Gates on the ISG after Gates was nominated to replace Rumsfeld cant these guys EVER find a new person of gravitas NOT associated with Reagan/Bush?) Did the conservative brain trust skip a generation? Minutes after the Iraq Study Group placed an improvised explosive device beneath the Bush administration's Iraq policy yesterday, panel member Lawrence Eagleburger was asked how President Bush reacted to the recommendations. "His reaction was, 'Where's my drink?' " the former secretary of state cracked after the commission's White House visit and Capitol Hill news conference. Reaching for his own cola, Eagleburger continued: "He was a little loaded. It was early in the morning, too, you know." The retired diplomat certainly did not mean that the president had fallen off the wagon. But if any event would call for a stiff one, this was it: A bipartisan group of elder statesmen some of them friends of Bush's father, no less had just concluded that the Iraq war, the centerpiece of Bush's presidency, was a disaster with no easy way out. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/06/AR2006120601 903.html <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/06/AR200612060 1903.html>
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
