Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Conyers: Why We Have to Look Back

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 05:41 PM
Original message
Conyers: Why We Have to Look Back

Why We Have to Look Back

By John Conyers Jr.
Friday, January 16, 2009; Page A19

This week, I released "Reining in the Imperial Presidency," a 486-page report detailing the abuses and excesses of the Bush administration and recommending steps to address them. Arthur Schlesinger Jr. popularized the term "imperial presidency" in the 1970s to describe an executive who had assumed more power than the Constitution allows and circumvented the checks and balances fundamental to our three-branch system of government. Until recently, the Nixon administration seemed to represent a singular embodiment of the idea. Unfortunately, it is clear that the threat of the imperial presidency lives on and, indeed, reached new heights under George W. Bush.

As this report documents, there was the administration's contrived drive to a needless war of aggression with Iraq, based on manipulated intelligence and facts that were "fixed around the policy." There was its politicization of the Justice Department; unconscionable and possibly illegal policies on detention, interrogation and extraordinary rendition; warrantless wiretaps of American citizens; the ravaging of our regulatory system and the use of signing statements to override the laws of the land; and the intimidation and silencing of critics and whistle-blowers who dared to tell fellow citizens what was being done in their name. And all of this was hidden behind an unprecedented veil of secrecy and outlandish claims of privilege.

I understand that many feel we should just move on. They worry that addressing these actions by the Bush administration will divert precious energy from the serious challenges facing our nation. I understand the power of that impulse. Indeed, I want to move on as well -- there are so many things that I would rather work on than further review of Bush's presidency. But in my view it would not be responsible to start our journey forward without first knowing exactly where we are.

We cannot rebuild the appropriate balance between the branches of government without fully understanding how that relationship has been distorted. Likewise, we cannot set an appropriate baseline for future presidential conduct without documenting and correcting the presidential excesses that have just occurred. After the Nixon imperial presidency, critical reviews such as the Church and Pike committees led to fundamental reforms that have served our nation well. Comparable steps are needed to begin the process of reining in the legacy of the Bush imperial presidency. I consider these three points crucial:

First, Congress should continue to pursue its document requests and subpoenas that were stonewalled under President Bush. Doing so will make clear that no executive can forever hide its misdeeds from the public.

Second, Congress should create an independent blue-ribbon panel or similar body to investigate a host of previously unreviewable activities of the Bush administration, including its detention, interrogation and surveillance programs. Only by chronicling and confronting the past in a comprehensive, bipartisan fashion can we reclaim our moral authority and establish a credible path forward to meet the complex challenges of a post-Sept. 11 world.

Third, the new administration should conduct an independent criminal probe into whether any laws were broken in connection with these activities. Just this week, in the pages of this newspaper, a Guantanamo Bay official acknowledged that a suspect there had been "tortured" -- her exact word -- in apparent violation of the law. The law is the law, and, if criminal conduct occurred, those responsible -- particularly those who ordered and approved the violations -- must be held accountable.

Some day, there is bound to be another national security crisis in America. A future president will face the same fear and uncertainty that we did after Sept. 11, 2001, and will feel the same temptation to believe that the ends justify the means -- temptation that drew our nation over to the "dark side" under the leadership of President Bush and Vice President Cheney. If those temptations are to be resisted -- if we are to face new threats in a manner that keeps faith with our values and strengthens rather than diminishes our authority around the world -- we must fully learn the lessons of our recent past.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ORDagnabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. blah blah blah...actions speak louder than words you spineless do nothing but say everything
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. Well then do it. He's in charge of the committee .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. He was sitting there while it all went down. Now he's got something
to say? Whatever!

By the way Conyers, that wife of yours is an embarassment to the city of Detroit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. What does Conyers' wife have to do with investigating Bush's crimes? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Nothing at all...that's why I said "by the way". Sorry if that bothered you.
I still can't understand what he's waiting for?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
curious one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
6. I am disappointed with Conyers. He is not credible with me anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Maybe if this is more talk, but
if he takes the lead in pursuing his first and second items, he has more than enough credibility to do an investigation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
steelyboo Donating Member (225 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
8. Mr. Conyers, we have a saying here in Kentucky
fool me once?, shame on me, fool me 45 times by raising my hopes that you will do what is right instead of giving it lip service?, go fuck yourself . . . but I may be paraphrasing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I love Ky., but I can't help but think, who do you all have speaking
on our behalf? Mitch?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salguine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
9. FUCK YOU, CONYERS. FUCK YOU, FUCK YOU, FUCK YOU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC