YOO: Bush Can Expand War To Iran & Syria - "WITHOUT CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION"

[kpete]

John "Torture" Yoo

The Justice Department lawyer who helped draft many of the legal authorities after September 11 used by the White House to justify intensive interrogations, John Yoo, yesterday said he did not agree with Mr. Biden's reading of the Constitution with regard to hot pursuit.
"As a matter of practice and history, presidents have used force abroad without any congressional authorization," Mr. Yoo said in an e-mail to The New York Sun, "including the war in Kosovo, which I do not recall Senator Biden challenging as a violation of the Constitution."

http://www.nysun.com/article/46598?page_no=2

[Warren DeMontague]

1. Is that John "Torture" Yoo?

He tortures me.

[Patsy Stone]

3. The very same.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Patsy%20Stone/2

[Patsy Stone]

2. Okay, I've already had more than enough of him.

He lives to dismantle the Constitution.

I suggest he be the next to enlist. :puke:

[fooj]

30. Just add him to the long list...

OF WAR CRIMINALS!

[Patsy Stone]

57. That list is much too long.

Get them out of there!

:hi:

[jelly]

4. Prediction: "John Yoo: Worst Person In the Woooorld!"

:)

[napi21]

5. It's not only Biden saying this! Johnathan Turley, a Constitutional

law prefessor at Georgetown University, said much the same as Bidenlast week on Olberman's show. Woo has misinterpreted the Constitution many times in the past, and I sure trust Turley's interpretation awhole lot more that some nitwit from the Shrub group!

[lady lib]

6. Well, Sen. Biden begs to differ.

SEN. BIDEN: Madame Secretary, I just want to make it clear, speaking for myself, that if the president concluded he had to invade Iran or Iraq in pursuit of these -- or Syria -- in pursuit of these networks, I believe the present authorization granted the president to use force in Iraq does not cover that, and he does need congressional authority to do that. I just want to set that marker.

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001869.php

[BrotherBuzz]

7. A brief primer designed to help you understand the workings of our new, streamlined American system

Perhaps you have been unable to follow the intricacies of the logic used by John Yoo, the UC Berkeley law professor who has emerged as the president's foremost apologist for all the stuff he has to apologize for. I have therefore prepared a brief, informal summary of the relevant arguments. - JON CARROLL

Why does the president have the power to unilaterally authorize wiretaps of American citizens?

Because he is the president.

Does the president always have that power?

No. Only when he is fighting the war on terror does he have that power.

When will the war on terror be over?

The fight against terror is eternal. Terror is not a nation; it is a tactic. As long as the president is fighting a tactic, he can use any means he deems appropriate.

Why does the president have that power?

It's in the Constitution.

Where in the Constitution?

It can be inferred from the Constitution. When the president is protecting America, he may by definition make any inference from the Constitution that he chooses. He is keeping America safe.

Who decides what measures are necessary to keep America safe?

The president.

Who has oversight over the actions of the president?

The president oversees his own actions. If at any time he determines that he is a danger to America, he has the right to wiretap himself, name himself an enemy combatant and spirit himself away to a secret prison in Egypt.

But isn't there a secret court, the FISA court, that has the power to authorize wiretapping warrants? Wasn't that court set up for just such situations when national security is at stake?

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court might disagree with the president. It might thwart his plans. It is a danger to the democracy that we hold so dear. We must never let the courts stand in the way of America's safety.

So there are no guarantees that the president will act in the best interests of the country?

The president was elected by the people. They chose him; therefore he represents the will of the people. The people would never act against their own interests; therefore, the president can never act against the best interests of the people. It's a doctrine I like to call "the triumph of the will."

But surely the Congress was also elected by the people, and therefore also represents the will of the people. Is that not true?

Congress? Please.

It's sounding more and more as if your version of the presidency resembles an absolute monarchy. Does it?

Of course not. We Americans hate kings. Kings must wear crowns and visit trade fairs and expositions. The president only wears a cowboy hat and visits military bases, and then only if he wants to.

Can the president authorize torture?

No. The president can only authorize appropriate means.

Could those appropriate means include torture?

It's not torture if the president says it's not torture. It's merely appropriate. Remember, America is under constant attack from terrorism. The president must use any means necessary to protect America.

Won't the American people object?

Not if they're scared enough.

What if the Supreme Court rules against the president?

The president has respect for the Supreme Court. We are a nation of laws, not of men. In the unlikely event that the court would rule against the president, he has the right to deny that he was ever doing what he was accused of doing, and to keep further actions secret. He also has the right to rename any practices the court finds repugnant. "Wiretapping" could be called "protective listening." There's nothing the matter with protective listening.

Recently, a White House spokesman defended the wiretaps this way: "This is not about monitoring phone calls designed to arrange Little League practice or what to bring to a potluck dinner. These are designed to monitor calls from very bad people to very bad people who have a history of blowing up commuter trains, weddings and churches." If these very bad people have blown up churches, why not just arrest them?

That information is classified.

Have many weddings been blown up by terrorists?

No, they haven't, which is proof that the system works. The president does reserve the right to blow up gay terrorist weddings -- but only if he determines that the safety of the nation is at stake. The president is also keeping his eye on churches, many of which have become fonts of sedition. I do not believe that the president has any problem with commuter trains, although that could always change.

So this policy will be in place right up until the next election?

Election? Let's just say that we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. It may not be wise to have an election in a time of national peril.

[lady lib]

11. PERFECT! n/t

[pberq]

22. Fantastic!

[woodsprite]

26. That reads like a Neocon Catechism. n/t

[teriyaki jones]

33. This needs to be its own thread!

Who is Jon Carroll? Sounds more like Lewis Carroll's "Through the Looking Glass"

tj

[BrotherBuzz]

43. San Francisco Chronicle columnist

The best we have to offer after the late great Arthur Hoppe passed on. He does great work for Salon.com, too.

The Obligatory Biography

Born Good Samaritan Hospital in Los Angeles, the same hospital where Bobby Kennedy died. Pre-baby boom by 1.3 years. Raised up by his mama in Pasadena mostly. Prep school education at the Webb School of California in Claremont, where he learned to have deeply ambivalent feelings about rich people.

University of California for 1.6 years, where he majored in experimental chemistry and biology in a non-classroom setting. Left one step ahead of the law and got a job on the Chronicle editing the crossword puzzle, writing the capsule summaries of TV movies ("Still his best work" -- Greil Marcus in a conversation with the author) and interviewing third rate entertainment celebrities.

Rolling Stone, 1970, assistant editor. Rags, 1971, editor. Oui, 1972, editor. Village Voice, 1974, West Coast Editor. Now that was a cushy job. Consulting editor, WomenSports magazine. New West magazine, 1978, editor. National Magazine Award, 1979. Forced retirement and extended period of contemplation indistinguishable from full-scale depression, 1981.

First Chronicle column, October something, 1982. Winner of several awards, none of them alas attached to any financial windfall. Notorious for cat columns and Commie pinko screeds. Longevity a surprise to management and labor alike.

Oakland resident since 1982; On-line since 1987; salaried and deal in a service. Cowardly world traveler; ignorant gardener; fully qualified to operate a stick-shift. Store in a warm, dry place. Rapier wit sold separately.

[teriyaki jones]

45. Thanks, BrotherBuzz. n/t

[proud patriot]

46. That sums it up nicely

:hi:

[cool user name]

54. That is mad funny ...

I love the circular type arguments exhibited.

Thanks for posting, BrotherBuzz.

[spanone]

8. Mr. Yoo wipes his ass with our constitution.

[ClayZ]

9. Fuck Yoo!

[mmonk]

12. excellent

:rofl:

[Hubert Flottz]

27. Yoo's ClayZ about Nazism.

[mzmolly]

50. Ahh, that's rich.

:)

[lovuian]

10. WHO IS HE??? My friend has Interpretation of this too

and she says Biden is right!!! and isn't the American People's OPINION count Mr. Who the Hell are you YOO...

:rofl:

[alcibiades_mystery]

13. Yoo doesn't believe that ANY presidential action requires Congressional approval

He's a monarchist of the Old School.

[shadowknows69]

14. So that would mean we're definitely going

the chimp think's he's above the law again and he has people helping him feel that way. Fucked we are.

[librechik]

15. Yoo is an idiot

and has always been wrong on this issue. He has no credibility.Please, leave him out of the discourse!
Eh, they had to find SOMEBODY who would speak for the president's deranged ideology--Yoo is a similar clueless cretin.

[BurtWorm]

17. Oh yeah?! Well, *you* is a...a..

Oh.

Never mind.

:blush:

[librechik]

19. I be a genius! n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

16. Nevertheless, I could envision an Abbott and Costello style routine.

"Yoo approves of torture?"

"No, I don't!"

"But Yoo said torture is okay!"

"I never said that!"

"But Yoo did!"

[jelly]

59. ah, hahaha, I'd love to see that on SNL

[scarletwoman]

18. That's why the AUMF must be REPEALED immediately!

Even without John Yoo's apologetics for dictatorship, the AUMF continues to be a magical, bottomless well that produces an unending supply of justifications for an infinite variety of assaults on our Constitution and our entire planet.

Forget impeachment, forget investigations, do something NOW! Demand that our Congress repeal/rescind their blank check. Some truly awful things are going to happen if bushco isn't stopped, this is serious.

sw

[in_cog_ni_to]

20. They WANT a Constitutional challenge/crisis. They have every intention

of bringing one on too.

Too bad Congress holds the power of the purse. Maybe the psycho and his cohorts can pay for the freakin' invasion of Iran with all the money they've bilked from the citizens of this country.:grr:

No money appropriated = no war.

[mmonk]

21. Too bad the congress obviously doesn't want one since

we're already in one.

[aquart]

32. Does George think the Supreme Court will declare him king?

[in_cog_ni_to]

34. Yes, he does.

And if they don't, he always has his signing statements to declare himself a King/Dictator.:( What a nightmare.

[Leopolds Ghost]

23. Where are the UC Berkely students against the war?

Why aren't they organizing a boycott of Yoo's classes?

Too focused on their fucking careers?

[Hubert Flottz]

24. Yoo Who...

I can't stand Yoo!

[BurtWorm]

25. He makes it all up as he goes a long.

That's why he's such a "brilliant" right wing lawyer.

:eyes:

[Hubert Flottz]

29. Who died and made Yoo Gawd?

[BurtWorm]

36. Yoo did.

:crazy:

[Hubert Flottz]

48. Dang Yoo!

Are Yoo trying to start some Shiite?

I'll say p?ss on Yoo!

[aquart]

28. Not exercising a power doesn't mean the power does not exist.

Similarly, invading a nation does NOT automatically convey the RIGHT to invade that nation.

John Yoo needs to be treated to each and every one of the powers he's given to George. And then I want him walled up with George and Lieberman forever. I'm just not feeling nice today.

[polmaven]

53. May we please

throw Dead-eye into that cell too? President Cheney may be even more dangerous than what we've got now.

I know, I know....but .....Brrrr!:scared:

[malaise]

31. Take him out in chains

straight to prison. These fascists have gone mad.

[quiet.american]

35. "...Kosovo"? Weren't we in alliance with NATO on that? What is Yoo talking about? n/t

[The Stranger]

37. "History and practice" where -- Nazi fucking Germany?

[madrchsod]

38. well....he just maybe right

teddy sent the great white fleet, fdr started this in 1943, carter, and reagan opened the door. the only thing the congress can do is withhold the funding of the war. if the democrats are serous about this they better start changing the reasons why we are there in the first place.if it was`t for our need for their oil would anyone want to die for sand?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carter_Doctrine

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/retire_the_carter_doctine.php

[shance]

42. Turn the tables. This Administration needs to prove how this is not an illegal war.

That or the people of America file a lawsuit and/or stop paying their taxes because our Congress has falsely represented where our funds are going and for what purpose?

[Jersey Devil]

44. FDR? In 1943?

Maybe Belushi was right - The Germans did bomb Pearl Harbor.

[madrchsod]

47. yup...he meant with the saudi king about oil

during the war. roosevelt was worried because he did`t want the us reserves to be depleted because of the war. he looked to the saudi`s as a reserve to fight ww2. at that time we were the largest producer of oil in the world. this crap did`t start overnight

[FourScore]

39. Does anyone know if Yoo

is a signator or the PNAC? Just curious.

[FourScore]

40. Can't wait to disbar this guy and throw him in jail for war crimes. n/t

[Kelly Rupert]

41. Unsurprising.

Yoo's been a longtime supporter of a "unitary executive" theory, in which the President hold monarchial power.

[LSK]

49. Im telling you, Biden sees a Constitution Crisis as his ticket for 08

[robertpaulsen]

51. Has the War Powers Act ever been challenged before SCOTUS?

Not that I want to see that happen with the Court stacked with Bush appointees. But how can anyone say the War Powers Act is not Constitutionally sound?

[cap]

52. Yoo please stop torturing the Constitution!

Stop waterboarding Congress! Stop putting this country in stress positions.

The War Powers Act limits what the President can commit to without Congressional Approval. Congress can express forbid spending money on such foolishness as well.

I think Yoo is part of the unitary executive crowd.

[Jack Rabbit]

55. Off to The Hague with the war cirminal!!

United Nations Prison, The Hague

[Marnieworld]

56. There's a cell waiting for you at the Hague Mr. Yoo

He is a very evil person. What a waste.

[Parche]

58. kosovo

Was not an illegal invasion
The US and most of its allies went in with UN troops along with NATO

[leveymg]

60. I guess Yoo wants to make himself an Accessory Before The Fact to yet another Crime

Against Humanity.

He's on the A-List for indictment.

[Zhade]

61. Only in your mind, Yoo. The world disagrees.

And that WILL be made real fucking clear!

[sakabatou]

62. Hey YOO!

STFU!