CNN Vid Clip via C&L...Alan Dershowitz: Bush broke the law

Alan Dershowitz: Bush broke the law



Appearing on the Situation Room, Alan slammed King George over the wiretapping scandal.

Video-WMP

Video-QT

Wolf: Did the President break the law?

Alan: I think the President broke the law. I think congress should hold hearings...

The only talking points I've heard by the likes of "Newt" is to attack the NY Times over publishing this story. I almost agree with the wingnuts this time. They should have published it last year.

Ameriablog weighs in...

7:01:43 PM Comments (272) permalink7:01:43 PM

.. said the same thing.

Bush broke the law.

Nobody seems to be able to say the I word, though.

I will.

Impeach and convict the bastard!

Sue

Or someone outside the Justice Department investigating and assessing the criminal actions of the Bush administration.

Refusing to report for duty in TANG was a start. He believes he is above the law and has been allowed to get away with it since day one. He is dismantling the Constitution one amendment at a time. Soon the Bill of Rights will be a distant memory if he isn't stopped.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/dershowitz/Articles/torturewarrants.html

"Actually it was a rebirth, because half a millennium ago torture warrants were part of the law of Great Britain. They could be sought only in cases involving grave threats to the Crown or the Empire and were granted in about one case a year. Judges even in those times, were extremely reluctant to authorize the thumb screw.

Why then should we even think about returning to an old practice that was abolished in England many years ago. The reason is because if we ever did have a ticking bomb case - - especially a ticking nuclear bomb case - - law enforcement officials would in fact resort to physical force, even torture, as a last resort. In speaking to numerous audiences since September 11th - - audiences reflecting the entire breadth of the political and ideological spectrum - - I have asked for a show of hands as to how many would favor the use of non-lethal torture in an actual ticking bomb case. The vast majority of audience members responded in the affirmative. So have law enforcement officials to whom I have spoken. If it is true that torture would in fact be used in such a case, then the important question becomes: is it better to have such torture done under the table, off the books and below the radar screen - - or in full view, with accountability and as part of our legal system? This is a very difficult question with powerful arguments on both sides. On the one hand, we have had experience with off the book policies such as President Nixon’s “plumbers” and Oliver North’s “foreign policy initiatives”. In a democracy, accountability and visibility must be given high priorities. On the other hand, to legitimate torture and make it part of our legal system, even in extreme cases, risks reversion to a bad old time when torture was routine."

I think we will read many reports of esteemed law professors arguing Bush broke the law.

But it's OK for the President to break the law it's part of the powers inherent in his office. Just ask REALLY great minds like William Kristol. :puke: