Instead of splitting hairs and trying to find distinctions without a difference, how about we just go with the obvious “The President shall act as Emperor in all cases where The President is a member of the party known as the Republican”?
-Joe
Not straight away. He has to send a minion out for a copy of the Constitution and the US Code and write ‘none of this applies to me’ across them for it to be perfectly legal.
Yep. These are the titles of the Code:
TITLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS
TITLE 2 THE CONGRESS
TITLE 3 THE PRESIDENT
TITLE 4 FLAG AND SEAL, SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATES
TITLE 5 GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES
TITLE 5A GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES (APPENDIX)
TITLE 6 SURETY BONDS [REPEALED]
TITLE 7 AGRICULTURE
TITLE 8 ALIENS AND NATIONALITY
TITLE 9 ARBITRATION
TITLE 10 ARMED FORCES
TITLE 10A ARMED FORCES (APPENDIX)
TITLE 11 BANKRUPTCY
TITLE 11A BANKRUPTCY (APPENDIX)
TITLE 12 BANKS AND BANKING
TITLE 13 CENSUS
TITLE 14 COAST GUARD
TITLE 15 COMMERCE AND TRADE
TITLE 16 CONSERVATION
TITLE 17 COPYRIGHTS
TITLE 18 CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
TITLE 18A CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (APPENDIX)
TITLE 19 CUSTOMS DUTIES
TITLE 20 EDUCATION
TITLE 21 FOOD AND DRUGS
TITLE 22 FOREIGN RELATIONS AND INTERCOURSE
TITLE 23 HIGHWAYS
TITLE 24 HOSPITALS AND ASYLUMS
TITLE 25 INDIANS
TITLE 26 INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
TITLE 26A INTERNAL REVENUE CODE (APPENDIX)
TITLE 27 INTOXICATING LIQUORS
TITLE 28 JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
TITLE 28A JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE (APPENDIX)
TITLE 29 LABOR
TITLE 30 MINERAL LANDS AND MINING
TITLE 31 MONEY AND FINANCE
TITLE 32 NATIONAL GUARD
TITLE 33 NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS
TITLE 34 NAVY [REPEALED]
TITLE 35 PATENTS
TITLE 36 PATRIOTIC AND NATIONAL OBSERVANCES, CEREMONIES, AND
ORGANIZATIONS
TITLE 37 PAY AND ALLOWANCES OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES
TITLE 38 VETERANS’ BENEFITS
TITLE 38A VETERANS’ BENEFITS (APPENDIX)
TITLE 39 POSTAL SERVICE
TITLE 40 PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS
TITLE 40A PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS (APPENDIX)
TITLE 41 PUBLIC CONTRACTS
TITLE 42 THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE
TITLE 43 PUBLIC LANDS
TITLE 44 PUBLIC PRINTING AND DOCUMENTS
TITLE 45 RAILROADS
TITLE 46 SHIPPING
TITLE 46A SHIPPING (APPENDIX)
TITLE 47 TELEGRAPHS, TELEPHONES, AND RADIOTELEGRAPHS
TITLE 48 TERRITORIES AND INSULAR POSSESSIONS
TITLE 49 TRANSPORTATION
TITLE 50 WAR AND NATIONAL DEFENSE
TITLE 50A WAR AND NATIONAL DEFENSE (APPENDIX)
It’s a bis thing - each individual title may have hundreds of sections and paragraphs. And there are not civil or criminal penalties associated with every one of these - in fact, most of these carry no penalty from what I’ve seen, but as I’m not a lawyer, I’m not an expert on such.
Impaling him on the Washington Monument would be nice. Y’know, like spindling a receipt. We could get a pretty tall stack of scumbags on that obelisk. One vulture to another: “Politicians on a stick?!”
Presidents seem to have immunity unless you go after them while they’re in office. Sure, they forced Nixon out but had that information come to light the day after he completed his term? Ancient history! I have to think that those who prosecute such things are looking to make political hay, i.e. oust the guy and his cronies, not get justice for John Q. Public.
Can’t he just use Bush’s copy?
He could but he’s probably prefer not to after all that gratuitous ass-wiping.
We’ve covered this more than once. If Presidents were immune except while in office, Ford would not have bothered pardoning Nixon.
Presidents are not immune. The maximum penalty Congress may impose on a President is removal from office. The removed President may then be prosecuted under criminal law, or, as in the case of Clinton, be subject to civil penalties (such as fines or disbarment) as well.
Of course, this kind of thing when applied to Bush tends to founder on the hard rocks of lack of evidence of any civil or criminal wrong doing. So we hear mostly calls for more investigations.
Only five more months of this to go. Unless McCain wins, in which case no doubt we will be investigating the Bush administration until the Republicans regain control of Congress. It’s not like Pelosi and company can achieve much of anything else.
Regards,
Shodan
Or he could employ another tactic, one of my personal favorites from the Bush files:
Get the Justice Department to advise you to do something illegal. Then, when someone says you should be prosecuted, the Justice Department can say that it would be unethical for them to prosecute you for doing something they advised you to do.
Sadly the Democrats are too spineless. I think 8 relentless years of gloves-off, what goes around comes around, is what the Republicans need to make a two-party system work. I’d like, but don’t expect them to launch a Ken Starr intense look under every available rock and prosecutions by the score up to and including Bush.
If Clinton can be got at for lying about something trivial under oath then by god these bastards can be investigated for their crimes. If Susskind’s allegations have any weight then they should be investigated and if it turns out he’s made it all up and doesn’t have tapes then his ass needs a good kicking too.
Alright, let’s hear the tapes. If it was on the record, there should be no problem releasing them.
I think he’s waiting for the Congressional supoena.
Everybody seems to have their own pet reason why Bush won the 2000 election. To me, it’s pretty clear that there were 50,456,002 reasons he won.
I thought there were five.
And they were all appointed by Republicans.
And 50,996,116 why he lost and Gore won.
I’m going with five people in black robes as well.
Bush won the electoral vote. You can say it was because of the scotus but that’s still through legal process. Saying Gore won just because he got more of the popular vote is wrong and immature.
I understand the electoral vote just fine.
You, however, cited the popular vote so I cited the same stat back at you. Seemed fair to me.
And if you don’t like black robed people calling the election then my vote goes to Ralph Nader. I’d bet all the money I have in the bank if he had not split the ticket Gore would have clearly won. Nothing illegal or wrong there…just saying.
Oh, fer Pete’s sake, this thread is not about the 2000 election. Let it go. It’s 2008, and they’re not going to go back and change it now. History may or may not vindicate us. This is about Ron Suskind’s book and Bush’s alleged lies connecting Iraq with 9/11.
Each of those individuals had their own personal reason to vote for him, and because they voted the way they did, he won. And you didn’t just cite the same stat back. You said Bush lost and Gore won.
You said, “…there were 50,456,002 reasons he won.”
You did not cite the electoral vote for why he won but the popular vote. If that is the measure, which you put out, then Bush lost and Gore won with more of the popular vote. Left unsaid was the vagaries of how the electoral college works and the reasoning of five judges as the ultimate answer to why Bush won.