I love my country. I take it seriously, and take the Federal Criminal Code that is the framework of legal behavior in our country seriously. As far as I am aware, I have never violated the Federal Criminal Code. Why would I? Why would I risk arrest and imprisonment? I respect the law. Apparently, not everybody does.
On July 24th, 2003, President George Bush took an American Flag into his hands, and wrote on it. There is photographic evidence of the crime, in addition to the fact that it was witnessed by workers in a Livonia, Michigan company- Beaver Aerospace 7 Defense Inc. It was done in plain sight and the fact of its occurrence is beyond debate.
He violated Federal Criminal Code:
It’s black and white. Signing one’s name clearly falls under the stricture applied by this law. This Administration adores crowing about how they conduct themselves by the much-vaunted Rule Of Law.
The evidence has never been debated or denied, no effort has been made to alter or revise this truth. However, the President is apparently excluded from the Federal Criminal Code.
I find this fascinating. No doubt the attorneys on the Board will be happy to explain to us all, worldwide, exactly how it is that if I took a Sharpie and wrote my name across a flag, I could go to Federal Prison, whereas when George Bush writes his name across a flag, nothing at all is done.
One country. One Federal Criminal Code. One Law. Or, as they love saying, one Rule Of Law? Apparently not.
Have you managed to find out how often offences of this type are normally prosecuted?
I’m not trying to make excuses, I’m just thinking that maybe it falls under the category of “things that are technically illegal but which pretty much no one gets in trouble for”.
Just committing a crime isn’t enough to go to prison.
You have to be arrested, which is at the discretion of the district or U.S. attorney and the police.
You have to be arraigned, which brings a judge into the picture. Felonies have to be sent to a federal or district grand jury.
You have to be tried and found guilty.
You have to be sentenced to prison by a judge.
If you’re President, before any of this can happen, you have to be impeached by the House and removed from office by a Senate vote.
A reluctance to do this at any level, and the jailin’ just doesn’t happen. This happens, by the way, all the time in real life. Has a cop ever let you off with a warning?
I don’t think Bush should have signed a flag, but I’d be inclined, like most people, to shrug it off as a momentary mistake. I would feel the same way, btw, if it had been Clinton.
Writing on a flag is a criminal offense? I was always under the impression that flag etiquette was part of the Flag Code, which is official, but not enforceable, just sort of a suggestion (thus creating authoritative guidelines for flag usage without violating the First Amendment).
This reminds me of the incident where GW was giving some kind of address from a warehouse, and someone (I’m thinking it was his press people) went around and taped little pieces of paper over all the “Made in China” or “Made in Taiwan” logos on the boxes for appearances sake. This was in direct violation of federal law which requires all import designations to be clearly marked and unobscured or something along those lines. I’m having a bit of trouble finding a link to it at the moment but I’ll keep looking. IIRC, nothing was ever done about that either. I’m not saying anyone should have been thrown in shackles and carted of to solitary, but it is a bit hypocritical, no?
*The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of the members present.
Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States: but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law.*
The President has immunity from prosecution until a conviction in the Senate removes this. At that point, a criminal trial can commence.
Except that, as noted, criminal charges cannot be filed from this statute anyway.
There were at least two threads on this previously. A Reeder thread in the GD, and another in pit (not by Reeder) IIRC.
IMHO the flag rules are brainless throwbacks to ignorant times that outlawed unpopular activites that hurt nobody. Wipe your ass with the flag, for all the law should care.
There is a flaw in your assumption. You could not go to “Federal Prison” if you did what Mr. Bush did. If you’ll read the Code, you’ll see there are no penalties listed for the actions.
Obviously the point has never been put before a judge but I disagree with your interpretation. If GWB pulled out a gun and shot Laura dead in the Oval Office in front of witnesses, I don’t believe that the Washington D.C. police would pay much heed to an argument of presidential immunity from prosecution pending impeachment and conviction.
D.C. police regularly don’t arrest murderers, as any MAD can attest.
It is unclear what can be done here. In an exterme case such as this, 25th Amendment procedures could be implemented. The Cabinet could remove the President from power and cause presidential authority to devolve to the Vice-President (a la “24”).
There is precedent for criminal conviction prior to impeachment, in the case of federal judges. U.S. District Judge Walter Nixon (unlucky name there) was found guilty of several different counts of obstruction to justice, and was impeached afterward. During the interim between his conviction and impeachment, he continued to receive his judge’s salary from the U.S. Treasury while incarcerated in federal prison. There’s no reason to believe a criminal charge couldn’t issue against a President prior to impeachment; President Nixon was charged as an “unnamed co-conspirator” in the Watergate break-in. However, in the case of federal crimes, there is one thing a President can do prior to impeachment that will give him a immunity of sorts: he can pardon himself, or get the V.P. to do it after he resigns in shame.
I think the whole premise of the OP is a little off: you can burn a flag and get away with it, which is covered under the First Ammendment, but not autograph it? I think conflagrating (heh heh) the ol’ Stars and Strips seems like it would be a far greater crime/sin/whatever than a little marker.
While the OP has been shown to be wrong in the specifics of the issue, the over-arching point, that conservatives preach against “desecration” of the flag but don’t have much problem when GWB is doing the “desecrating,” is a valid one.
