Bush Declares He's Not Bound By Provisions in the India Nuclear Cooperation Law He Just Signed

[bigtree]

Signing Statement on India Nuclear Bill Says Bush's Approval Doesn't Mean He'll Follow Letter of Law


Bush India signing statement raises Congress concerns

2006/12/21
By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent

Reuters - WASHINGTON: A statement by President George W. Bush issued in connection with the just-signed U.S.-India civil nuclear cooperation law has raised concerns that Bush may try to circumvent some of Congress' intentions, lawmakers and analysts say.

In the statement, Bush said his signature "does not constitute my adoption of the statements of policy (in the law) as U.S. foreign policy." Also in responding to reports mandated by Congress, he would consider how releasing data requested by lawmakers might "impair foreign relations."

In one of its most controversial directives, Congress stipulated in the law that presidents should report annually on India's cooperation in restraining Iran's nuclear program, which Bush has condemned as a major international threat.

"With his recent signing statement, once again the president has shown he views Congress as a nuisance rather than an equal branch of government under the Constitution," said Sen. Thomas Harkin of Iowa, a Democrat whose party will control a majority of the new Congress to be sworn in next month.

It was "outrageous that the president has repeatedly stated the greatest threat to U.S. national security is a nuclear Iran, yet explicitly rejects Congress' declaration that it shall be the official policy of the United States that India will not use its nuclear technology to help develop Iran's nuclear weapons arsenal," Harkin said in a press release.

In the statement, Bush also said he considered as only "advisory" a congressional directive prohibiting nuclear transfers to India that conflict with guidelines of the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, which the United States helped establish years ago to restrain nuclear trade.

report: http://mathaba.net/rss/?x=547597



http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[acmavm]

1. NO ONE is above the law. He intends to break the law. He has

the two elements necessary for convicting him of a crime. Mens rea (a guilty mind) and then once he transfers the necessary technology, actus rea (the guilty act itself).

[kikiek]

2. As if his past actions weren't enough, his recent ones are leaving Congress

no option but to impeach. The war would have been enough but he is kindly firming up any doubts some may have had.

[Bridget Burke]

3. Weren't they the "Rule of Law" folks?

I've even heard that phrase parrotted at DU.

[magellan]

4. Congress needs to start including its own statement in legislation to Bush**

...saying that any presidential signing statement that attempts to subvert said legislation is null & void and grounds for impeachment hearings to begin at once.

[pacalo]

5. It seems to me that this alone is enough reason for impeachment.

These signing statements have become s.o.p. for this king dictator president spoiled rich brat who is accustomed to getting his way. If he doesn't have it in his character to accept Congress as a co-equal & is compelled to re-write its intentions, then Congress should resort to the impeachment provision.

Didn't the boy king preach to us yesterday in his press conference that Iran's president will not learn a lesson if he doesn't have consequences? In fact, his entire statement about Iran's president could have been said about himself.

[bigtree]

6. kick