Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush Abolishes the 5th Amendment...Executive Order

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:13 PM
Original message
Bush Abolishes the 5th Amendment...Executive Order
George W. Bush who has already declared himself a dictator in the case of a national emergency has now issued an executive order that effectively destroys the Fifth Amendment.

A few days ago, Bush signed a new executive order in which he uses broad language to claim that he has the power to seize the property of any person who undermines efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq. The language in the executive order is broadly defined and does not specifically identify a specific group of individuals that the order applies to. It opens up the possibility of anti-war protesters and other political dissidents having their property confiscated for simply speaking out against the war.


Amazingly, the establishment press has spun the coverage of this Bush order as a way to strengthen the government’s ability to fight terrorism when the real story is that this order violates the Fifth Amendment and is entirely unconstitutional.

George W. Bush is a criminal who has violated his oath of office on countless occasions. This is yet another one of those occasions. He needs to be impeached and put on trial immediately.

--------------------------------------------------------


Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq


RSS Feed White House News

Fact sheet Message to the Congress of the United States Regarding International Emergency Economic Powers Act

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, as amended (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)(IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)(NEA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that, due to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by acts of violence threatening the peace and stability of Iraq and undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq and to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people, it is in the interests of the United States to take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 of May 22, 2003, and expanded in Executive Order 13315 of August 28, 2003, and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive Order 13350 of July 29, 2004, and Executive Order 13364 of November 29, 2004. I hereby order:

Section 1. (a) Except to the extent provided in section 203(b)(1), (3), and (4) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(1), (3), and (4)), or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the date of this order, all property and interests in property of the following persons, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense,

(i) to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of:

(A) threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq; or

(B) undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people;

(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or services in support of, such an act or acts of violence or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

(iii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.

(b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section include, but are not limited to, (i) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order, and (ii) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

Sec. 2. (a) Any transaction by a United States person or within the United States that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

Sec. 3. For purposes of this order:

(a) the term "person" means an individual or entity;

(b) the term "entity" means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization; and

(c) the term "United States person" means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.

Sec. 4. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and expanded in Executive Order 13315, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order.

Sec. 5. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that, because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render these measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and expanded in Executive Order 13315, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 1(a) of this order.

Sec. 6. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government, consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order and, where appropriate, to advise the Secretary of the Treasury in a timely manner of the measures taken.

Sec. 7. Nothing in this order is intended to affect the continued effectiveness of any rules, regulations, orders, licenses, or other forms of administrative action issued, taken, or continued in effect heretofore or hereafter under 31 C.F.R. chapter V, except as expressly terminated, modified, or suspended by or pursuant to this order.

Sec. 8. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right, benefit, or privilege, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers or employees, or any other person.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

July 17, 2007.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. You know, by this language protestors could have their homes seized
As well as anyone who doesn't "tow the line"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Congress could be affected too.
Edited on Fri Jul-20-07 02:17 PM by alyce douglas
Right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. In theory yes
And anything any court deems "impedes our effort" in Iraq could be considered.

This is more than just the trashing of the 5th ammendment. This is also the trashing of the 1st.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
18. What about Hillary?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. Then would it not be appropriate for him to seize his own assets?
Who has done more to fuck up economic and political reform in Iraq then dumbass himself? He's a fucking monster attmpting to spread conservative values around the globe and hundreds of thousands are dying in the process
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkofos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
5. I found this line interesting
(A) threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq; or

I guess *ush doesn't think HIS FUCKING OCCUPATION of Iraq is affecting the peace or stability of Iraq.

WTF

Can we use this against him??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snappyturtle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. You'd think so but there's probably another EO against it.
I can't keep up with all his edicts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkofos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Well, he is above the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snappyturtle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. THAT'S my problem....thanks..I keep forgetting that point. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
butterfly77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
7. Pass it on in anyway possible...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TechBear_Seattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
8. This is an expansion of extant authority, not creation of new authority
After 9/11, the Junta declared similar rules against anyone who is or might possibly be associated with terrorists (I work in the financial sector, and I know what we had to go through to implement these new rules.) All this does is expand on what it means to be "associated with terrorists."

Where were you when these rules first went into effect in 2002? Where was the public outrage then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Most people were still reeling. And Iraq dominated the news. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
10. This one is scary right here;
"(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or services in support of, such an act or acts of violence or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or"

Wow, out of all the scary shit in there, this one takes the cake.

You can lose everything just for helping someone else who's lost everything.

Holy Shit, these people need to be removed NOW!

Everything the right-wingers were claiming Clinton might do, this asshole is doing right in front of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
melody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. That's why the far right led the way in pointing at Clinton
So they could do the same thing and use that as a smokescreen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TechBear_Seattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Again, this was already extant
Edited on Fri Jul-20-07 02:47 PM by TechBear_Seattle
Since 9/11, identical provisions have existed against anyone who was materially supporting any individual or group who was or might be considered to be a terrorist organization, or who was facilitating those who who were supporting, etc.

Here in Seattle, a Yemeni owned grocery store was shut down for months because a cash-transfer service the store was registered with might have been used by a small fraction of the store's patrons to transfer money to charity groups in Yemen and Saudi Arabia that could have been redirecting some of the money it collected to terrorist groups. The store lost most of its inventory due to spoilage, the Muslim community the store served lost a reliable source of guaranteed halal food and the owners were driven out of business because of the financial losses caused by this earlier executive order. As far as I know, the closest to an apology they were ever given for the complete destruction of their American dream by the government was a polite but firm, "We did this to keep America safe."

This is merely an expansion of existing power, nothing new.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnceUponTimeOnTheNet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
15. Who wrote this gem? Cheney's side-kick Addington?
This is not Gonzos style. He's too stupid. Looks like another Addington jewel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnceUponTimeOnTheNet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. I wish Swampy would do something w/ this BASTARDS pic.
He has cleared the path for Cheney and his profits for decades now. The White House is now the Cheney Addington WHORE house.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Ask and ye will probably receive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knitter4democracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-20-07 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
16. This sounds like the Handmaid's Tale.
Scary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 09:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC