HEY! AN EXECUTIVE ORDER ONLY BECOMES LAW IF CONGRESS DOESN’T OVERTURN IT WITHIN THIRTY DAYS!

[redacted]

In an as yet un-numbered Executive Order (at least the number isn't published), president bush has decreed that your property - all of it - can be taken away at the sole discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury at the mere suspicion that you may commit a crime in the future. You can view and read this latest executive atrocity at the White House website.

An executive order only becomes law if Congress doesn’t overturn it within thirty days after it is published in the Federal Register.

If you own a business, this concerns you. Whether you own it as a sole proprietorship, as a sole shareholder, or even as a partial shareholder of a corporation, you stand to lose all of it if the Secretary thinks you may commit an "act of violence" that may disrupt the war (or peace) effort in Iraq. Naturally, "act of violence" is not defined anywhere in this order.

Once this becomes law, he has all the tools Hitler and Stalin had to keep their respective populations in utter subjection to their will.

WAY WAY MORE

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_alex_wal_070726_30_days_to_absolute_.htm

[Kagemusha]

1. I think that the 'becomes law' part is a little overstating the case.

Maybe we can say, it becomes legal, and in force, but it is not a law and shouldn't be mistaken for one.

Okay. I'm nitpicking. But laws are laws and executive orders aren't laws.

[BattyDem]

2. I wonder which Dem will be the first to say ...

"We don't have the votes to overturn it" :eyes: :-(

[BlackHawk706867]

3. So, my response has to be... First of all is Congress aware of this and

second of all, when are they going to over turn this Executive order and all of those that have come before it?

ww

[msongs]

4. heard from any congressional dems who care about this? nt

[BlackHawk706867]

5. I would be more interested in knowing if they are even aware of this! eom. ww.

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. Mine wasn't

[MiniMe]

6. Time for a DU write-in campaign

Write your congress critter and your Senators now to publicize this.

[Swamp Rat]

7. Congress is on vacation,

permanently, it seems.

[redacted]

8. I JUST ABOUT LOST IT WHEN I READ THIS

[bonito]

9. K&R n/t

[shance]

10. Congress is complicit. No matter how much they grand stand in hearings.

Actions speak louder than words.

[MsRedacted]

11. How many of these atrocious things have gone on to become "law?"

:wtf:

[redacted]

12. I WANT THAT FUCKING ORDER OVERTURNED

[wildbilln864]

15. damned right! I do too!

But I won't hold my breath! We've been being punked for decades! I don't expect to see a change now. :grr:

[redacted]

13. AND CONGRESS NEEDS TO RECONVENE--THAT is why Bush signed the order only days before

CONGRESS WENT ON VACATION

THIS HAS ROVE'S FINGERPRINTS ALL OVER IT--DAMM THIS ADMINISTRATION

DAMM THEM DAMM THEM DAMM THEM ALL

[mmonk]

14. Let's see,

what day did he sign that?

[Just-plain-Kathy]

17. July 17, 2007 ....n/t

[mmonk]

20. Thanks

[Zensea]

18. July 17

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html

[mmonk]

21. Thanks

[Zensea]

16. It does not say sole discretion

It says

...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:
-snip-
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.

read it yourself
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html

Of course they might all get in cahoots with each other, but that is not a given.
Also the part I snipped out is a laundry list, but structurally the key phrase and controlling phrase for the laundry list to apply is the act of violence clause.
Violence may not be defined here, but I'm betting it has a fairly narrow legal definition & the term significant risk probably also does also. Any lawyers?

I'm not saying I like the looks of this order, but if you're going to argue against something it's important to be accurate about what is actually written -- saying it is the Secretary of the Treasury "only" is inaccurate.

I also think it is a bit inaccurate to say he has "all the tools." All the tools? Isn't that a tad hyperbolic?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

19. ARE WE GOING TO WRITE CONGRESS ABOUT THIS OR NOT?

They need to start overturning monkeyman's executive orders NOW!

[OneBlueSky]

22. if this is the case, wouldn't that mean the the EO that makes the president dictator . . .

in times of national emergency is already law? . . . is this the case? . . . and, if so, why wasn't this challenged/overturned by the Congress? . . . do they all agree with it? . . .

[The Backlash Cometh]

24. Have you read the BBC report on Prescott Bush?

Didn't I read that Prescott Bush had his assets or business confiscated for basically, the same thing?

I am beginning to believe that George Bush is living out his Grandfather's bitterness.

[redacted]

28. You mean this?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/document/document_20070723.shtml

Think you're right on both counts Backlash, thanks for posting.

[Warren DeMontague]

25. Edit. Self delete.

I found the link.

[ThomWV]

26. Executive Orders Become Law the day Hell Freezes Over. Congress Legislates, not the Executive

Executive Orders are not applicable to anyone outside of the executive agencies and in fact even the heads of agencies are not bound to follow them. In short they are as meaningless as people want them to be and only as meaningful as their application can stand in court - which is dam near not at all.

[redacted]

27. Hope you're correct, Thom

Thanks for posting. Can you give us a source or two?

[ryanus]

29. Whatever. Show me where that's the case in the Constitution