The Boston Globe's Charlie Savage has been a tenacious investigator of presidential signing statements. These "I'm-above-the-law" footnotes Bush has added to the laws of land are now being used to keep us in Iraq for decades to come.
President Bush this week declared that he has the power to bypass four laws, including a prohibition against using federal funds to establish permanent US military bases in Iraq, that Congress passed as part of a new defense bill. ...
... One section Bush targeted created a statute that forbids spending taxpayer money "to establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq" or "to exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq."
There are four parts of the latest military budget bill to which President Bush takes exception. The first would require much more effective oversight of private contractors; the second provides protection for whistleblowers who expose fraud; the third requires swift responses to requests from the Armed Services Committees for information; and the fourth prevents the use of any part of the latest budget to establish permanent bases in Iraq.
All this was being codified in signing statements even as bipartisanship was the subject of the State of the Union address. Bush wants a free hand in extending US military presence in Iraq in spite of laws requiring that Congress be a partner in any such decisions. New York Times editors write that this is all the proof we need that Bush never intended to withdraw from Iraq, once there.
Just before Monday night’s State of the Union speech, in which Mr. Bush extolled bipartisanship, railed against government excesses and promised to bring the troops home as soon as it’s safe to withdraw, the White House undermined all of those sentiments with the latest of the president’s infamous signing statements. ...
... It is more evidence, as if any were needed, that Mr. Bush never intended to end this war, and that he still views it as the prelude to an unceasing American military presence in Iraq.
For many, this could be considered casus belli for the American people against administration itself. It seems more and more likely that the original invasion of Iraq was part of a big lie. Of course, there is one bigger lie: the legitimacy of the Bush presidency itself.
