Checks and balances.  That's gone.  The executive branch is flexing it's king-like muscles, a thing that hasn't been seen since Nixon and has, at this point, far surpassed tricky Dick.  If Congress can't hold anyone in contempt, can't subpoena, can't seemingly question anything, then there is truly nothing for them to do.  Checks and balances.

Washington Times Article Here:

Bush administration officials unveiled a bold new assertion of executive authority yesterday in the dispute over the firing of nine U.S. attorneys, saying that the Justice Department will never be allowed to pursue contempt charges initiated by Congress against White House officials once the president has invoked executive privilege.

The position presents serious legal and political obstacles for congressional Democrats, who have begun laying the groundwork for contempt proceedings against current and former White House officials in order to pry loose information about the dismissals.Under federal law, a statutory contempt citation by the House or Senate must be submitted to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, "whose duty it shall be to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action."

But administration officials argued yesterday that Congress has no power to force a U.S. attorney to pursue contempt charges in cases, such as the prosecutor firings, in which the president has declared that testimony or documents are protected from release by executive privilege. Officials pointed to a Justice Department legal opinion during the Reagan administration, which made the same argument in a case that was never resolved by the courts.

"A U.S. attorney would not be permitted to bring contempt charges or convene a grand jury in an executive privilege case," said a senior official, who said his remarks reflect a consensus within the administration. "And a U.S. attorney wouldn't be permitted to argue against the reasoned legal opinion that the Justice Department provided. No one should expect that to happen."

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the issue publicly, added: "It has long been understood that, in circumstances like these, the constitutional prerogatives of the president would make it a futile and purely political act for Congress to refer contempt citations to U.S. attorneys."

Mark J. Rozell, a professor of public policy at George Mason University who has written a book on executive-privilege issues, called the administration's stance "astonishing."

"That's a breathtakingly broad view of the president's role in this system of separation of powers," Rozell said. "What this statement is saying is the president's claim of executive privilege trumps all."

The administration's statement is a dramatic attempt to seize the upper hand in an escalating constitutional battle with Congress, which has been trying for months, without success, to compel White House officials to testify and to turn over documents about their roles in the prosecutor firings last year. The Justice Department and White House in recent weeks have been discussing when and how to disclose the stance, and the official said he decided yesterday that it was time to highlight it.

From www.defcon.org:

DefCon Poll Shows Rift in Religious Right
The new anti-science Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, has nothing of value to teach about the development of life on Earth -- but that doesn't mean we haven't learned anything from it.
A new poll released by DefCon reveals the enormous schism within the religious right represented by the museum. The poll shows that 95% of Evangelicals reject the Creation Musuem's strange, dino-friendly version of Creationism. In addition, only 10% of self-identified Evangelicals support Intelligent Design. While religious right leaders like James Dobson lump all forms of anti-evolution together, the new Creation Museum is showing us just how deeply divided the religious right really is.
You can download the full poll results here (PDF), or click here to read an analysis by the Cincinnati Enquirer (the museum's own home-town newspaper).
The other main lesson we've learned from the museum is just how concerned many Americans are about the continued assault on science education from the religious right. Nearly 25,000 people from across the country have signed our petition condemning the museum's anti-science agenda. If you haven't already, click here to sign the petition, spread the word, or get your own DefCon Creation Musuem bumper sticker.

Bush Again Bows to Religious Right on Stem Cells
Once again, with overwhelming support from the American people and the medical establishment, Congress passed a bill this Spring to relax restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research. And once again, President Bush has caved in to the only major group opposing the potentially life-saving research -- the religious right -- in vetoing the bill.
Since last May, DefCon supporters have sent more than 100,000 emails to President Bush and congressional leaders urging them to support embryonic stem cell research. In light of the president's unwillingness to buck the religious right on this crucial issue, it is clear that our best hope is securing a veto-proof majority. Click here to contact your senators and ask them to put lives above the religious right's agenda.

Attorney General Gonzalez Visits the Discovery Institute
Last month, Attorney General Gonzalez became the latest political official to speak at an event sponsored by the Discovery Institute, the leading proponent of Intelligent Design. While Gonzalez's speech focused on intellectual property and cybercrime, his decision to pay a visit to an organization leading the campaign to undermine science education in America is troubling. Senator John McCain made a similar trip to a Discovery Institute event in February.
Perhaps the most worrying aspect of the parade of politicians pandering to the Discovery Institute is that the Institute's main financial backer, Howard Ahmanson, has a long history of attempting to undermine the separation of church and state. He spent 20 years on the board of the Chalcedon Foundation, an organization dedicated to replacing American civil law with "Biblical law."
That the head of the Justice Department decided to make a special visit to Ahmanson's current pet project raises deep concerns. Visit the DefCon blog for more information on Gonzalez's speech to the Discovery Institute.

Yet again, former administrators and health officials are coming forward to state that the Bush administration in 7 years has promoted wiping out scientific research in favor of bad, fundamentalist and religious approaches to complex problems.  Is there any better example that we should not want our country ruled by ideological zealots who cannot see past their limited world view?  I certainly don't want my kids' health determined by the narrow religious viewpoint of government officials bowing down to fundamental Christian thought.  If you believe these things, if you essentially want to believe the world if flat and we'd all be better off living in the 15th century, then by all means follow your path.  But leave the rest of the country alone.  These dangerous streams of un-scientific thought have no place in public policy or government.

Washington Times Article Here:

Former surgeon general Richard H. Carmona yesterday accused the Bush administration of muzzling him on sensitive public health issues, becoming the most prominent voice among several current and former federal science officials who have complained of political interference.

Carmona, a Bush nominee who served from 2002 to 2006, told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that political appointees in the administration routinely scrubbed his speeches for politically sensitive content and blocked him from speaking out on public health matters such as stem cell research, abstinence-only sex education and the emergency contraceptive Plan B.

"Anything that doesn't fit into the political appointees' ideological, theological or political agenda is often ignored, marginalized or simply buried," he said. "The problem with this approach is that in public health, as in a democracy, there is nothing worse than ignoring science or marginalizing the voice of science for reasons driven by changing political winds."

In one such case, Carmona, a former professor of surgery and public health at the University of Arizona, said he was told not to speak out during the national debate over whether the federal government should fund embryonic stem cell research, which President Bush opposes.

"Much of the discussion was being driven by theology, ideology, [and] preconceived beliefs that were scientifically incorrect," said Carmona, one of three former surgeons general who testified at yesterday's hearing. "I thought, 'This is a perfect example of the surgeon general being able to step forward, educate the American public.' . . . I was blocked at every turn. I was told the decision had already been made -- 'Stand down. Don't talk about it.' That information was removed from my speeches."

White House spokesman Tony Fratto rejected claims of political interference, saying Carmona had all the support he needed to carry out his mission. "As surgeon general, Dr. Carmona was given the authority and had the obligation to be the leading voice for the health of all Americans," Fratto said. "It's disappointing to us if he failed to use his position to the fullest extent in advocating for policies he thought were in the best interests of the nation."

Carmona said that when the administration touted funding for abstinence-only education, he was prevented from discussing research on the effectiveness of teaching about condoms as well as abstinence. "There was already a policy in place that did not want to hear the science but wanted to just preach abstinence, which I felt was scientifically incorrect," Carmona said.

Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), the House panel's chairman, called for Congress to take steps to insulate the office from political influence. "We shouldn't allow the surgeon general to be politicized," he said. "It is the doctor to the nation. That person needs to have credibility, independence and to speak about science."

Carmona, a former deputy sheriff in Arizona with expertise in emergency preparedness, came to the administration's attention because of his work helping local governments plan their response to terrorist attacks. A high school dropout and former Army Special Forces medic, Carmona eventually received undergraduate and medical degrees from the University of California at San Francisco.

He is the latest in a string of government employees to complain that ideology is trumping science in the Bush administration.

In January, the leader of the National Institutes of Health's task force on stem cells, Story Landis, said that because of the Bush policy -- which aims to protect three-day-old embryos -- the nation is "missing out on possible breakthroughs." And in March, NIH Director Elias A. Zerhouni called the Bush policy "shortsighted."

Last year, NASA scientist James E. Hansen and other federal climate researchers said the Bush administration had made it hard for them to speak in a forthright manner about global warming. In 2005, Susan F. Wood, an assistant FDA commissioner and director of the agency's Office of Women's Health, resigned her post, citing her frustration with political interference that was delaying approval of over-the-counter sales of Plan B.

Bush claims executive privilege and the standoff between Congress and the Executive Office begins in earnest.  It seems Congress will press the issue but are the courts so stacked with political favor in Bush's lap that justice and law cannot be upheld?  Executive privilege is an interesting claim.  Executive privilege to avoid criminal and unconstitutional behavior reaching the public record.  The evidence is astounding and the on-the-record testimony of the individuals requested is of utmost import to the American public.  I can't help but think that 10 years down the road, history books will describe the Bush Administration as one of secrecy, hidden agendas, covert criminal activities and a complete disregard for the US Constitution that makes Richard Nixon look like a saint.

NY Times Article Here:

President Bush invoked a broad interpretation of executive privilege on Monday in his confrontation with Congress over the dismissal of federal prosecutors, refusing to comply with subpoenas for documents and blocking testimony from former White House aides.

Mr. Bush’s counsel, Fred F. Fielding, in a combative letter to the Democratic chairmen of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, said the White House and the two legislative panels had reached an impasse. The letter, which also said the White House would refuse to turn over materials explaining Mr. Bush’s legal claims, appeared to place the executive and legislative branches on a collision course.

Mr. Fielding wrote that Mr. Bush would not turn over any records related to the dismissals and that he had instructed Sara M. Taylor, the former White House political director, and Harriet E. Miers, the former White House counsel, to refuse to testify in hearings this week.

With Democratic lawmakers comparing President Bush’s stance to President Richard M. Nixon’s refusal to turn over evidence during Watergate, Congressional aides said they were going ahead with the hearings. Ms. Taylor has been summoned to appear on Wednesday before the Senate judiciary panel, and Ms. Miers is scheduled to appear on Thursday before the House one.

The Bush administration had offered to allow Ms. Taylor, Ms. Miers and other aides, like Karl Rove, the senior White House political adviser, to meet privately with the committees in informal sessions with no transcripts, but lawmakers have refused that arrangement.

Neither side has shown any willingness to back down. But several separate steps would be needed before the House or Senate could vote on a contempt measure to compel compliance with its subpoenas. Such a contempt citation could send the constitutional conflict into court.

An outspoken critic of the Bush administration, an interesting short interview with the NY Times.

Interview with Wesley K. Clark:

As a retired four-star general and former presidential candidate, you’re about to publish a memoir whose title, “A Time to Lead,” might seem to suggest you’re personally eager to lead this country. Is that an accurate reading? “A Time to Lead” is a time for America to lead. That is the intention of the title. Certainly we are having a leadership crisis. We have an administration that has lost all sense of strategic purpose in the Mideast. I am very concerned that we have lost the foundation of America’s worldwide power and influence. It has been squandered.

Are you referring to our military strength?  The most important element of power is not the military. After World War II and through the end of the 20th century, we had a legitimacy that magnified our military strength and economic strength. We weren't like other powers. We weren't after an empire. We didn't torture. What we've lost is our legitimacy. It's time for every American to be a leader.

I have serious doubts, but more than ever it's important to get the jackass and his crew out.  The below from www.impeachbush.org.

I am writing to you with the hope that you will help us organize and promote the September 15th March in Washington DC. Thousands of Americans from around the country will join together to demand the impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and insist on the immediate end to the war in Iraq. September 15th is the date General David Petraeus is mandated to make a report to Congress on the progress of the so-called surge. The eyes of the national and international media will be focused on Washington DC at that time.

In the coming weeks we will be taking out newspaper ads, producing 500,000 leaflets, flyers, and stickers, and setting up outreach committees for the September 15th March in Washington all over the country. I hope we can count on you to help in this momentous effort. Time is short. The question is whether we have the will to act.

President Bush has said ...”the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude.” Feeling unappreciated he has questioned “...whether or not there is a gratitude level that’s significant enough in Iraq.” Let us count the acts of the Bush Administration for which the Iraqi people should be grateful.

We need your help

How much will you give to impeach Bush?  Please act now, as if the future of the country depends on it.

It is essential that we raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to organize buses, to take out newspaper ads, to print 500,000 flyers, stickers, and posters, to cover the cost of sound and stage, and more. We can succeed but only with the help of you and thousands of other people.

Please make a donation today by clicking this link -- you can make an online donation or send a check.

—US violence has brought death to hundreds of thousands of Iraqi’s and physical injury to millions.

—Hundreds of billions of dollars in property destruction caused by U.S. aggression will take decades after peace to rebuild.

—2.2 million Iraqi’s, nearly one in ten, have fled their country to foreign exile, refugee camps and a doubtful future while at least 2 million more have fled their homes and communities to furtive lives of quiet desperation, to inadequate housing within Iraqi, without jobs or schools.

—3/4's of the people do not have safe drinking water.

—Iraqi’s internationally acclaimed and free health care system is a shambles.

—Since Shock and Awe began in March 2003 infant mortality in Iraq has increased radically to the highest death rate of all nations.

—Iraq is the most unstable country in the world.

—The sight and sound of violent death has created a pervasive state of constant devastating fear.

For this Iraq should be grateful?

It must be clear to every informed and thinking person that President Bush has no concern for human suffering, truth, freedom, democracy, peace, justice, human rights, or the Constitution of the United States. His words and acts are designed only to increase his personal power and achieve his personal agenda and that of those who share his goals and hatred.

To this end, he will destroy relations with Russia by placing missile defense systems on its border inside Poland and in the Czech Republic, he will impose Wolfowitz on the World Bank, and he will retain Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General.

President Bush intends for a major American military force to remain in Iraq for the foreseeable future even if it destroys that country utterly and turns the whole world that cares about justice against the United States. Look only at the $600 million dollar U.S. Embassy built in the heart of Baghdad and nearing completion. He sees withdrawal from Iraq as the loss of control of its oil followed by Saudi Arabia and the Emirates with their oil and the expansion of Iranian influence.

President Bush seeks regime change in Iran and Syria and the perpetuation of repressive dictatorships in Egypt, Pakistan and elsewhere in the region. There is a high risk he will order an attack on Iran. Having achieved regime change of the fairly elected government of Palestine, he seeks permanent isolation and decimation of Gaza and tightening control of the West Bank through funding and arming of a minority faction there, ending the hope for a viable, free and independent Palestine.

He plans to expand his war against Islam that will involve the U.S. in a losing military conflict on Muslim soil for years to come with unforeseeable, but devastating costs and consequences.

To continue these policies he will further diminish the freedom, privacy and civil liberties of the American people and expand the domination of wealth and militarism over the economy and body politic of our country.

He has committed the most serious crimes against humanity from wars of aggression and threats of more to political corruption and the corruption of justice at home unprecedented in our history.

Impeachment now is imperative. If, We the People fail to force accountability for these crimes this fall, President Bush will have a free ride with impunity through the Presidential election year of 2008, when the Constitutional duty to impeach will succumb to political pressure, to the end of his second term in January 2009.

The impeachment of Bush, Cheney and the other civil officers of the United States is not merely the best way to bring our troops home from Iraq and prevent new aggressions, it is the sure way and the only way. President Bush, who assaults nations in the name of democracy has proclaimed himself the one man “decider” for the fate of our country and its victims. For him, democracy is an election controlled by wealth every four years and dictatorship in between.

If we fail, the world will see that the American people are powerless to effectively oppose Bush policies that have angered and embittered billions of people, making enemies of most nations, or worse, that the American people support Bush policies. How else could such lawless and destructive policies be tolerated?

We do have the will to act and by working together we can make the difference. Please act now, as if the future of the country depends on it.

We can succeed but only with the help of you and thousands of other people. It is essential that we raise hundreds of thousands of dollars right now. Please make a donation today by clicking this link -- you can make an online donation or send a check.

We can organize, arouse public opinion and raise funds over the summer to bring a massive turnout on September 15 in Washington DC demanding Impeachment and an end to the war. If you want to be listed as an endorser and supporter of the September 15th demonstration, you can do so by clicking this link.

We will work in key Congressional Districts, constituents to their Representative, to insure action on Impeachment. We will involve people in every walk of life, working together to stop the runaway lawlessness of the Bush Administration before we are so inextricably intertwined in aggression, war, occupation and alienation that it will take decades before we can pursue policies that serve humanity, rejecting militarism, domination and exploitation.

We need to know how receptive the American people are to an all out effort in this moment of maximum moral and political crisis to personal commitment to participation in a six month campaign to impeach Bush/Cheney, et al.

Are you? Let us know now whether you will join this campaign. Let us know how you can organize support, enlisting others, staging demonstrations across the nation, raising and contributing funds for massive T.V., newspaper, computer and direct telephone and mail campaigns.

I hope you will join us and make this effort a priority so we can persevere in common cause.

Sincerely,
Ramsey Clark

--please forward widely to your friends, family and email lists--

Please make a donation today by clicking this link.

While technically legal, it remains disgusting.  Unethical.  A final, gasping demonstration of an adolescent president who has never listened, rarely done the right thing and continues to uphold untruth, injustice and the unAmerican way.  Right before the 4th of July.  Bush has surpassed Nixon in his audacity and sheer willingness to cooperate with criminals and protect croneys like Libby.  Libby perjured himself.  Plain and simple.  Now he'll skate with a $250K fine that will likely be paid for him.

CNN Article:

President Bush on Monday spared I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from prison, commuting the former White House aide's 30-month prison term.

A conviction remains on Scooter Libby's record, and he must still pay a $250,000 fine.

The prison time was imposed after a federal court convicted Libby of perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to investigators in the probe of the leak of the name of a CIA operative.

A commutation is distinct from a pardon, which is a complete eradication of a conviction record and makes it the same as if the person has never been convicted.

Bush has only commuted Libby's prison term, which means that the conviction remains on Libby's record and he must still pay a $250,000 fine. He will be on probation for two years.

Commutations are rarely granted, says CNN's chief legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin. A commutation is a total right of the president and it cannot be challenged by any attorney or court, he said.

It's the fourth time Bush has issued one.

Earlier Monday, a federal appeals court unanimously ruled that Libby could not delay serving his sentence, which would have put Libby just weeks away from surrendering to a prison.

In a written statement commuting the prison sentence, issued hours after Monday's ruling, Bush called the sentence "excessive," and suggested that Libby will pay a big enough price for his conviction. Watch what signal critics say Bush's decision sends »

"The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant, and private citizen will be long-lasting," he said.

The president, who has been under great pressure to pardon Libby, said Libby was given "a harsh sentence based in part on allegations never presented to the jury."

Libby can still appeal his conviction. And if the appeal fails or is still in process at the end of Bush's term, the president could grant Libby a full pardon.

Libby's conviction is linked to the investigation into the 2003 leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity.

An outraged Joe Wilson, Plame's husband, spoke to CNN shortly after the ruling. Wilson had gone public with allegations that the Bush administration had "twisted" the evidence used to justify the invasion of Iraq, and prosecutors argued that Libby disclosed her employment as part of an effort to discredit him.

"I have nothing to say to Scooter Libby," Wilson said. "I don't owe this administration. They owe my wife and my family an apology for having betrayed her. Scooter Libby is a traitor."

Libby was not accused of disclosing Plame's identity himself. But at trial, special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald told the jury that Libby's actions left "a cloud over the White House" by obstructing the leak probe.

In a statement issued Monday night, Fitzgerald took issue with Bush's description of the sentence as "excessive," saying it was "imposed pursuant to the laws governing sentencings which occur every day throughout this country."

"It is fundamental to the rule of law that all citizens stand before the bar of justice as equals," Fitzgerald said. "That principle guided the judge during both the trial and the sentencing."

Plame had worked in the CIA's counter-proliferation division before the March 2003 invasion. She told a congressional committee in March that her exposure effectively ended her career and endangered "entire networks" of agents overseas.

Her husband said Bush's action today demonstrates that the White House is "corrupt from top to bottom."

Clemency petitions are normally reviewed by the Justice Department, which investigates the case and seeks input from the federal prosecutor who brought the case before issuing a recommendation to the president. A government official said that Bush did not consult with the Justice Department before rendering his decision.

Reaction on Capitol Hill was swift. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said the president had "abandoned all sense of fairness when it comes to justice."

"The president's commutation of Scooter Libby's prison sentence does not serve justice, condones criminal conduct, and is a betrayal of trust of the American people," she said.

I bring to your attention a great series of articles about the behind-the-scenes life of Dick Cheney.  Very interesting series that the Washington Post is running and worth reading.  The expansion of executive power, the increased role for a vice president all comes at a time when Cheney himself claims he's not truly a member of the executive branch.

Washington Post Series Here

I bet this is some fascinating reading.  I have this gross desire to print off these records and read them for the sheer weirdness of it all.  Botched assassination attempts, spying for Nixon.  It's all in there.

Article on CIA classified docs opened:

Hundreds of pages of decades-old documents declassified and released by the CIA yesterday revealed a 1970s-era agency in the throes of unaccustomed self-examination, caught between its traditional secrecy and demands that it come clean on a history of unsavory activities.

Prompted by the then-unraveling Watergate affair, and by fears that CIA involvement in that scandal would be exposed along with other illegal operations, the agency combed its files for what it called "delicate" information with "flap potential." The result was a collection of documents the CIA called the "family jewels."Partly disclosed yesterday, the documents chronicle activities including assassination plans, illegal wiretaps and hunts for spies at political conventions. One document spoke of a plan to poison an African leader. Another revealed that the CIA had offered a Mafia boss $150,000 to kill Cuba's Fidel Castro.

I see that members of the GOP are defecting from the Iraq policy and speaking out against the president.

Washington Times Article Here

Key Republican senators, signaling increasing GOP skepticism about President Bush's strategy in Iraq, have called for a reduction in U.S. forces and launched preemptive efforts to counter a much-awaited administration progress report due in September.

In an unannounced speech on the Senate floor Monday night, Sen. Richard G. Lugar (Ind.), the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, said the U.S. military escalation begun in the spring has "very limited" prospects for success. He called on Bush to begin reducing U.S. forces. "We don't owe the president our unquestioning agreement," Lugar said.The harsh judgment from one of the Senate's most respected foreign-policy voices was a blow to White House efforts to boost flagging support for its war policy, and opened the door to defections by other Republicans who have supported the administration despite increasing private doubts.

Pretty late in the game to apply critical thinking but perhaps the atmosphere is finally one where they're not afraid to speak out.  Or that they're simply afraid of losing their jobs in the next election.  What an interesting world it would be if all congressmen and senators started saying what they believed.

Far more signing statements attached to bills that any other president in American history, King Bush continually proves himself willing and able to ignore the will of the people and the idea of checks and balances.  One must ask why is a signing statement disagreeing with a ban on torture necessary?  Who does it serve?  National intelligence?  Now we rely on torture.  Apparently, evangelical Christians must think torture is A-ok - their poster-child does.  The statements are blatantly illegal.  You cannot have Congress sign into law...anything...and have the president simply ignore it with a wave of a pen.  Executive kingmanship.

Washington Post Article Here and Excerpt Below:

President Bush has asserted that he is not necessarily bound by the bills he signs into law, and yesterday a congressional study found multiple examples in which the administration has not complied with the requirements of the new statutes.

Bush has been criticized for his use of "signing statements," in which he invokes presidential authority to challenge provisions of legislation passed by Congress. The president has challenged a federal ban on torture, a request for data on the administration of the USA Patriot Act and numerous other assertions of congressional power. As recently as December, Bush asserted the authority to open U.S. mail without judicial warrants in a signing statement attached to a postal reform bill.

For the first time, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office -- Congress's investigative arm -- tried to ascertain whether the administration has made good on such declarations of presidential power. In appropriations acts for fiscal 2006, GAO investigators found 160 separate provisions that Bush had objected to in signing statements. They then chose 19 to follow.

Of those 19 provisions, six -- nearly a third -- were not carried out according to law. Ten were executed by the executive branch. On three others, conditions did not require an executive branch response.

The instances of noncompliance were not as dramatic as some of the signing statements that have caused the most stir, such as Bush's suggestion that he was not bound by a ban on torture in U.S. military detention facilities. But congressional aides said they were significant.

For example, Congress directed U.S. Customs and Border Protection to relocate its checkpoints around Tucson every seven days to improve efforts to combat illegal immigration. But the agency took the law as an "advisory provision" that was "not always consistent with CBP's mission requirements." Instead, the agency periodically shut down its checkpoints for short periods of time, believing that would comply with congressional demands.

Frustrated by the Pentagon's broad budget submissions for the "global war on terrorism," Congress demanded in its 2006 military spending law that the Defense Department break down its 2007 budget request to show the detailed costs of global military operations, such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The department ignored the order. While the Pentagon did break out the costs of operations in the Balkans and at Guantanamo Bay, it did not detail expenditures in other operations.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency also ignored Congress's demand that it submit an expenditure plan for housing assistance and alternatives to the approaches that failed after Hurricane Katrina. FEMA told the GAO that it does not normally produce such plans.

In all those instances, presidential signing statements had asserted that congressional demands were encroaching on Bush's prerogatives to control executive branch employees as he sees fit and to receive effective services from his employees. White House spokesman Tony Fratto said Congress should not be surprised that the administration carried out the recommendations of the signing statements, although he cautioned that he could not know whether the agencies took action because of the statements.

"The signing statements assert the president's understanding of how the law should be executed, pursuant to his understanding of the Constitution, and that's the way we deal with them," Fratto said.

But Democratic lawmakers jumped on what they see as the actions of an imperial presidency with little respect for the law or the legislative branch.

"The administration is thumbing its nose at the law," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), who requested the GAO study and legal opinion along with Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.).

"This GAO opinion underscores the fact that the Bush White House is constantly grabbing for more power, seeking to drive the people's branch of government to the sidelines," Byrd said in a joint statement with Conyers.

This should warm everyone's heart.  More evidence that partisan politics is the name of the game in the Bush administration, not the rule of law.  Proving that he is more interested in pandering to Christian mythologists and special interest social issues, personnel are hired based on party affiliation and a willingness to "tow the line."  Screw experience and qualifications.  It would seem it's more important to corrupt what law the USA has.  Disgusting.

From the Washington Post:

The Bush administration increasingly emphasized partisan political ties over expertise in recent years in selecting the judges who decide the fate of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, despite laws that preclude such considerations, according to an analysis by The Washington Post.

At least one-third of the immigration judges appointed by the Justice Department since 2004 have had Republican connections or have been administration insiders, and half lacked experience in immigration law, Justice Department, immigration court and other records show.

Two newly appointed immigration judges were failed candidates for the U.S. Tax Court nominated by President Bush; one fudged his taxes and the other was deemed unqualified to be a tax judge by the nation's largest association of lawyers. Both were Republican loyalists.

Justice officials also gave immigration judgeships to a New Jersey election law specialist who represented GOP candidates, a former treasurer of the Louisiana Republican Party, a White House domestic policy adviser and a conservative crusader against pornography.

These appointments, all made by the attorney general, have begun to reshape a system of courts in which judges, ruling alone, exercise broad powers -- deporting each year nearly a quarter-million immigrants, who have limited rights to appeal and no right to an attorney. The judges do not serve fixed terms.

Department officials say they changed their hiring practices in April but defend their selections. Still, the injection of political considerations into the selection of immigration judges has attracted congressional attention in the wake of controversy over the Bush administration's dismissal last year of nine U.S. attorneys.

If someone is a criminal, a terrorist, why not tell them why you are arresting them?  Provide the list of charges?  After all, they're going to prison.  Instead we have indefinite imprisonment, no habeas corpus and little regard for what should be the law.  Interesting and disturbing times...

Washington Post Story Here:

In bringing three detainees to Guantanamo since March, the Defense Department has signaled a willingness to keep approximately 385 detainees there in indefinite custody and to increase the population held there, despite bipartisan sentiment in favor of closing the facility. In September, President Bush ordered 14 high-value detainees to be moved from CIA secret prisons to Guantanamo, the first new detainees brought there since September 2004.

Navy Cmdr. J.D. Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, said Arale was transferred to Guantanamo earlier this week and that he was captured recently in the Horn of Africa region. Gordon declined to offer more details. Arale was in U.S. custody overseas for an unspecified period of time before his transfer.

A group of human rights organizations plans to release a report today naming as many as 39 people believed to have been taken into secret CIA custody and who have since disappeared. Arale is not among those listed. The report decries the Bush administration's secret imprisonment of those people