If you had a ounce of doubt left

Obama intends to rule just as W did. I posted this link on my Facebook page last night:

White House Is Drafting Executive Order to Allow Indefinite Detention; Move Would Bypass Congress

The Obama administration, fearing a battle with Congress that could stall plans to close Guantanamo, is drafting an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate suspected terrorists indefinitely, according to three senior government officials with knowledge of White House deliberations.

Such an order would embrace claims by former President George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war. Obama advisers are concerned that bypassing Congress could place the president on weaker footing before the courts and anger key supporters, the officials said.

Ya think?  “Change you can believe in?”

And let the mind-fuck begin:

One administration official suggested the White House was already trying to build support for an executive order.

“Civil liberties groups have encouraged the administration, that if a prolonged detention system were to be sought, to do it through executive order,” the official said. Such an order can be rescinded and would not block later efforts to write legislation, but civil liberties groups generally oppose long-term detention, arguing that detainees should either be prosecuted or released.

Um…what civil liberties group has suggested this? This is just a flat out lie by the Obama Administration. I’m a card-carrying sustaining member of the ACLU and I’ve not gotten any word from them that this would be an acceptable solution. As the article implies, the ACLU has always asserted that our system is fully capable of either trying or freeing these detainees. Their position has always been that the government has a duty to either charge and try the detainees, or set them free. End of discussion.

Always with his eye on the next election, and fearing a backlash from his own party, Obama has done a bit of a 180 on the “national kangaroo security courts.” 

Some of Obama’s top legal advisers, along with a handful of influential Republican and Democratic lawmakers, have pushed for the creation of a “national security court” to supervise the incarceration of detainees deemed too dangerous to release but who cannot be charged or tried.

But the three senior government officials said the White House has turned away from that option, at least for now, because legislation establishing a special court would be both difficult to pass and likely to fracture Obama’s own party. These officials, as well as others interviewed for this story, spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about internal deliberations.

[...]

Three months into the Justice Department’s reviews, several officials involved said they have found themselves agreeing with conclusions reached years earlier by the Bush administration: As many as 90 detainees can not be charged or released.

Why? Because we fucked up? Yes, that is what it boils down to. And it’s time for We the People to wake up and understand, if this can be done to these detainees, it can be done to us. Once a president or a government asserts that it has the authority to set aside the law for a particular group, there is nothing to stop them from doing it again and again and again.

Finally, for a Constitutional scholar, Obama sures seems in the dark about what his duties are and what powers belong to Congress.  (Note that it is the legislative branch which is addressed first in the Constitution, not the executive.  Also take note of which article has a more detailed list of powers.) 

Lawyers for the administration are now in negotiations with Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., over separate legislation that would revamp military commissions. A senior Republican staff member said that senators have yet to see “a comprehensive, detailed policy” on long-term detention from the administration.

“They can do it without congressional backing, but I think there would be very strong concerns,” the staff member said, adding that “Congress could cut off funding” for any detention system established in the United States.

Concerns are growing among Obama’s advisers that Congress may try to assert too much control over the process. Earlier this week, Obama signed an appropriations bill that forces the administration to report to Congress before moving any detainee out of Guantanamo and prevents the White House from using available funds to move detainees onto U.S. soil.

“Legislation could kill Obama’s plans,” said one government official involved. The official said an executive order could be the best option for the president at this juncture.

Oh well, then, that settles it. We musn’t let anything as mundane as the separation of powers get in the way of the monarch we’ve elected now.   I guess the Constitutional Scholar is unaware of Article Two, Section 3 which states:

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information on the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient;

And if there is any doubt as to which branch of government should be dealing with the fate of the detainees, Article One, Section 8 enumerates the the duties of Congress. Among them are these three that follow in succession:

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

The President gets to recommend legislation. The Executive Branch doesn’t get to legislate by Executive Order, and he most definitely is not allowed to go around the courts or Congress to lock up even one person without charge or trial, let alone 90.