Bush, GOP Reach Agreement on Tribunal Laws
by Pamela LeaveyI had reported here earlier that Bush and McCain had reached a deal on Bush’s “military tribunal legislation.” The details of the agreement hammered out between Bush and the GOP are eeking out now. The Bush administration and Senate Republicans have announced that they come to an agreement on the “terms for the interrogation and trial of suspects in the war on terror.”
“I’m pleased we have agreement,” said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, emerging from a session in his office where National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and key lawmakers reviewed the compromise.
Hadley called it a “framework for compromise,” and Sen. John Warner, R-Va., said he won’t consider the agreement sealed until President Bush signs it.
An accord would fulfill a Republican political and legislative imperative — pre-election party unity on an issue related to the war on terror, and possible enactment of one of Bush’s top remaining priorities of the year.
“The agreement that we’ve entered into gives the president the tools he needs to continue to fight the war on terror and bring these evil people to justice,” said Sen. John McCain of Arizona, one of three rebellious GOP lawmakers who told Bush he couldn’t have the legislation the way he initially asked for it.
“There’s no doubt that the integrity and letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions have been preserved,” McCain said.
AP reports that although an announcement has formally been made, details remain “sketchy.”
One official said that under the agreement, the administration agreed to drop language that would have stated an existing ban on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment was enough to meet Geneva Convention obligations.
Bush said, shortly after administration officials and key lawmakers announced agreement, “I’m pleased to say that this agreement preserves the single most potent tool we have in protecting America and foiling terrorist attacks.”
The N.Y Times reports, Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said, “We did our duty, ” and he “noted that the legislation would still need close study by both houses of Congress.”
I remain skeptical that the “Decider” won’t pull a fast one and slip in a signing statement in order to get his way. McCain should know better than to trust him. I’m not the only one thinking along those lines…
Middle Earth Journal asks, “Did McCain sell out – AGAIN?”
Filed under: Bush Admin, In The News, National Security, Politics, Republicans, Senate | Get Permalink or trackback |
We all know Bush’s track record on his “signing statements”. Why not just add an amendment that states that if Bush adds a statement that is contrary to what Congress intended, that the whole Bill is voided. And that if Bush orders anyone to do something that is contrary to what Congress intended, that he commits a crime punishable by loss of all presidential perks and would spend 10 years in jail. And that if anyone employed or contracted by the U.S. Government, does something that is contrary to what Congress intended, they would too spend 10 years in jail. Something has to be done about those “signing statements” whereby Bush “re-writes” the law to fit his desires (which by the way to me is a crime in itself!).
Bryan,
Only 10 years?
Seems like there should be something in the checks and balances to address this – as in, if there was a balance.
January, 2007 ?
I’ve got to hand it to the Democrats. The strategy of allowing the Republicans to “thrash out” their differences on the treatment and prosecution of detainees has played out exactly as planned…for the Republicans. Don’t let anyone convince you that you can go to the well too often…that is if you are a Republican and your opponent is a fully inept Democratic Party.
Amidst a trend of favorable polling data and a firestorm of speeches by the President to refocus the voting public on their fear of terrorism, the Democrats stood in the background for the past two weeks and watched what the GOP will call the difficult work of creating legislation that preserves our commitment to civil liberties while at the same time providing our determined President with the essential tools needed to pursue those who seek to kill us all.
OK, perhaps I’m being too harsh. There is a possibility that in the past two weeks the Democrats were able to devise their sixth iteration of a campaign slogan and strategy to roll out with less than 50 days to the election. Perhaps they could call it “Fifty States, Fifty Days…But Never Fifty Percent”? It’s catchy, it’s succinct, and it may well be accurate come November 8th. Arrgghh!
Read more here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com