Pelosi Threatens to Sue President Bush over Iraq

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is threatening to take President Bush to court if he issues a signing statement as a way of sidestepping a carefully crafted compromise Iraq war spending bill.

Pelosi recently told a group of liberal bloggers, "We can take the president to court" if he issues a signing statement, according to Kid Oakland, a blogger who covered Pelosi's remarks for the liberal website dailykos.com.

"The president has made excessive use of signing statements and Congress is considering ways to respond to this executive-branch overreaching," a spokesman for Pelosi, Nadeam Elshami, said. "Whether through the oversight or appropriations process or by enacting new legislation, the Democratic Congress will challenge the president’s non-enforcement of the laws."

It is a scenario for which few lawmakers have planned. Indicating that he may consider attaching a signing statement to a future supplemental spending measure, Bush last week wrote in his veto message, "This legislation is unconstitutional because it purports to direct the conduct of operations of the war in a way that infringes upon the powers vested in the presidency."

A lawsuit could be seen as part of the Democrats' larger political strategy to pressure - through a series of votes on funding the war - congressional Republicans to break with Bush over Iraq.

Democrats floated other ideas during yesterday's weekly caucus meeting. Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) suggested that the House consider a measure to rescind the 2002 authorization for the war in Iraq. Several senators and Democratic presidential candidates recently have proposed that idea.

"There was a ripple around the room" in support of the idea, said Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.).

In the 1970s, congressional Democrats tried to get the courts to force President Nixon to stop bombing in Cambodia. The courts ruled that dissident lawmakers could not sue solely to obtain outcomes they could not secure in Congress.

In order to hear an argument, a federal court would have to grant what is known as "standing," meaning that lawmakers would have to show that Bush is willfully ignoring a bill Congress passed and that he signed into law.

The House would have to demonstrate what is called "injury in fact." A court might accept the case if "it is clear that the legislature has exhausted its ability to do anything more," a former general counsel to the House of Representatives, Stanley Brand, said.

Lawmakers have tried to sue presidents in the past for taking what they consider to be illegal military action, but courts have rejected such suits.

A law professor at Georgetown Law Center, Nicholas Rosenkranz, said Bush is likely to express his view on the constitutionality of the next supplemental in writing. Whether Bush has leeway to treat any provision of the supplemental as advisory, however, depends on the wording Congress chooses, Rosenkranz added.

Bruce Fein, who was a Justice Department official under President Reagan, said Democrats seeking to challenge a signing statement would have to try to give themselves standing before filing a lawsuit.

"You'd need an authorizing resolution in the House and Senate to seek a declaratory judgment from the federal district court that the president, by issuing a signing statement, is denying Congress's obligation to [hold a veto override vote]," Fein said.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) introduced legislation to that end last year, but the idea of a lawsuit has yet to gain traction in Congress.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said that "the odds would be good" for a signing statement on the next supplemental, considering that Bush has in the past shown a predilection for excusing his administration from contentious bills. But Levin did not offer any clues as to how Democratic leaders would counter Bush.

Talk Show America 5/10/2007

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Plain English
Get that gold fringe off my flag.
Republicat gobbledygook, jargon and misleading public information.
Below you will find some double talk see if you can spot it on your own.


Found at: http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html
In July 2003 President Bush autographed a small flag. This picture was circulated across the Internet noting its violation of the Flag Code: "The flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature." Click picture for enlargement. Photo credit: AP Photo/Charles Dharapak


__________________________________________________________________________________________

Found at: http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/faqs/q17.htm

Betsy Ross Homepage Resources: Choose a Resource...Betsy Ross Home PageBetsy Ross GuestbookBetsy Ross: Her LifeBetsy Ross and the American FlagQuotes and NotesFlag Rules and RegulationsFlag TimelineFlag Picture Gallery5-Pointed Star in One SnipFlag TriviaWas This Her House?Historic AnalysisAffidavitsCanby's paperThe Betsy Ross HouseBetsy Ross and the Flag Web Links
Return to FAQ Index | Return to Flag Rules and Regulations


US Flag Frequently Asked Questions
What does the fringe on the flag represent?
The gold trim is found on ceremonial flags used indoors and for outdoor ceremonies. The fringe is considered completely within the guidelines of proper flag etiquette. There is nothing in the Flag Code about the fringe being for federal government flags only. The Internet contains many sites that claim that the fringe indicates martial law or that the Constitution does not apply in that area. These are entirely unfounded (usually citing Executive Order 10834 and inventing text that is not part of the order) and should be dismissed as urban legends.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Found at: http://www.vfwofwi.com/Apr04page%203.pdf



Department
Judge
Advocate
Michael L.
Borg
Get That Gold Fringe Off My Flag
What do the gold-fringed United
States flags standing in our present day
courtrooms, schools, public buildings,
churches, federal government buildings,
and many of our own VFW clubhouses
and Post Color Guard units symbolize?
Is the gold fringe there for decoration
only, or is there a significance to the gold
fringe?
Currently, the flag of the United States
of America is defined in these words:
"The American Flag of Peace of the
United States of America is red, white
and blue, with thirteen alternating red
and white horizontal stripes, and a blue
field (Union) with 50 stars, one to represent
each of the states." This flag is
covered under Title 4 – U.S.C., 1 & 2
and Presidential Executive Order 10834,
found in the Federal Register at Vol. 24,
No. 166, Pages 6365-6367.
Why should anyone be concerned
about this apparently innocent decorative
feature? What difference does it
make?
Citizens are subject to much ridicule
when they object to the "Admiralty
Flag," the flag that appears in every government
office and courtroom, as well
as other public buildings in the land.
That flag is the United States Flag – with
one seemingly minor cosmetic difference
– a knotted gold fringe on three
sides.
The difference is that the gold-fringed
flag, when displayed, is legal notice to
all who enter of the type of law that holds
jurisdiction. The constitutional United
States flag signifies common law jurisdiction.
The gold-fringed United States
flag is an "Admiralty" or "War" flag,
which denotes Admiralty or martial law.
As mentioned above, there are two
"United States" – one which is comprised
of the "Republic States" and the
other comprised of the "United States"
which without authority of law incorporated
itself in 1871 and 1874. Are you
aware that there are also two separate
and distinct "flags" for each of these
"United States?" It is the flag appearing
within the sanctuary of the "bar" in the
courtroom that determines the laws applying
to that court.
Flag #1 – Flags with gold fringe, gold
braid, gold eagle, gold spear or gold ball
atop the flagpole establish the jurisdiction
of the Admiralty, maritime or administration
jurisdiction.
Flag #2 – Article III (Three) of the
United States Constitution describes the
jurisdiction of the court by the American
flag of peace, Title 4 U.S.C., 1 & 2.
This flag is described as red, white and
blue with stripes of red and white horizontally
placed in alternation. Under the
jurisdiction of the American flag of
peace, the United States Constitution is
alive and well and all rights are preserved.
People are innocent until proven
guilty. The jurisdiction of the American
Flag is the determining factor upon
which all citizens' rights are determined.
Remember always that the goldfringed
flag is your warning that you are
entering into a foreign enclave, the same
as if you are stepping into a foreign
embassy and you will be under the jurisdiction
of that flag. The flag with the
gold or yellow fringe has no constitution,
no laws, and no rules of court, and
is not recognized by any nation on the
earth, and is foreign to you and the
United States of America.
You can clearly see that the goldfringed
flag does not, I repeat not, symbolize
a ceremonial flag. The next time
you see this yellow/gold-fringed flag,
you will know what you are looking at
and what it really symbolizes.
Even our VFW National organization
in their Flag Questions and Answers section
that appear on the web site states
that the fringe started in the early 1800s
as decorative enrichment. They claim
that there are no rules that prohibit the
use of fringe on a U.S. flag by non-government
groups or organizations, which
isn't the case in fact.
Please feel free to contact me anytime
you need assistance in any way with regard
to the Bylaws of the VFW. Remember
to address your concerns either to
my address of 1809 N. Oneida St.,
Appleton, WI 54911, e-mail to
judgeadvo@tds.net, or phone at 920-
739-5730.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Found at: http://www.remnantofgod.org/bn040417.htm

SUSPENDING THE CONSTITUTION?
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 11:15 PM
Subject:

Today I recieved a letter from California, Assemblymen Bill Maze's office from a staff member named Erin Gilbert (916)319-2034 ...she stated below.


Currently, the United States Flag is defined as follows: The American Flag of Peace of the United States of America is as Red, White, and Blue, with thirteen alternating red and white horizontal stripes and a blue field (representing the Union with 50 stars, one to represent each of the several states). The Flag is proportional (1x1.9) . This proportion is easily determined by measuring the length (fly), and dividing by the measurement of the with (hoist). The length divided by the width should be very nearly 1.9. If the flag is not to the correct 1x1.9 proportion, it is not an official Title 4 U.S.C.1, 2, American Flag of Peace of the United States of America.

The United States Military Flag has a gold Fringe, whitch stands in every State and Federal Court, effectively rendering the Court as a Military Court. "Pursuant to 4 U.S.C. chapter 1, ## 1, 2, & 3; Executive Order 10834, August 21, 1959; 24 F.R.6865; a Military Flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a YELLOW FRINGE border on three sides.The president of the United States designates this deviation from the regular Flag, by executive order, and in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief.

Title 4 U.S.C. 3, provides that anything put on the title 4 U.S.C., 1, 2, American Flag such as gold fringe MUTILATES the flag and carries a one-year prison term. This is confirmed by the authority of title 36 U.S.C. 176 (G). The gold fringe is a fourth color and represents "color of military law" jurisdiction, and when placed on the title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2 Flag, mutilates the flag and suspends the Constitution. (Refer to title 18 U.S.C.242, see Black's Law Dictionary). As provided by title 36 U.S.C. 173 and Army Regulation 840-10, Chapter 2-1 (b). The flag of the United States of America is defined and described in title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2. Civilians must use the title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2, Flag ( see title 36 U.S.C. 173 and Army Regulation 840-10, chapter 2-7), and when military flags are displayed by Army Regulation 840-10, chapter 2 and title 36 U.S.C. 175.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Judges Trained to resist the constitution, The anti government movement handbook.

Found in part at: http://www.apfn.net/Messageboard/7-12-03/discussion.cgi.8.html

Post a Comment