United States v. George W. Bush et al.

RavennaSeattle1911RavennaSeattle1911 Posts: 478
edited February 2007 in A Moving Train
http://www.amazon.com/United-States-George-Bush-al/dp/1583227563

so why did she write the book? just to sell books? i wonder how many presidents had accusations to impeach made

From Publishers Weekly
By revisiting public statements, official documents and journalistic reports from the months leading up to the Iraq invasion, de la Vega builds a legal case that President Bush and top members of his administration engaged in a conspiracy to "deceive the American public and Congress into supporting the war." Drawing on her experience as a federal prosecutor, as well as the work of scholars and legal experts, she brings a well-honed legal perspective to the issue. She presents her argument in transcript form as a hypothetical weeklong presentation to a grand jury, including extensive testimony from three fictional investigative agents. Despite her somewhat specialized approach, the author clearly defines the legal terms and issues and avoids jargon. If anything, the book feels casual and straightforward to a fault: awkward asides about room temperature and coffee breaks, meant to humanize de la Vega's hypothetical grand jurors, are contrived; in explaining some of her claims, she relies too much on an analogy to the Enron fraud. Still, whenever she focuses on the issues at hand—most compellingly in her final analysis of the administration's spurious claims about Iraq's nuclear weapons program—de la Vega makes a persuasive case. (Dec. 1)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Book Description

In United States v. George W. Bush et al., former federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega brings her twenty years of experience and her passion for justice to the most important case of her career. The defendants are George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, and Colin Powell. The crime is tricking the nation into war, or, in legal terms, conspiracy to defraud the United States.

Ms. de la Vega has reviewed the evidence, researched the law, drafted an indictment, and in this lively, accessible book, presented it to a grand jury. If the indictment and grand jury are both hypothetical, the facts are tragically real: Over half of all Americans believe the president misled the country into a war that has left over 2,500 American soldiers and countless Iraqis dead. The cost is $350 billion-and counting.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • http://www.amazon.com/United-States-George-Bush-al/dp/1583227563

    so why did she write the book? just to sell books? i wonder how many presidents had accusations to impeach made

    From Publishers Weekly
    By revisiting public statements, official documents and journalistic reports from the months leading up to the Iraq invasion, de la Vega builds a legal case that President Bush and top members of his administration engaged in a conspiracy to "deceive the American public and Congress into supporting the war." Drawing on her experience as a federal prosecutor, as well as the work of scholars and legal experts, she brings a well-honed legal perspective to the issue. She presents her argument in transcript form as a hypothetical weeklong presentation to a grand jury, including extensive testimony from three fictional investigative agents. Despite her somewhat specialized approach, the author clearly defines the legal terms and issues and avoids jargon. If anything, the book feels casual and straightforward to a fault: awkward asides about room temperature and coffee breaks, meant to humanize de la Vega's hypothetical grand jurors, are contrived; in explaining some of her claims, she relies too much on an analogy to the Enron fraud. Still, whenever she focuses on the issues at hand—most compellingly in her final analysis of the administration's spurious claims about Iraq's nuclear weapons program—de la Vega makes a persuasive case. (Dec. 1)
    Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

    Book Description

    In United States v. George W. Bush et al., former federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega brings her twenty years of experience and her passion for justice to the most important case of her career. The defendants are George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, and Colin Powell. The crime is tricking the nation into war, or, in legal terms, conspiracy to defraud the United States.

    Ms. de la Vega has reviewed the evidence, researched the law, drafted an indictment, and in this lively, accessible book, presented it to a grand jury. If the indictment and grand jury are both hypothetical, the facts are tragically real: Over half of all Americans believe the president misled the country into a war that has left over 2,500 American soldiers and countless Iraqis dead. The cost is $350 billion-and counting.


    guess the author didnt read the constitution....executive privilege
  • guess the author didnt read the constitution....executive privilege


    perhaps that answers the poster's question about motive. i mean, i doubt that money is not a factor, but books can be written post-trial also, no?, and such a case certainly reaches directly into the elevated sphere of "war-crimes", so most likely this is an account that should be taken very seriously but otherwise has not been and would not be,...

    i'm very interested to see how this work plays out,.. thanks for posting.
    we don’t know just where our bones will rest,
    to dust i guess,
    forgotten and absorbed into the earth below,..
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    guess the author didnt read the constitution....executive privilege

    There is no mention of "executive privilege" in the constitution.

    And even if there were, I doubt this would exempt the president and/or his staff from charges of "conspiracy to defraud" the American people.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • gue_barium wrote:
    There is no mention of "executive privilege" in the constitution.

    And even if there were, I doubt this would exempt the president and/or his staff from charges of "conspiracy to defraud" the American people.


    The right to privacy cant be found in the Constitution either, and the right to privacy has been interpreted from the Constitution by the courts. Same with executive privilege. You cant have it both ways. If its not written in the constitution that makes you a strict constructionist. If you are a strict constructionist, then many of the rights we enjoy today would not exist, like the right to privacy which gurantees women the right of choice. The constitution is an interpretive document. Executive privilege is as old as George Washington...

    http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    The right to privacy cant be found in the Constitution either, and the right to privacy has been interpreted from the Constitution by the courts. Same with executive privilege. You cant have it both ways. If its not written in the constitution that makes you a strict constructionist. If you are a strict constructionist, then many of the rights we enjoy today would not exist, like the right to privacy which gurantees women the right of choice. The constitution is an interpretive document. Executive privilege is as old as George Washington...

    http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html

    I've read all that; strictly speaking, 'executive privilege' isn't written in the constitution.
    What might be interesting in the years, maybe even the months, after Bush steps down is how far 'executive privilege' can reach after a president is no longer a president.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    guess the author didnt read the constitution....executive privilege

    So if it's ever proven in a court of Law that Bush et al deliberately lied to the public to justify the war, do you not believe there's any legal basis for them to be convicted of any crime?
  • gue_barium wrote:
    I've read all that; strictly speaking, 'executive privilege' isn't written in the constitution.
    What might be interesting in the years, maybe even the months, after Bush steps down is how far 'executive privilege' can reach after a president is no longer a president.
    that is a good question. wont happen though..
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    that is a good question. wont happen though..

    I hope you're wrong about that.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • Byrnzie wrote:
    So if it's ever proven in a court of Law that Bush et al deliberately lied to the public to justify the war, do you not believe there's any legal basis for them to be convicted of any crime?
    thats a complicated question. any motivated prosecutor can find a crime in just about any conduct if it serves his or her agenda. all the privilege issues aside, there is plenty of conduct that could amount to crimes. just ask scooter libby. he doesnt have privilege to protect him and he is being prosecuted. bush probably cant be convicted of a crime under US law as president. and since we dont acknowledge the hagues criminal court, there is no forum for him to be prosecuted in. if one could make a case against bush for iraq why not nixon or johnson for vietnam? or clinton for perjury? the remedy would be impeachment, and that aint happening
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    thats a complicated question. any motivated prosecutor can find a crime in just about any conduct if it serves his or her agenda. all the privilege issues aside, there is plenty of conduct that could amount to crimes. just ask scooter libby. he doesnt have privilege to protect him and he is being prosecuted. bush probably cant be convicted of a crime under US law as president. and since we dont acknowledge the hagues criminal court, there is no forum for him to be prosecuted in. if one could make a case against bush for iraq why not nixon or johnson for vietnam? or clinton for perjury? the remedy would be impeachment, and that aint happening

    There's a warrant out for Bush in one European country I can't think of right now. We just need to trick him into going there. You really think congress is going to back a military action to get him out of there?:)

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • gue_barium wrote:
    There's a warrant out for Bush in one European country I can't think of right now. We just need to trick him into going there. You really think congress is going to back a military action to get him out of there?:)
    this is pure fantasy
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    this is pure fantasy

    Can't get anything past you...yeez.

    I guess I'll have to do this one myself. I'll become like a bounty hunter type. I'll ride a motorcycle, wear lots of leather, and pull a cage for my prisoner. It would make for great reality tv. I'll get em when they don't expect it. First Rumsfeld. I'll rough that fucker up a bit, he deserves it. Then Wolfowitz. I think seeing Wolfowtiz being arrested by a vigilante biker on tv may be the one that does Dirty Dick's heart in. Condi, I'll ship her down to Chavez, he can do what he wants with her. Then, its the big fish, Dubya himself. He's going to gitmo in a raft i'll make him build himself.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    gue_barium wrote:
    There's a warrant out for Bush in one European country I can't think of right now. We just need to trick him into going there. You really think congress is going to back a military action to get him out of there?:)

    Germany, if I'm not mistaken.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    thats a complicated question. any motivated prosecutor can find a crime in just about any conduct if it serves his or her agenda. all the privilege issues aside, there is plenty of conduct that could amount to crimes. just ask scooter libby. he doesnt have privilege to protect him and he is being prosecuted. bush probably cant be convicted of a crime under US law as president. and since we dont acknowledge the hagues criminal court, there is no forum for him to be prosecuted in. if one could make a case against bush for iraq why not nixon or johnson for vietnam? or clinton for perjury? the remedy would be impeachment, and that aint happening

    I suppose if anyone's gonna get it then it'll be Rumsfeld then.
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Germany, if I'm not mistaken.


    That's what I was thinking. I couldn't find the article. It was issued a couple of years ago.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    I signed it.

    Edit: Whoops! Wrong thread. I signed the petition.
Sign In or Register to comment.