The White House wasn’t about to brook any criticism of its conduct of the war from the Republicans when they ran Congress — as unlikely as that cocky, overconfident group of legislators was to offer any — and it’s not going to invite any from the Democrats now that they’re in charge.
In the latest setback for the Bush Administration, a federal appeals court slapped the President down for violating the constitutional rights of a U.S. resident through use of the questionable and discredited “military tribunals.”
Even worse for Bush, the rebuke came from a conservative federal appeals court that the White House thought would rule favorably but the court said the President cannot order people locked up as long as he wants by calling them “enemy combatants.”
Instead, the court ruled, Bush should follow the law and the Constitution but the President, as he always does, plans to appeal.
The fight continues.
We don’t use the word “condign” very often these days.
In case you’re unfamiliar with the term, it means “worthy” or “suitable,” but since the end of the 17th century, it’s been used almost exclusively in conjunction with the word “punishment,” to indicate a penalty that properly suits the crime.
Deep in a newly released 300-page report on the benefits system for the nation’s veterans lies a first look at the dimensions of the disabilities the Iraq- and Afghanistan- war injured are suffering.
Sen. John McCain was wrapping up his last campaign speech in Iowa on Friday when an audience member turned the tables.
Don’t listen to the “screwballs” in the media and the voices “on the left,” the man lectured. He told the Arizona Republican to stick to his guns, particularly in defending the unpopular war in Iraq.
Experts meeting in Miami warn a terrorist nuclear attack somewhere in the world is no longer a question of “if” but “when.”