Do the Secret Bush Memos Amount to Treason? Top Constitutional Scholar Says Yes

AlterNet by Naomi Wolf | Mar. 25, 2009 (News Report)

In early March, more shocking details emerged about George W. Bush legal counsel John Yoo's memos outlining the destruction of the republic.

The memos lay the legal groundwork for the president to send the military to wage war against U.S. citizens; take them from their homes to Navy brigs without trial and keep them forever; close down the First Amendment; and invade whatever country he chooses without regard to any treaty or objection by Congress. Full Story »

Posted by Glenn LaBauve

See All Reviews »

View

Review

Dwight Rousu
4.8
 by Dwight Rousu - Mar. 28, 2009

Wolf and Ratner here provide a strong and pointed dialogue examining particular points in the constitution, particularities of the bush papers, and a rich history of such events that should continue to be a strong warning, which seems to be in the process of being slow-walked instead of expedited.

The memos are a confession. The memos could not be clearer: This was the legal groundwork of an attempted coup. I expected massive front page headlines from the revelation that these memos exited. Almost nothing. I was shocked.

The mainstream media have virtually ignored these revelations, though it seems to me this is the biggest news since Pearl Harbor.

You are right. Treason need not involve another state. Aaron Burr was tried for treason. I do think that a plan to control the military, use it in the United States contrary to law and the Constitution and employ it to levy a war or takeover that eliminates the democratic institutions of the country constitutes treason, even if done under the president of the United States.

See All Reviews »

Dwight's Rating

Overall
4.8

Very good
from 15 answers
Quality
4.9
Facts
5.0
Fairness
5.0
Information
5.0
Sourcing
4.0
Style
5.0
Context
5.0
Depth
5.0
Enterprise
5.0
Popularity
4.5
Recommendation
5.0
Credibility
4.0
More How our ratings work »