![]() |
![]() |
||
|
Congressman: Bush Signed Bill That Didn’t Pass CongressPosted on Mar 20, 2006Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) has asked the White House why the president signed a version of the Budget Reconciliation Act that apparently did not pass the House. Also, check out a lawsuit on the issue, and an earlier news report.
Advertisement Previous item: Congressman: Bush Signed Bill That Didn’t Pass Congress Next item: Congressman: Bush Signed Bill That Didn’t Pass Congress Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
By Arch~Angel, March 24, 2006 at 9:55 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
HopeSeekr of xMule:
Do you have references for your statements? If so that would make a blockbuster article.
Report thisBy worried, March 24, 2006 at 9:07 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
im just worried what will happen when his term comes up, is he going to have established a perminent dictatorship by then? or will another from his regime take over as the new head?
i mean they havent gone thru all the trouble of taking away our civil rights and invading other countries and creating their whole new world order to simply step down after a couple terms and let someone else reap the rewards
Report thisBy HopeSeekr of xMule, March 24, 2006 at 4:07 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Not so…it’s far worse.
Rep. Hastert (R, IL) was personally responsible for the typo. As of today, it has been revealed that the Whitehouse had been informed of the typo but that Bush signed it any way. It has futher been revealed that Bush used a new “power” he is creating called a “signatory letter”. Basically, he wrote a little note on the bill that said “This is the correct amount because I say it is” and signed it.
Now, it is likely this will go to the Supreme Court. Due to precendence first set in an 1876 supreme Court case, the court has decided that it cannot judge a matter if it would lead to proving that there is a conspiracy in Congress to enact illegal legislation. What this means is that since this would have had to be done via conspiracy that the Supreme Court will rubber stamp this law passage as, well, lawful, and then a signatory letter will become defacto Constitutional law.
At that point, we are effectively in a complete dictatorship run by Executive Orders and Signatory Law, just what Bush, Cheney and Allito want.
Report thisBy spiiderweb, March 20, 2006 at 2:38 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I posted about this back in February. It sounds simple enough. A typo got corrected. But it effectively negated the House vote.
Report this