Fun with President Bush

On "learning" about the Supreme Court's decision in Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld, President George W. Bush reportedly reacted as follows: "To the extent there is latitude to work with the Congress to determine whether or not the military tribunals will be an avenue in which to give people their day in court, we will do so. The American people need to know that the ruling, as I understand it, won't cause killers to be put out on the street."

Presumably, this final remark reflects Bush's relaxation at the news the Hamdan case will not result in his immediate impeachment and removal from office.

But what of the rest of this sparkling verbiage? This is an opportunity to delve into the cognitive workings of the Leader of the Free World and see what's up. Assuming that his verbalization is symptomatic of underlying thought processes, let us deconstruct this quote phrase by phrase:

1. "To the extent there is latitude to work with the Congress to determine whether..." Right away you get an inkling how screwed up this guy's thinking is. (It never takes long, in fact.) First of all, "to the extent" and "latitude," as used here, really amount to the same thing. "Extent" and "latitude" cover identical ground. The phrase could have been stated, "to the extent we can work with Congress to determine..." The latitude is implied in the phrase. But what does the phrase mean? Here we follow along thusly:

2. "or not the military tribunals will be an avenue..." The first thing that comes to mind here is, why wouldn't there be "latitude" to work with Congress sufficient to figure something out? Of course, the "latitude" exists to talk to a bunch of other Republicans about Bush's burning desire to find something that comports less with procedural due process than Uniform Code of Military Justice procedures. Bush doesn't need to be anxious that someone in the Republican Party, including Arlen Specter, is going to go so far as to suggest Guantanamo scum deserve an actual "trial." Let's not get ridiculous. These are people (we guess - no one in authority has ever said, and very few of the Gitmo inmates have ever actually been charged with anything other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time) who supported Osama bin Laden's 9-11 attack. As did Zacarias Moussaoui, who was recently tried and convicted in a federal district court in Manhattan. But these people are different. They were captured "on the battlefield" and are therefore more like "enemy combatants," much like Jose Padilla who was captured on the battlefield of Chicago's O'Hare Airport and classified an enemy combatant, although he's an American citizen. Fortunately, we're a nation of laws, and not an autocracy run at the capricious whim of one man, like some countries we could name. Where were we? Oh yeah. So the latitude is there to figure something out, George. You don't need to "determine" that part. What is it you're trying to figure out?

3. "whether or not the military tribunals will be an avenue in which to give people their day in court,..." Well, George, there you go again. The "military tribunals," as you cooked them up, are the very thing the Supreme Court said you couldn't use, because you usurped Congressional legislative authority, under Article 1 of the Constitution, to determine UCMJ rules and the applicability of the Geneva Conventions. So I can save you time here. In using your latitude to discuss things with Congress to determine anything, don't bother talking about the military tribunals you pulled out of John Ashcroft's ass, because those are off the table. Although keep heart: Congress will come up with some Draconian amendment to the UCMJ to get you closer to your true hope of staging your very own Show Trials, just like some of your heroes used to do. Leading to the summary:

4: "an avenue in which to give people their day in court." Avenue is such a sunny, cheery word. Alas, the whole point of your star chamber procedures in the first place was to make two things certain. That the Gitmo detainees never have a day in court, and that they never have an open forum to discuss all the Geneva Convention violations inflicted upon them. The idea of a "day" in court, however, sounds just about right. Thirty minutes, to be exact.

So what is George W. Bush actually pledging to do, when you read his statement as a whole? He is saying he will figure out whether there is any point in talking to Congress to see if they'll go along with his kangaroo court. Read it through carefully and you will see the man revealed.