Bush Signs New Executive Order that Allows U.S. Government to Seize Assets without Due Process
July 19th, 2007Via: TPMmuckraker:
In a little-noticed executive order issued on Tuesday, President Bush directed the Treasury Department to block the U.S.-based financial assets of anyone deemed to have threatened “the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq” or who “undermin(e) efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq.”
The order empowers Treasury, in consultation with the State and Defense Departments, to target those individuals or organizations that either “have committed, or … pose a significant risk of committing” acts of violence with the “purpose or effect” of harming the Iraqi government or hindering reconstruction efforts. It applies to “U.S. persons,” a category including American citizens. It had not previously been disclosed — and still hasn’t — that U.S. persons are abetting the Iraqi insurgency, nor that Iraqi insurgents have property in the United States, raising questions about who in fact the order targets.
“The part where they reserve lots of discretion to themselves is the list of conditions that goes beyond determination of acts of violence. ‘Threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq,’ that could be anything,” says Ken Mayer, an expert in executive orders and a University of Wisconsin political scientist. “Think of the possibilities: it could be charities that send a small amount of money (to groups linked to) the insurgency, or it could be the government of Iran that has assets in the U.S. and has money that flows through a U.S. bank or something like that.”
The order permits the targeting of those who aid someone else whose assets have been blocked under the order — wittingly or not. And under Section Five, the government does not have to disclose which organizations are subject to having their assets frozen:
For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that, because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render these measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and expanded in Executive Order 13315, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 1(a) of this order.
The scope of the order has raised civil-liberties concerns. “Certainly it is highly constitutionally questionable to empower the government to destroy someone economically without giving notice,” says Bruce Fein, a Justice Department official in the Reagan administration. “This is so sweeping it’s staggering. I’ve never seen anything so broad that it expands beyond terrorism, beyond seeking to use violence or the threat of violence to cower or intimidate a population. This covers stabilization in Iraq. I suppose you could issue an executive order about stabilization in Afghanistan as well. And it goes beyond even attempting violence, to cover those who pose ‘a significant risk’ of violence. Suppose Congress passed a law saying you’ve committed a crime if there’s significant risk that you might commit a crime.”
Representatives from the ACLU are still studying the executive order. But preliminarily, says spokeswoman Liz Rose, the order appears to expand the assets-seizure provisions of the Patriot Act, known as Section 806, to organizations linked to Iraqi insurgent groups. Much like the order, Section 806 allows the government to seize assets of banned organizations without prior notice and without a conviction of involvement in banned activity. “It is by far the most significant change (in the law) of which political organizations need to be aware,” the ACLU wrote in 2002, contending that the vagueness of Section 806 potentially implicates legitimate political protest as well as material support for terrorism.
Prof. Kenneth Mayer is a cool guy… I had him for a class called The American Presidency. He fully understood the insanity of the bush/cheney administration. I wrote my final on the unitary executive theory & john yoo… good stuff..
First habeas corpus, now this? Jeepers!
Here’s to the horrible monotony of prick prick prick prick prick prick prick.
I suppose anyone who even thinks about bringing an end to the money machine in Iraq – and that would include the U.S. House and Senate as those subject to this new ruling.
Wow. I can’t wait to see the crowns being fashioned for Georgie and Dickie – the imperial hinesties.
This will, of course, be used against anyone who tries to fight income tax law. Or any other law via civil disobedience.
This will be the “legal” basis of robbing all the future to be interned Iranian Americans and other “Enemy Combatants” (american citizen activists).
Its like WWII all over again. They will even be re-using some of the same camps.
Look out Beverly Hills.
All the Persian Jews who imigrated with great wealth back in the days of the Islamic Revolution kicked The Shah out.
History Repeating itself all over.
Doesn’t this pres-suppose that there is peace and security in Iraq already? You can’t threaten what doesn’t exist…
Then I guess it’s time to round ’em up….
Bush: Dems Delaying Critical Troop Funds
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070720/D8QGDB580.html
Jul 20, 11:30 AM (ET)
WASHINGTON (AP) – President Bush, ratcheting up a fight with Congress over Iraq, accused Democrats on Friday of conducting a political debate on the war while delaying action on money to upgrade equipment and give troops a pay raise.
“It is time to rise above partisanship, stand behind our troops in the field, and give them everything they need to succeed,” Bush said in the Rose Garden after meeting with a veterans and military families.
…
PENTAGON: HILL IS HELPING FOE
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07202007/news/nationalnews/pentagon__hill_is_helping_foe_nationalnews_ian_bishop____post_correspondent.htm
July 20, 2007 — WASHINGTON – The Pentagon yesterday launched a blistering attack on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton for boosting “enemy propaganda” by demanding the U.S. military whip up plans for withdrawal from Iraq.
The forceful pummeling – in response to Clinton’s request that the Defense Department “prepare plans for the phased redeployment” – came in a terse letter to the Democratic presidential front-runner from Defense Undersecretary Eric Edelman.
“Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia,” Edelman wrote in the July 16 letter.
“Such talk understandably unnerves the very same Iraqi allies we are asking to assume enormous personal risks,” he added.
…
Hey! When “Decider-guy” says “seize” he doesn’t have to explain nuttin to any of youse guyz!
So let it be written, so let it be done!