Rules of the Road
Imagine we’re playing a baseball game, and I’ve just hit a single (as unlikely as that may be.) Taking a big lead off first, I decide to try to steal second base. I take off for second, the catcher deftly snatches the pitch and, with lightning speed, fires a throw to the second baseman, who’s in perfect position.
There’s no doubt that the second baseman is going to tag me out. By a mile.
So I pull a gun out of my waistband and shoot him.
Now, to my knowledge, nowhere does it say in the baseball rule book that I can shoot another player. Nor, as far as I know, does it say that I can’t. But, as a society, we do have laws about such things. So perhaps instead I could throw dirt in the second baseman’s face. Or perhaps I could spike him. (Both have been done many times). Or perhaps I could do something less visible, like drugging his coffee or threatening his wife and kids.
And I might even get away with it.
Here’s the point: it’s very difficult to forge rules that cover all possible circumstances. And even if you do, how would you enforce those rules? Sure, you might have a speed limit, but by using a radar detector or driving on the back roads, you can probably avoid getting caught.
People evade rules all the time. But does that mean that we shouldn’t have rules at all? Or laws? Of course not. Speed limits are instituted for reasons of public safety, and the rules of baseball help to ensure the integrity of the game. The essential element here is that the rules need to apply equally to everybody. When they don’t, it casts doubt upon the very integrity of the institution, whatever that institution might be. A sense of “fair play” is essential for just about any human activity you can think of. Without it, civilization collapses and it’s the law of the jungle: Eat or be eaten.
When we break a rule in a game, it’s called cheating. When we break a law, we call it a crime.
So what do you call it when you illegitimately seize the presidency of the United States?
That’s called a coup.
And that’s what happened on December 12, 2000.
Katherine Harris, Florida Attorney General (and, incidentally, Florida Chair of the Bush/Cheney campaign) had certified the Florida vote count as giving Bush a minuscule 537-vote edge out of almost 6 million cast. The margin was insanely small (only 0.009%), but if the result stood, Florida would give Bush the edge in the Electoral College, even though he had lost the national popular vote by over half a million votes.
Irregularities were rampant, among which was a pre-election voter purge by AG Harris, who illegitimately had thousands of likely Democratic voters removed from the eligible voter list. Those potential votes were gone forever, but there were many other problems with the vote count. So-called “hanging chads”1 and the “Brooks Brothers Riot”2 (engineered by convicted criminal trickster Roger Stone) were just two of many issues. After a flurry of successful court rulings challenging the accuracy of the result, a state-wide recount was well underway when, shockingly, the US Supreme Court ordered a stop to it.
In a 5-4 decision, the court allowed Harris’ vote count to stand. This meant that one single person (any one of the five justices who voted in favor of Bush) overruled all the state courts who had issued carefully-considered, carefully-argued rulings. And by that same single vote, any one of those five justices had overruled the will of a country where over 100 million people voted, a plurality of them for Gore.
By any definition of the term, this was a coup, pure and simple. Make no mistake about it.
Noted Harvard University Law Professor Alan Dershowitz (no Democratic partisan, as his later support of Trump would demonstrate) wrote:
[T]he decision in the Florida election case may be ranked as the single most corrupt decision in Supreme Court history, because it is the only one that I know of where the majority justices decided as they did because of the personal identity and political affiliation of the litigants. This was cheating, and a violation of the judicial oath.
And, as Justice John Paul Stevens said in his dissenting opinion:
Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.
Stevens turned out to be absolutely right, as we shall see later on. But in any event, that’s how George W. Bush became America’s 43rd president by one single vote, out of a country of over 300 million.
So rather than being the protectors of democracy, as was their job, the Supreme Court had instead used its solemn authority to brazenly force its own will upon the American people. Reminiscent of the robber barons of a century before, the court felt it had the impunity to exempt itself from judicial standards and instead, make its own rules as it suited them.
And thus, like it or not, the Supreme Court had spoken. Five of the nine justices had handed the presidency to their own chosen candidate… and there wasn’t a damn thing anybody could do about it.
Dubya
What did George W. Bush do the minute he got into office? He set his administration to undoing Clinton policies wherever he could.
- Bush scuttled a deal with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il to halt missile development that was “tantalizingly close“. As a result, North Korea was able to test its first nuclear device in October 2006, destabilizing the region and posing a major threat to US security.
- Bush refused to enforce Clinton environmental rules, allowing more poisonous arsenic in drinking water (amongst other things) and walking away from the Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty signed by 180 countries to reduce global warming.
- Bush banned aid to international organizations that even mentioned abortion as an option.
- Bush deregulated religious charities, allowing federal funds to flow to them in a clear violation of separation of church and state.
- Bush pushed through Congress a trillion-dollar tax cut that would explode the federal deficit. (Clinton had a surplus at the end of his term.)
- Bush halted stem cell research on new stem cell lines.
This was all in the first seven months.
But the change of Clinton policy that would have the most devastating impact was the Bush administration’s about-face on what had been Clinton’s anti-terrorism strategy. What Bush did – and didn’t do – would prove to be utterly catastrophic, with consequences we’re dealing with to this day… murderous consequences with no end in sight.
Al Queda
Richard Clarke, Counterterrorism Czar for the National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-Terrorism under Clinton testified that when it came to Al Queda, the Clinton administration had their “hair on fire.” In search of bin Laden, Clinton had bombed not one, but two sovereign nations2, nations that had not taken any direct action against the US.
Let me repeat that. We bombed not one, but two sovereign nations, nations who hadn’t taken any action against the US.
Bombing another nation is a big deal, particularly when they haven’t done anything against you. It’s an act of war.
That’s how worried the Clinton administration was about bin Laden.
From Wikipedia:
Clarke wrote in Against All Enemies that in the summer of 2001, the intelligence community was convinced of an imminent attack by al-Qaeda, but could not get the attention of the highest levels of the Bush administration. At a July 5, 2001, White House gathering of the FAA, the Coast Guard, the FBI, Secret Service and INS, Clarke said that “something really spectacular is going to happen here, and it’s going to happen soon.”
During the transition, the outgoing Clinton administration was utterly consumed with imparting the threat of bin Laden and al Queda to the incoming Bush staff. But the Bush administration ignored repeated near-frantic warnings, most notably with the CIA’s famous Presidential Daily Brief “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”, presented to George W. Bush on August 6, 2001.
From the above Politico article:
By May of 2001, says Cofer Black, then chief of the CIA’s counterterrorism center, “it was very evident that we were going to be struck, we were gonna be struck hard and lots of Americans were going to die.”
The warnings were ignored. Why? Bush was certainly anxious to put his own stamp on the presidency by distancing himself from Clinton policy; that much is clear. But there was another issue at play that few people mention today:
At the time, the Bush administration was all about abrogating the ABM Treaty, a treaty with Russia that prohibited nationwide missile defenses. Unilaterally exiting the treaty would allow the US to embark upon a new arms war in space, the so-called “Star Wars” initiative that Reagan had dreamed up (otherwise known as the “Strategic Defense Initiative,” or “SDI.”)
“Star Wars” was exactly the sort of scheme the ABM Treaty expressly prohibited.
Yes, deploying nuclear weapons in space would threaten all life on Earth. And abrogating a carefully-negotiated treaty would mean that any future international agreements with America wouldn’t be worth the paper they were written on.
But a new arms war in space would allow billions of tax dollars to flow to Republican-backing defense contractors, companies like Halliburton, from whom ex-Halliburton Chairman (and now Vice-President) Dick Cheney would stand to make many millions. So making “Star Wars” a reality was of the highest priority.
And that’s where the Bush administration was directing their energies when the airplanes hit on 9/11.
Saddam
Below is one of the saddest photos I’ve ever seen in my life.
The picture is from 2010 and it was taken in Iraq – nine years after the 9/11 attacks and after over 4,400 American soldiers had lost their lives. The photo made its rounds via email; here was the text:
The proud warriors of Baker Company wanted to do something to pay tribute to our fallen comrades so since we are part of the only Marine Infantry Battalion left in Iraq. The one way that we could think of doing that is by taking a picture of Baker Company saying the way we feel.
Let the world know that ‘WE HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN’ and are proud to serve our country.
As you can see, they’re in Iraq and spelling out “9-11 – We Remember.” The 4,431 deaths of American soldiers in the Iraq War (not including the 3,650 contractors killed and 31,994 wounded in action) is horrific enough. But the saddest part of it is:
Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. And the Bush administration knew it.
Despite the fact they knew there was no connection between Saddam, al Queda and 9/11, the Bush administration cynically embarked upon a campaign to deliberately deceive the American people. Instead of owning up to the greatest security failure in American history, they used the 9/11 attacks as a pretext to remove Saddam and try to gain control over the country that had the second-largest oil reserves in the world. It’s now 15 years later, but what I wrote at the time (lightly edited) still holds true:
If the picture was taken in Afghanistan, that’s one thing. Or if they spelled out “Saddam Was a Bad Guy,” that’s another.
But, as you know, Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11. Nothing at all. Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were mortal enemies – Saddam was secular and is Osama [bin Laden] was a radical Muslim. Our invasion of Iraq was a dream come true for bin Laden, for Iran and for radical Muslims everywhere.
Al Queda in Iraq did not exist until after the invasion, and only came into being in reaction to the American presence there. In fact, al Zarqawi (who was behind the bombing of the Golden Dome mosque that kicked off the sectarian violence) was deliberately allowed to operate by the CIA in northern Iraq, which was in the “no-fly” zone and thus beyond Saddam’s control. Al Zarqawi was super-dangerous and high on the CIA’s target list, but the CIA was ordered to leave al Zarqawi alone, despite knowing his whereabouts. Why? Because the Bush administration wanted to use his presence in Iraq to cynically “justify” their claim that al Queda had a connection to Saddam. The “connection” between al Zarqawi and Saddam never existed, and the Bush administration knew it.
After the invasion, the CIA lost track of al Zarqawi, he bombed the Golden Dome mosque, setting off the Iraqi insurgency and the rest is history.
This is not “left,” or “right” – this is the simple truth, unpleasant as it may be.
There were three real reasons Bush decided to invade:
- A bid for control of the world’s second-largest oil reserves
- Personal reasons: revenge for alleged assassination attempts against Bush’s dad – the son trying to show the father that he could “finish the job” Dad couldn’t and Bush wanting to be a “wartime president”
- Establishment of an American power base in the region
Of course, the American people never would have supported a war – a pre-emptive war, no less – for such reasons, so the Bush administration cynically used 9-11 as as a pretext and ginned up the fake threat of WMD to seal the deal with visions of a “mushroom cloud.” It’s ironic that in supposedly seeking to prevent a secular Iraq from developing an atomic bomb, we have now made it practically inevitable that a radical theocratic Iran actually will. [Note: Iran is currently on the verge of being able to create a nuclear weapon, as predicted.]
For this, over 4,400 of our brave soldiers have given their lives. Sad… but true.
The fact that a grave injustice has been imposed upon them and on the American people takes nothing away from their heroism. We honor those who serve, who have served, and those who have given their last full measure of devotion, regardless of the validity of the cause for which they fight.
As Americans, we can best honor the troops by putting to good use the democracy they defend. Jefferson famously said “An informed citizenry is the only true repository of the public will,” so our duty as patriotic Americans is to seek out the truth (as opposed to simply waving the flag) and vote accordingly.
The people who would perpetrate such a gargantuan fraud on the American people do not deserve to be walking the streets – to say nothing about being elected to public office.
You probably know the rest. The Bush administration’s prediction that US forces would be “greeted with flowers“, leading to an explosion of democracy across the Middle East proved to have been absolute fantasy dreamed up by neocon armchair warriors who never fought a battle in their lives. In fact, the invasion ended up being a disaster. From the Foreign Policy Research Institute:
- The Iraq War destroyed America’s credibility as a promoter of democracy and liberalism in the Middle East.
- Revolutionary uprisings for democratic change continue to roil the Middle East, but none desire official sponsorship or support from the United States given its bloodstained legacy in Iraq.
The Bush Administration botched the occupation spectacularly, giving rise to ISIS when the Americans excluded members of Saddam’s armed forces from any participation in the interim government. The instability in the region caused refugees to flood into Europe and the crisis has led to a resurgence of right-wing movements in Italy, France, Poland and Germany, where the Neo-Nazi AfD (Alternative for Democracy) Party had historic victories in 2024.
So 24 years after 9/11, the murderous consequences of the failure – and deception – of the Bush administration are very much still with us, and will be for the foreseeable future. I’d also bet good money that, in a shameful indictment of our media, a majority of Americans still believe the deception that Saddam was behind 9/11,
So why do I bring all this up? And why do I bring it up so long after the fact?
Simply this: imagine what the world would be like now had the Florida fiasco not prevented Gore from becoming president. A Gore administration would certainly have continued along the aggressive path Clinton had followed in pursuing bin Laden.
So imagine no 9/11. Imagine no disastrous Iraq War. Imagine a nuclear détente with Iran, instead of the toxic relationship we have now. Imagine a greener environment and measures to prevent global warming. That’s just for starters.
The absolute mess we find ourselves in right now – both domestically and internationally – is a direct result of people who, instead of following the will of the people, decided to bend democracy to their own ends, or if that wasn’t possible, to damage it any way they could.
The December 12, 2000 ruling in Bush v. Gore was a major blow to our trust in democracy. According to a University of Washington study, the vote of one justice (whichever one you choose) may well have resulted in the deaths of nearly half a million people. Think about it.
So the next time you see a “Wounded Warrior” ad, think about George W. Bush spending his days placidly painting on his ranch. Or imagine what Bush’s National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice might be doing while the amputees from the Iraq War undergo their physical therapy. Condoleezza is a “Professor, pianist, golfer, and football fan,” according to her Facebook page. Many of her favorite activities aren’t possible for the now-amputees she allowed to be sent into harm’s way… for reasons she knew to be false.
For Bush, Cheney and Rice, et. al., their actions prior to and after 9/11 represented either poor decision-making or deliberate deception, deception for which they paid no significant penalty. But when it comes to the soldiers they sent to fight a pointless war, those who survived will be paying for the rest of their lives.
People like Bush, Cheney and Rice (and the party that enables them) have no shame. They need to know that at least some of us were paying attention to what they did. And now you, too, know all about it. As the photo says, “Remember.”
Bush v. Gore was not to be the last time the court would “violate its judicial oath,” as Professor Dershowitz put it. And it was not to the the last time an activist Supreme Court would use its solemn authority to force its will upon the American people.
As you might imagine, there was more to come. A lot more.
In our next – and last – part, we’ll go into the moment when one of our two great political parties ceased to be a party… and became something else entirely.
