Bush Administration Backs Off JAG Corps Plan

Earlier this week, we posted an entry about how the Bush Administration was attempting to take control over promotions of military lawyers in order to get control of the JAG corps. The Bushies are unhappy with military lawyers who insist that Bubble-Boy doesn't have the power to suspend the Geneva Conventions when it comes to handling prisoners of his War on Terror. Their plan was to make promotion of military lawyers dependent on politically appointed civilians in the Pentagon. The implication was obvious: You buck us on torture, you don't get promoted.

Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe first reported on this plan in Saturday's edition of the Globe. After that report, the Bushies backed off. On Wednesday, December 19, 2007, Savage reported that the plan has been shelved. Now, here's the question: If Democrats didn't control the Congress, would one newspaper report have had the effect of getting Bubble-Boy and his loyalists to back off their crude attack on the rule of law?

Another Bush Assault on the Rule of Law: Going After JAG Lawyers

The Boston Globe's Charlie Savage, who won a Pulitzer for his reporting on Bush's use of signing statements, has a story out about how the Bush Administration is attempting to gain greater control over JAG Corps attorneys. This latest attack by the Bushies on the rule of law would put approval of promotions for JAG attorneys in the hands of political appointees at the Pentagon.

This is a quote from the story:

The Bush administration is pushing to take control of the promotions of military lawyers, escalating a conflict over the independence of uniformed attorneys who have repeatedly raised objections to the White House's policies toward prisoners in the war on terrorism. The administration has proposed a regulation requiring "coordination" with politically appointed Pentagon lawyers before any member of the Judge Advocate General corps - the military's 4,000-member uniformed legal force - can be promoted.

A Pentagon spokeswoman did not respond to questions about the reasoning behind the proposed regulations. But the requirement of coordination - which many former JAGs say would give the administration veto power over any JAG promotion or appointment - is consistent with past administration efforts to impose greater control over the military lawyers.

The former JAG officers say the regulation would end the uniformed lawyers' role as a check-and-balance on presidential power, because politically appointed lawyers could block the promotion of JAGs who they believe would speak up if they think a White House policy is illegal.

Why the media, with the exception of reporters like Savage, doesn't write about how the Bush Administration is trying to undermine the rule of law in America is amazing. Since 9-11 this Administration has claimed the right to:

1. Hold Americans indefinitely without trial and without access to attorneys;
2. Torture terrorism suspects;
3. Send people to other countries to be tortured for information;
4. Hold people indefinitely without any sort of judicial or quasi-judicial review;
5. Determine what laws it will and will not enforce;
6. Intercept Americans' electronic communications without any use of a warrant;

just to name a few. Now we have this latest assault on the idea that attorneys should be free to represent their clients to the best of their ability.

If this was being done by a Bill Clinton, the right-wing noise machine would be in hysterics and the mainstream media would be echoing the shrill screams of people like Limbaugh, Hewitt, Coulter, and Beck.

Since the installation of George W. Bush as President by virtue of a black-robed coup carried out by a Republican majority of the United States Supreme Court, this country has seen all out assaults on the concept of the rule of law. The media's response: to talk about Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.