This Is Encouraging, But It Will Probably Have Little Effect

From MSNBC:

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees.

The ruling, a rebuke to the administration and its aggressive anti-terror policies, was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, who said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and international Geneva conventions.

In brief comments, Bush said he will work with Congress to get approval to try terrorism suspects before military tribunals.

Yeah, right. At first, I thought this decision might be pretty big, until I realized that Bush considers himself to be above the law, so the decision will have little if any effect on what BushCo does.

Meanwhile, the GOP is continuing its attack on anyone who suggests that we should impose a timetable for a withdrawal from the Iraq Debacle (I'm assuming that includes General George Casey, the U.S. commander in Iraq). From the Washington Post:

President Bush attacked congressional Democrats and the news media at a Republican fundraiser Wednesday night, accusing the opposition of "waving the white flag of surrender" in Iraq and declaring that there is "no excuse" for journalists to write about secret intelligence programs.

Sharpening his rhetoric as the midterm congressional campaign season accelerates, Bush offered a robust defense of his decision to invade Iraq even though, ultimately, no weapons of mass destruction were found, and drew standing ovations for his attacks on those who question his leadership of the war or the fight against terrorists.

"There's a group in the opposition party who are willing to retreat before the mission is done," he said. "They're willing to wave the white flag of surrender. And if they succeed, the United States will be worse off, and the world will be worse off."

What I'm really enjoying is how Bush and the rest of the Radical Right are continuing their attack on the New York Times and other newspapers for reporting on a program that Bush himself openly discussed in 2001. For God's Sake, Bush signed an executive order in autumn of 2001 calling for "greater cooperation with foreign entities to monitor money that might be headed to terrorist groups," and then posted this executive order on the White House website.

At least one Republican wants the New York Times to be charged with treason over this. Does that mean Bush should also be charged with treason? What is the maximum penalty again if you are convicted of treason? I forget.