Federal judge likens Bush to Mussolini and Hitler

[basso]

this has got to be a violation of the judicial code of conduct. wonder why the times' hasn't run a story on it yet?

http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getmailfiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2004/06/21&ID=Ar00101

--
AUDIENCE GASPS AS JUDGE LIKENS ELECTION OF BUSH TO RISE OF IL DUCE
2nd Circuit’s Calabresi Also Compares Bush’s Rise to That of Hitler

By JOSH GERSTEIN Staff Reporter of the Sun

WASHINGTON — A prominent federal judge has told a conference of liberal lawyers that President Bush’s rise to power was similar to the accession of dictators such as Mussolini and Hitler.

“In a way that occurred before but is rare in the United States…somebody came to power as a result of the illegitimate acts of a legitimate institution that had the right to put somebody in power.That is what the Supreme Court did in Bush versus Gore. It put somebody in power,” said Guido Calabresi, a judge on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, which sits in Manhattan.

“The reason I emphasize that is because that is exactly what happened when Mussolini was put in by the king of Italy,” Judge Calabresi continued, as the allusion drew audible gasps from some in the luncheon crowd Saturday at the annual convention of the American Constitution Society.

_“The king of Italy had the right to put Mussolini in, though he had not won an election, and make him prime minister. That is what happened when Hindenburg put Hitler in. I am not suggesting for a moment that Bush is Hitler. I want to be clear on that, but it is a situation which is extremely unusual,” the judge said.

Judge Calabresi, a former dean of Yale Law School, said Mr. Bush has asserted the full prerogatives of his office, despite his lack of a compelling electoral mandate from the public.

_“When somebody has come in that way, they sometimes have tried not to exercise much power. In this case, like Mussolini, he has exercised extraordinary power. He has exercised power, claimed power for himself; that has not occurred since Franklin Roosevelt who, after all, was elected big and who did some of the same things with respect to assertions of power in times of crisis that this president is doing,” he said.

The 71-year-old judge declared that members of the public should, without regard to their political views, expel Mr. Bush from office in order to cleanse the democratic system.

“That’s got nothing to do with the politics of it.It’s got to do with the structural reassertion of democracy,” Judge Calabresi said.

His remarks were met with rousing applause from the hundreds of lawyers and law students in attendance.

Judge Calabresi was born in Milan. His family fled Mussolini in 1939 and settled in America. In 1994, President Clinton appointed the law professor to the federal appeals court that hears cases from the states of New York, Connecticut, and Vermont.

_An opinion written by Judge Calabresi in 2000 rebuked Mayor Giuliani’s administration for failing to respect First Amendment rights.

“We would be ostriches if we failed to take judicial notice of the heavy stream of First Amendment litigation generated by New York in recent years,” the judge wrote. Allies of the mayor denounced the opinion as a thinly veiled political attack on Mr. Giuliani, who was then a candidate for the Senate.

Judge Calabresi made his comments from the floor during a question-andanswer period that was part of a panel discussion on the impact of the upcoming election on law and policy.

_“I’m a judge and so I’m not allowed to talk politics. So I’m not going to talk about some of the issues that were mentioned or what some have said is the extraordinary record of incompetence of this administration,” he said.

Two Republicans on the panel politely rejected Judge Calabresi’s contention that Mr. Bush has overstepped his bounds.

A White House counsel under President George H.W. Bush said Judge Calabresi suggested the war in Iraq was a bold and inappropriate use of power without noting that the president’s policy initially enjoyed broad bipartisan support.

“It was approved with a pretty solid vote from Congress,” C. Boyden Gray said. Mr. Gray said conservatives believe Mr. Bush has been too cautious on issues like Medicare reform.

_“If anything, he’s been too shy of doing things,” the attorney said.

_A top Supreme Court litigator, Jay Sekulow,said it would be unwise to place limits on Mr. Bush’s authority simply because he did not win the popular vote.

_“To say that a person who comes in under an Electoral College vote but not a majority of the popular vote and they’re somehow relegated to president-minus,I think is a very dangerous precedent,” said Mr.Sekulow,who is chief counsel for a conservative legal group,the American Center for Law and Justice.

One of the Democrats on stage endorsed Judge Calabresi’s comments.

“I absolutely obviously agree with what Judge Calabresi was trying to get at,” said a former chief of staff to Vice President Gore, Ronald Klain.

[StupidMoniker]

http://www.artthrob.co.za/01july/images/grapes01a.jpg

You would think these things would rot away after 4 years.

[mc mark]

Well? If the shoe fits....

http://data.blogg.de/thorte/images/adolf_bush_gruss.jpg

[111chase111]

Originally posted by mc mark
Well? If the shoe fits....

http://data.blogg.de/thorte/images/adolf_bush_gruss.jpg

Please show how Bush is like Hitler.

Guys, you can hate the guy if you want to but to liken the guy to Hitler is simply silly. It takes away any credibility you have with regard to real arguments and demonstrates what a partisan sheep you are.

[ima_drummer2k]

Don't take the bait, 111chase111.

[mc mark]

Originally posted by 111chase111
Please show how Bush is like Hitler.

Guys, you can hate the guy if you want to but to liken the guy to Hitler is simply silly. It takes away any credibility you have with regard to real arguments and demonstrates what a partisan sheep you are.

You're right chase!

Likening Bush to Hitler is an insult to Hitler.


:D


I was just fooling around chase

[ZRB]

I think it's a completely fair comparison. Bush was appointed president, and has since been responsible for a neo-conservative movement that has led to countless deaths. He has ushered in an era of violence and hatred that could lead to the third world war, and has gone away from nearly every principle that made this country great. He is a divisive prick who cares only for his own personal profit and glory, and is as close to Hitler as any American leader has ever been. I’m glad that some people in the government are finally speaking their minds.

[rimbaud]

Originally posted by 111chase111
Please show how Bush is like Hitler.

Wel, if you look at the picture it is as if he is making the "heil" gesture so mc mark was drawing a visual connection. Mind-boggling, isn't it?

[Deckard]

Originally posted by basso
...............
“I absolutely obviously agree with what Judge Calabresi was trying to get at,” said a former chief of staff to Vice President Gore, Ronald Klain.
So do I.

[B-Bob]

Originally posted by rimbaud
Wel, if you look at the picture it is as if he is making the "heil" gesture so mc mark was drawing a visual connection. Mind-boggling, isn't it?
Would be better if Bush sported that awesome 'tache. I might grow one of those.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by ZRB
I think it's a completely fair comparison. Bush was appointed president,
Get off it! Hitler was fairly elected.... :D

[RocketMan Tex]

http://www.uta.fi/~timo.talvitie/kuvat/Bush%20vs.%20Hitler.jpg

"The great masses of people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. Especially if it is repeated over and over."

--Adolf Hitler

[SamFisher]

Originally posted by basso
this has got to be a violation of the judicial code of conduct.

[.

Really, what section of the "judicial code of conduct" does it violate? When I was in law school, Judge Posner wrote a book about the Starr investigation -- which was still ongoing at the time.



wonder why the times' hasn't run a story on it yet?

"I am not suggesting for a moment that Bush is Hitler. I want to be clear on that" -- because it's not one.

[basso]

Originally posted by SamFisher
Really, what section of the "judicial code of conduct" does it violate? When I was in law school, Judge Posner wrote a book about the Starr investigation -- which was still ongoing at the time.




"I am not suggesting for a moment that Bush is Hitler. I want to be clear on that" -- because it's not one.

yes, i'm sure it's really no big deal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/25/nyregion/25judge.html?ei=5007&en=cbc7ac73fa26bc3d&ex=1403582400&partner=USERLAND&pagewanted=print&position=

--
The New York Times
June 25, 2004
U.S. Judge Apologizes for Equating Victories of Bush and Hitler
By JULIA PRESTON

A federal appeals court judge apologized "profusely" yesterday for remarks he made last weekend at a lawyers convention comparing President Bush's election in 2000 to the rise of Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini.

In a letter to the court, Guido Calabresi, a judge on the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, acknowledged that he had given the impression he was taking a partisan position, opposing President Bush's re-election. The letter was addressed to John M. Walker Jr., the chief judge of the appeals court, who released it to the press.

"In a way that occurred before but is rare in the United States, somebody came to power as a result of the illegitimate acts of a legitimate institution that had the right to put somebody in power," Judge Calabresi told an annual meeting of the American Constitution Society in Washington on Saturday, in remarks that were first reported by The New York Sun. "That is what the Supreme Court did in Bush v. Gore; it put somebody in power," he said, referring to the decision that cleared the way for Mr. Bush to claim victory in the election.

"The reason I emphasize that is because that is exactly what happened when Mussolini was put in by the king of Italy," he said. "That is what happened when Hindenburg put Hitler in."

Judge Calabresi qualified his comments, adding: "I am not suggesting for a moment that Bush is Hitler. I want to be clear on that, but it is a situation which is extremely unusual." The comments provoked a strong reaction this week among lawyers and judges.

In a cover letter also released yesterday, Judge Walker said, "I am pleased that Judge Calabresi has promptly recognized that his remarks could too easily be taken as partisan and hence were inappropriate." Partisan political comments by judges are a violation of the code of judicial ethics.

Judge Walker, who by coincidence is President Bush's cousin, did not suggest there would be any further action against Judge Calabresi.

Judge Calabresi said that in his off-the-cuff remarks he was trying to make "a rather complicated academic argument," but he understood that they had been taken as an attack on President Bush. In a letter that contained no less than four apologies, he said he was "truly sorry" for "any embarrassment" he might have caused the appeals court. He did not, however, renounce the views he expressed.

Judge Calabresi was appointed by President Bill Clinton in February 1994. Before that, he was dean of the Yale Law School.

[basso]

more:

http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getmailfiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2004/06/25&ID=Ar00103

--
Calabresi Apologizes for Bush Jabs

Judge Says He’s Sorry for ‘Partisan’ Remarks

By JOSH GERSTEIN Staff Reporter of the Sun



A federal appeals court judge apologized yesterday for public comments that many viewed as a call for voters to remove Mr. Bush from office in the November election.

Judge Guido Calabresi of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals said he did not intend to express a view about the president’s re-election when he compared Mr. Bush’s rise to power to that of dictators such as Hitler and Mussolini.

“Although what I was trying to do was make a rather complicated academic argument about the nature of reelections after highly contested original elections, that is not the way my words, understandably, have been taken,”Judge Calabresi wrote in a letter to the circuit’s chief judge, John Walker Jr.“I can also see why this occurred, despite my statements at the time that what I was saying should not be construed in a partisan way.”

In the one-page letter, which the court released to The New York Sun yesterday, Judge Calabresi apologized four times.

“I am truly sorry and apologize profusely for the episode and most particularly for any embarrassment my remarks may have caused you, my colleagues,and the court,”the judge wrote.

Judge Walker circulated the apology yesterday to all members of the court, along with a memorandum in which he suggested that Judge Calabresi’s comments ran afoul of ethics rules that forbid judges from entering the political fray.

“Partisan political comments, of course, are violations of the code of judicial conduct. As Judge Calabresi has acknowledged, his remarks reasonably could be — and indeed have been — so understood, whatever his intent,” Judge Walker wrote. He also warned his colleagues to avoid repeating Judge Calabresi’s mistake.

“I urge all members of the court to exercise care at all times, but especially in an election year, to refrain from any conduct or statements that could reasonably be understood as political activity or publicly endorsing or opposing a candidate for public office,” Judge Walker wrote.

In remarks to a liberal lawyers’ conference in Washington last Saturday, Judge Calabresi called the Supreme Court’s decision resolving the 2000 presidential election an “illegitimate act.” He went on to compare the way Mr. Bush arrived in office to decisions installing Mussolini and Hitler in their countries.

“It seems to me that one of the things that is at stake is the assertion by the democracy that when that has happened it is important to put that person out regardless of policies, regardless of anything else,” the judge said.

The judge’s comments were first reported Monday in the Sun. They drew criticism from several law professors and led to discussions on some law-related Internet blogs about whether the judge had violated ethical constraints.

In recent days, Judge Calabresi’s comments have been celebrated on sites maintained by strident opponents of Mr. Bush.

Critics of Judge Calabresi’s comments said yesterday they welcomed the judge’s concession that his remarks were inappropriate.

“It’s good he recognizes that,” said a

professor and legal ethics specialist at George Mason University, Ronald Rotunda. But the professor said the apology does not erase concerns about Judge Calabresi’s impartiality.

“One wonders whether anybody with a case of political significance could get a fair shake from Calabresi,” Mr. Rotunda said.

Another legal scholar who had raised concerns about the remarks said he does not think the matter should be pursued further.

“This is a very good response,” said a law professor at the University of California at Los Angeles, Eugene Volokh. “I don’t see anything else to be done about it.”

Mr. Volokh said he did not think Judge Calabresi would be required to recuse himself from politically sensitive cases.

In his letter yesterday,Judge Calabresi did not refer directly to the analogies he drew to Hitler and Mussolini.

“I will not take the time here to outline the non-partisan theoretical framework I was trying to develop. In retrospect, I fear that is properly the stuff only of an academic seminar,” he wrote.

Last month, Judge Calabresi’s wife joined protesters who denounced Mr. Bush as he visited Connecticut to attend a graduation party for his daughter. She told a reporter she was protesting on behalf of herself and her husband.

Judge Calabresi’s letter did not address that episode.

President Clinton appointed Judge Calabresi to the appeals court in 1994. Prior to his nomination, Mr. Calabresi was dean of Yale Law School for nine years. He was born in Italy in 1932 to a family with Catholic and Jewish roots. His family emigrated to America to escape Mussolini’s fascist regime when he was 6.

[ROXRAN]

Al Gore is still the Devil incarnate and you immoralistic liberals know it!

[Ottomaton]

http://dorothyblodgett.homeip.net/dictator.jpg

[robbie380]

Originally posted by ZRB
I think it's a completely fair comparison. Bush was appointed president, and has since been responsible for a neo-conservative movement that has led to countless deaths. He has ushered in an era of violence and hatred that could lead to the third world war, and has gone away from nearly every principle that made this country great. He is a divisive prick who cares only for his own personal profit and glory, and is as close to Hitler as any American leader has ever been. I’m glad that some people in the government are finally speaking their minds.

good comparison...can i make a comparison between you and a drama queen? or perhaps someone can make a comparison between clinton and ted bundy? hey...i mean they are completely the same. its clear to anyone who isnt a moron that bush really wants to create racial superiority and murder anyone who he doesnt think is racially good. oh yeah i also heard bush isn't really trying to return control of iraq to the iraqis. he is just over in iraq to take control of the country and never give it back and all these plans are really bs. hey i just heard bush was murdering blacks and mexicans because he didnt want them here. my gf has to go into hiding because she is mexican and bush is trying to put her in an internment camp.

oh wait...i forgot there were internment camps in WWII. gee....i guess FDR is like hitler too.

just shut up and think before you make extremely stupid statements. i'm sorry i don't usually get to insulting people but this is just stupid how you can say stuff like this

[KaiSeR SoZe]

how the hell is it "the same ****"

[ZRB]

Originally posted by robbie380

just shut up and think before you make extremely stupid statements. i'm sorry i don't usually get to insulting people but this is just stupid how you can say stuff like this


ur rite. eyem sory. eye dont no how eye can argu that... ur post is gr8 and you r da man.

[robbie380]

Originally posted by Ottomaton
http://dorothyblodgett.homeip.net/dictator.jpg

lol...wow way to take things out of context. i remember watching him give that quote. he was JOKING! freaking drama queens. i swear all you partisan people are all alike. it doesnt matter if you are from the right or left. hey lets take a quote and get a somewhat sinister looking picture of bush and put them together so they look really bad when the original quote was not said in that sort of context. GREAT JOB MISLEADING!!!:)

[robbie380]

Originally posted by ZRB
ur rite. eyem sory. eye dont no how eye can argu that... ur post is gr8 and you r da man.

im sorry for calling your post stupid, but you are making a silly comparison that is way over the top and incorrect. maybe now you can address the stuff i said in my previous post.

[MacBeth]

Originally posted by robbie380
im sorry for calling your post stupid, but you are making a silly comparison that is way over the top and incorrect. maybe now you can address the stuff i said in my previous post.

I'm interested. How is a comparison 'incorrect.'?

You can make many parallels between Bush and Hitler or Mussolini. You can make comparisons between Hitler and Churchill.

Remember, Hitler was reviled long before anyone knew about the Holocaust. He was reviled for using deception and fear to promote war, for subverting the democratic process and reducing civil rights, and for invading lesser nations in the face of global opposition. *cough*. THAT was the Hitler the world rose up to fight against. NOT the Holocaust, about which we mainly knew nothing and cared less until after the war.

Similar comparisons can be made with Mussolini, especially his African campaign.

[nyrocket]

http://www.dbr.nu/noin/gr/boring.jpg

“Why of course the people don't want war... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.”
Hermann Goering

“The art of leadership... consists in consolidating the attention of the people against a single adversary and taking care that nothing will split up that attention... The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category.”
Adolf Hitler

[KingCheetah]

Since everyone is exaggerating and taking things out of context why not move to the next ‘logical’ step…

http://sens-de-la-vie.com/Images-dok/Satan-bush-cornes.jpg

Minions

[robbie380]

Originally posted by MacBeth
I'm interested. How is a comparison 'incorrect.'?

You can make many parallels between Bush and Hitler or Mussolini. You can make comparisons between Hitler and Churchill.

Remember, Hitler was reviled long before anyone knew about the Holocaust. He was reviled for using deception and fear to promote war, for subverting the democratic process and reducing civil rights, and for invading lesser nations in the face of global opposition. *cough*. THAT was the Hitler the world rose up to fight against. NOT the Holocaust, about which we mainly knew nothing and cared less until after the war.

Similar comparisons can be made with Mussolini, especially his African campaign.

ok well incorrect may have not been the perfect word choice for expressing my feelings. yes you can make a comparison to hitler, but i guess if you want to go out on a limb like that then i can compare anyone to hitler. hell i could probably compare kerry to hilter because of the way kerry flat out lies about the economy and how bad he says it is when it is really very strong. the job growth hasnt been great under bush up until the last quarter, but now it is simply stellar. so i make the comparison by saying they both lie therefore kerry is like hitler. kerry is trying to play off this false idea in the american public that the economy isnt good when it really is so he is trying to create a false sense of instability so he can use that false belief to get elected. maybe i am oversimplifying the argument but thats how i feel the comparison is incorrect and by incorrect i should probably say invalid. am i kind of making sense? i'm not sure if i am expressing myself entirely well.

i mean you can also compare FDR to hilter because he systematically rounded up people by race and nationality and threw them in internment camps just like hitler. does that mean FDR was like hitler? i don't think it does, but the comparison can be made. FDR was also much closer to an american dictator than bush has ever been. thats why i feel all this stuff about comparing bush to hilter is so over the top. its really annoying how people can make such wreckless statements and accept them as truths.

if you really believe bush is out to take over the middle east for its oil then so be it, like a hilter might do. i don't think you do, but i know there is this strong belief in america that it is his purpose. there is no feasible way for that even to be done. people get extremely dramatic with what bush has done as if he is going to take over america and as if he has destroyed all the freedoms in america. i have seen nothing change and its almost as if most of it is imagined. like i said if things were that bad do you really think moore's movie would be out? do you think that these protesters would be allowed to protest? there is this strange idea that is around in the heads of most anti-bush/anti-war people that they are labeled unpatriotic for not supporting the war. yes that was true immediately after 9/11, but can you not tell me that sentiment faded quickly and that it then became this imagined sort of response? kind of like what you see that pops up immediately in the D&D threads that have something from someone against the war. i dunno thats just my feeling on it. i hope that made some sense...sometimes i'm not very good at expressing the thoughts in my head.

[ROXRAN]

Long live Bush and the empire he has bestowed upon us all so that immoralistic heathens will be perished so help us all...

[rockbox]

Originally posted by KingCheetah
Since everyone is exaggerating and taking things out of context why not move to the next ‘logical’ step…

http://sens-de-la-vie.com/Images-dok/Satan-bush-cornes.jpg

Minions

Didn't he get rejected from UT???:D

[basso]

Originally posted by MacBeth
You can make many parallels between Bush and Hitler or Mussolini.

well neville, i suppose you're right, but then you could just as easily compare (http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/g/Godwin_s_Law.html) the entire DNC to Vichy, but then at that point you'd have to say the thread had gone GP on us... (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/040623)

[FranchiseBlade]

Originally posted by ROXRAN
Al Gore is still the Devil incarnate and you immoralistic liberals know it!

Liberals did not - Start a war based on reasons that have been shown to be false

Liberals did not - Fire scientists who's scientific findings didn't match their hoped for result.

Liberals did not - rewrite scientific reports in order to make it closer to the outcome that they wanted

Liberals did not - send forged documents to help make a case for starting a war.

Liberals did not - allow a member of the administration with top security clearence to leak the name of an intel officer while we have troops in the field, and then allow that felony to go unpunished.

Bush started a war, did all this other stuff and the liberals are the ones that are immoral? I've never encountered someone with a sense of morality like you have.

[basso]

Originally posted by FranchiseBlade
Liberals did not - Start a war based on reasons that have been shown to be false

Liberals did not - Fire scientists who's scientific findings didn't match their hoped for result.

Liberals did not - rewrite scientific reports in order to make it closer to the outcome that they wanted

Liberals did not - send forged documents to help make a case for starting a war.

Liberals did not - allow a member of the administration with top security clearence to leak the name of an intel officer while we have troops in the field, and then allow that felony to go unpunished.

Bush started a war, did all this other stuff and the liberals are the ones that are immoral? I've never encountered someone with a sense of morality like you have.

did the email from eli pariser arrive early this week?

[ROXRAN]

Originally posted by FranchiseBlade
Liberals did not - Start a war based on reasons that have been shown to be false

Liberals did not - Fire scientists who's scientific findings didn't match their hoped for result.

Liberals did not - rewrite scientific reports in order to make it closer to the outcome that they wanted

Liberals did not - send forged documents to help make a case for starting a war.

Liberals did not - allow a member of the administration with top security clearence to leak the name of an intel officer while we have troops in the field, and then allow that felony to go unpunished.

Bush started a war, did all this other stuff and the liberals are the ones that are immoral? I've never encountered someone with a sense of morality like you have.

It is faulty if a realized, and logical threat is not acted on. Thank God for President Bush!...the rest of your unsupported, unproven snips are pure rubbish idealistic of a hedonistic mind...:)

[FranchiseBlade]

Originally posted by ROXRAN
It is faulty if a realized, and logical threat is not acted on. Thank God for President Bush!...the rest of your unsupported, unproven snips are pure rubbish idealistic of a hedonistic mind...:)
Roxran your mind needs to learn the meaning of hedonism before commenting on my mind.

The other stuff is not unrpoven or unsupported. It's all been discussed and posted on this very website. I'm sorry you missed it.

[ROXRAN]

Originally posted by FranchiseBlade
Roxran your mind needs to learn the meaning of hedonism before commenting on my mind.

The other stuff is not unrpoven or unsupported. It's all been discussed and posted on this very website. I'm sorry you missed it.

Discussed, and posted, but proven?...Mhhmm, I think not.

[FranchiseBlade]

Originally posted by basso
did the email from eli pariser arrive early this week?

Actually I don't know who eli pariser is. I specifically limited my comments to things that had been discussed on this board. Things such as the forged papers sent by Bush to the IAEA. Things such as Bush's firing of scientists and vetting scientists based on political beliefs. The administration's rewriting of EPA reports to better suit their purposes. etc.