This has to be seen to believed. John Conyers asks John Yoo a simple question: "Is there anything the president could not order be done to a suspect?" He can't give a straight answer. So Conyers reduces it to a simple hypothetical: "Could the president order a suspect to be buried alive?" He still can't answer! It's a yes or no question!
What can be done in the face of such a disgusting evasion of simple decency from the Bush administration? Not much, but laugh.
Gary Farber has invented a game, "Stump the Yoo". Go ahead, think of some outrage you would propose as a hypothetical to John You, just to see him squirm.
Gary suggests, "Can the president order the arms of a suspect eaten by wolves while still attached?"
How about, "Can the president order a suspect to be impaled for his lunchtime entertainment?"
Or perhaps, "Can the president order a suspect to be repeatedly drowned to the point of suffocation?"
Your turn. Can you think of a question that would get John Yoo to say simply, "No, the president cannot order that"?
- Log in to post comments
Can a president order a person to eat his own foot?
Could the president order a president to be buried alive? That depends which other country this other president was the president of. If he was the president of, say, a country the US had just invaded, then sure.
(Going by past history, anyway.)
Can a president order a person to never get a straight, thoughtful and honest answer that goes to the very hearts of all questions that person might ever ask?
PZ is that your example: "Can a president order a president buried alive?" Himself, or his Dad, or maybe Clinton or Carter?
Oh the imagery.
Can a president order a suspect's knees raked with a cheese-grater, then have him dragged around the shark tank at Sea World?
Can the President order me to get pregnant, and not have an abortion?
Can the President throw me in prison and torture me if I won't believe in his god?
Don't get me started PZ I can turn grown men into piddling puppies with my haraden behavior over the prez...grrr!
Recall that Yoo got put on the spot sometime back by a constitutional scholar from Notre Dame who asked him if the president could order that an enemy's son have his testicals crushed, and Yoo said he could.
The reason Yoo is hedging here is because he knows he will be skewered if he gives what he thinks the answer is, because it is YES to all of the above.
The real question is whether Yoo believes the President could do all these things not to a hypothetical "enemy combatant," but to a citizen of the United States.
I'll bet the answer to that is "yes," but we won't get it.
Can the president order that an immovable object be made?
Can the president order the sun to stop shining?
Well really, why not ask those questions? Yoo seems to model the president on the same thing the Bible models its god upon, the eastern despot who is responsible for inanimate nature, as well as humanity.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Gary suggests, "Can the president order the arms of a suspect eaten by wolves while still attached?"
of course!
didn't SCOTUS just state that all citizens have the right to bare arms?
The president has as much right as any citizen to bare arms, regardless of the circumstances of their, uh, "liberation"...
(you may now smack me with a rolled-up newspaper)
Yoo would be more at home with a Mugabe-style strongman than a democratically elected Presnit. It is truly terrifying to see exactly what sort of individuals were given positions in the Bush regime (the Liberty University grads in the DoJ come to mind).
And to think, we're not out of the soup yet!
Just what we need more of in politics- grandstanding in Congress and serious questions boiled down to simple "yes" or "no" answers.
Woo's evasion of the question isn't commendable, but Mr. Conyers doesn't exactly acquit himself well either.
Could the president order you, Mr. Yoo, to be renditioned to Saudi Arabia to be interrogated, then decapitated? And if not, why not?
doov
Can the President order a person to shoot a man in Reno just to watch him die?
Could the president order me to turn myself inside-out?
Can the president order John Yoo to declare that the "enhanced interrogation techiques" were indeed torture?
(From someone whose first name is Yoo, not John Yoo.)
Can the President send a side order of broccoli to his father?
George W playing along:
"Can the President order a thin crust pizza? no seriously....i'm hungerly. he he he"
Note that the second question Conyers asks is "Can the President order a *suspect* to be buried alive," not "[...] a president to be buried alive."
Torture is illegal under both U.S. and international law. But Yoo wouldn't commit to that. So Conyers, quite reasonably, was trying find out where Yoo would draw the line. It wasn't grandstanding, it was trying to stop stonewalling.
Yoo has gone on record previously as supporting torture of a suspect's family members. Such despicable opinions, especially from a senior Justice Department official, should be exposed as widely as possible.
Can the president order me to burn out my eyes with a soldering iron, then make me take a DMV eye test?
Could the President make you, John Yoo, answer my questions with a simple "Yes" or "No" response?
Could the president order a cattle prod to be shoved into a suspect's anus and then turned on?
Could the president order that the suspect explode in a shower of rainbows, polka dots, and Care Bear plushies?
Could the president order that the suspect must travel in time to save Lincoln?
Could the president order giant ants to consume the suspect alive while the suspect sings the national anthem?
Could the president order that the suspect solve pi to infinity?
Corey @ 11
There is a place for direct yes/no questioning; when people repeatedly refuse to address the issue or the obvious consequences of their positions.
I agree that oversimplifications are juvenile and unhelpful in many circumstances, but do you really believe that is what is happening in this context? John Yoo isn't defending a complicated, nuanced, considered position that requires education and investigation to understand. He's simply being a yes-man to an administration that has used fear and misinformation to deprive citizens of their human rights while lining their own pockets with the proceeds of an illegal war.
My submission: Could the president order a suspect to be grated into a powder and sprinkled on his toast?
All of these commands make me think of the "Preacher," comics by Garth Ennis and Steve Dillon. Humper-dumper-di-do!
Can the president bring down the god he is always mentioning to in his speeches?
Can the President order anybody in congress openly religious to prove the existance of their deity?
Can he order Congress to reduce their pay to the income level of the average middle class American?
Can he order the Federal Reserve to be directly accountable to the American people?
Can he order any of the members of the three branches of government to pass a simple high school science exam?
Q: Can the president order all the books he has read (both of them) in alphabetical order?
A: No, the president cannot order that.
Can the president make a boulder so big that even he can't lift it?
Can the president order the new Batman movie to come out a week early? That would be a good order.
Could the president order an act so foul that even he would be sickened by it?
I am certain that every Cal student, graduate and faculty are proud to know that a person of this moral character functions at their wonderful school. What a waste of protoplasm!
Ha! this is getting to be a farce! Should we spend all night with this? We can run through the gamet of all sorts of possibilities! Can the president mutter in his sleep, "Can the president...snore"
Can the president order a suspect to listen to the full Michael Bolton discography?
Can the president order a suspect to eat a booger sandwich?
Can the president order a suspect to give a human sexuality class to Rick Santorum?
Subcommittee transcript:
Representative Amplexus (D-MN)
Could a president legally crack open a suspect's skull and spoon feed the suspect's brain tissue to him?
Could a president fart loudly in a cabinet meeting and blame it on a terrorist plot to release toxic gas?
Could a president order gay sex on the down-low and still be masculine?
Could the president order his dog barney to be neutered for soiling a rug in the oval office?
May a president eat only the marshmellows out of a box of lucky charms?
Can John Yoo answer a question without replying?
Thank you chairman it looks like im out of time
Can the president order someone to spend a week with Ken "Wackaloon" Ham?
I'd sooner kill myself.
Can the president order that he may not order anything?
Can the president order a acetone and pumice enema to prevent a terrorist attack?
Could the president order a suspect to subsist only on sweetener-free brownies while a 24hour loop of the 2 girls one cup video plays endlessly at full volume to gain human intelligence?
Could the president force a detainee to wear an asbestos bodysuit while guards pout molten iron right on his testicles?
And this guy is a law professor. It's kind of like Ken Ham bragging that he used to teach science.
Yoo has no moral center at all. He is a puppet, mouthing lines that he hopes will protect other amoral people from the consequences of their actions.
@#38 More than that, people like Yoo have given the terrorists a propaganda victory that is in a sense giving aid to the enemies of the United States. Ergo: Yoo is guilty of treason.
Can the president order you to put a gag ball in his mouth?
Can the president
I'll stop there.
Can the Preesident order a detainee to Goatse himself?*
*If you don't know, check Wikipedia & Urbandictionary first. Your eyes, mind, body, & soul will thank you.
Can the president have a man tied up, doused in barbeque sauce, and thrown on top of an ant hill if that man went on a date with his daughter, said he would call her back, and never ended up doing so?
Bullshit. The reason that serious questions have been boiled down thusly is that Yoo and his ilk have dissembled, prevaricated, and in general failed to provide good faith answers when those questions are asked. And even when the question is simplified to the point where a two-year-old ought to be able to provide a satisfactory response, they still won't give a straight answer. If your looking for someone to blame for the situation, there they fucking are.
I mean, lets be serious here. If someone representing the president of the United States doesn't reply to the question of whether the president can have a person buried alive with "of course not, are you insane?" then there is something seriously wrong, and it is not the questioner.
How the fuck can you not see this?
Could the president order a suspect crucified? ... if he washed his hands afterwards, of course!
Can the President order ALL the citizens of a foreign country to join arms and sing the "We Both Reached for the Gun" number from 'Chicago'?
With an encore?
hmmm....
Can I watch?
Can the president have a man's children ground to beef and make him eat it?
Can the president have a really long garden hose shoved up a man's anus, up threw the intestines, come out of his mouth and use that garden house to water the lawn of the White House?
Can a president have a man's hands removed and surgically replaced with the tentacles of an octopus just to see what would happen?
Can the president put the American people and the rest of the world threw 8 excruciating years of nothing but corruption, war, torture, stupidity, and utter incompetence and still be able to look himself in the mirror without drenching himself in gasoline and liting a match?
Conyers should have framed the questions to be specifically in reference to Yoo himself.
Could the President lawfully order that John Yoo's nuts be crushed in a garlic press?
Well said.
It is you who is not acquitting yourself well by absurdly equating asking a yes/no question to "grandstanding". In the history of this republic, thousands upon thousands of yes/no questions have been asked of witnesses appearing before Congress ... were those all examples of "grandstanding"? I'm at a loss as to how a person of any intelligence could make your charge, or expect any intelligent person to think it makes sense. And your notion of "boiling down" is foolish nonsense -- Conyers asked many questions trying to determine the shape of this administration's theory of presidential power; it isn't Conyers who isolated that question or posted it here for you to make your transparently ridiculous comments about it; nor is it Conyers who trampled the Constitution, making these hearings necessary. The boiling down is that Yoo's response to this question illustrates well, as Conyers said, the games being played. And that this is so bleeding obvious indicates that you too, are playing a game.
Can the President order a plausibly deniable fake terrorist attack somewhere in America and then use that as an excuse to invoke martial law and cancel the November election?
Can the President remain in power indefinitely if martial law is declared and not revoked?
Can the President appoint the Vice President as Acting President for an indefinite period of time during a period of martial law?
Tangentially, reminds me of the immortal FafBlog:
A Taste:
Q. How does a War Bill become a War Law?
A. It all begins with the president, who submits a bill to the president. If a majority of both the president and the president approve the bill, then it passes on to the president, who may veto it or sign it into law. And even then the president can override himself with a two-thirds vote.
Q. See it's the checks and balances that make all the difference in our democratic system.
A. It's true.
Can the President order a plausibly deniable fake terrorist attack somewhere in America and then use that as an excuse to invoke martial law and cancel the November election?
hmm, you wouldn't be the first to ask that.
http://www.concordbridge.net/NSPD-51.htm
Conyers: Can the president order someone to take a required physical examination to avoid being grounded after being detailed to Alabama for a year from the Texas Air National Guard?
Yoo: Well, duh, no!
Can the President order Snake Pliskin to be coerced into sneaking into Los Angeles, now turned into a penal colony, to retrieve the remote control unit for a set of military satellites, right now in the hands of a terrorist and the President's daughter?
even then the president can override himself with a two-thirds vote.
O.o
would he have to cut himself into thirds in order to do so?
oh wait...
"Can the president override himself with a two-thirds vote if he partitions himself into three pieces with say, a chainsaw?"
Now for your entertainment: John Yoo answers the questions of the ages!
I'm sorry but I can't comment on an ongoing investigation.
I like Conyers, something I can't say of many politicians. I'd suggest he could be a VP candidate... but, as unpleasant as it is to ask, would an all black ticket be electable in the US today?
truth machine, while you're here, have you considered writing your own blog?
Thanks muchly, P.Z. Good to see this stuff get publicized. Loved your suggestions.
Minor wordo in your post: "Could the president order a president to be buried alive?"
That's "order a suspect to be...."
Ah, I see the commenters have made lunch of that. :-)
I've just added to my post, as an addendum, YouTube audio of John You agreeing tha the President can order the crushing of the testicles of a suspect's children, and a transcript, and my comments from last year on this, which I made at Obsidian Wings, so if anyone wants to hear and read that, too, go check it out again. :-)
Could the President lawfully order that John Yoo's nuts be crushed in a garlic press?
Yoo's (non) answer would be the same ... that he can't envision the President needing to do so, neither confirming nor denying under oath that the Bush administration's view is that there are no Constitutional limits on the President's power. Although I'm not clear why he bothers, since the administration is operating under that view, which includes refusing to prosecute contempt of Congress, and Congress refuses execute its own power to have the Sergeant-at-arms seize those who are in contempt.
Although I'm not clear why he bothers, since the administration is operating under that view
hmm, last year, didn't Cheney essentially define himself as "above" any label of administration or congressional representative one could apply to him, in refusing to fork over various legal documents?
do you remember what his exact argument was again?
I recall it having raised a few eyebrows at the time.
Could the president order John Yoo (and everyone else in America - nay - in the world) to accept Evolution and disavow "god"?
Can the President part his hair behind?
Can the President dare to eat a peach?
Can the President wear white flannel trousers, and walk along the beach?
This is fun.
Myself, I'd prefer the President, and John Yoo, "etherised upon a table...."
truth machine, while you're here, have you considered writing your own blog?
My view right is now is that I don't think it is necessary to order me to write my own blog.
... I did find a reference to it:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2007/12/exarchives_security_c…
do you remember what his exact argument was again?
He argued that, as President of the Senate, he was not part of the executive branch.
because they have both legislative and executive functions
False dichotomies are the bread and butter of sleazy politicians, but rarely are they employed so brazenly. Even Cheney's de facto agents in the media had trouble keeping straight faces.
Q.Could the President read and understand any of the Constitution of the United States?
Sweet merciful fuck, Conyers, can we get on with the Inherent Contempt already? You can put him in jail for contempt of congress, and you can bypass the infected DoJ to do it.
What are you waiting for?
FUCKING DO IT ALREADY!
Hey, I've got one!
Can the president spin a man in a desk chair until he vomits enough to fill a small tub, then drown the man in his vomit?
What are you waiting for?
I keep thinking that our older representatives are recalling Nixon and Clinton, the Iran-Contra affair, and others, and thinking it would be better NOT to open that can of worms again. Moreover, they likely are pressuring other congress critters not to do so as well, in the false belief that avoiding the pursuit of criminal proceedings would somehow be "better for the country" (or at least, themselves).
If that's really the reasoning behind things like this, and Pelosi's tabling of even discussing impeachment, it's most certainly backfiring on them.
the only group that has as low a rating as the current administration is Congress itself, last I checked.
Time for a fire sale.
From Ichthyic's link
It was David Addington.
In fact, when considering the numerous evils of this administration streaming out of the the VP's office, that statement almost always applies. Addington is the least visible yet among the most culpable of these villains. Compared to him, Yoo is the model of straightforwardness and respect for Congress: Just a few days ago, Addington explained that he could not answer questions because al Qaeda may be watching C-SPAN:
www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/26/david-addington-i-cant-talk-about-tor…
This may seem amusing, but the facts about Addington are not -- torture, Plame, secrecy, unitary executive, you name it and Addington is in the thick of it.
Can the president order a concern troll spit-roasted alive?
Also:
Wait a minute. This can't be right... ;)
His argument was that the vice president is not constitutionally a member of the executive branch and instead is a congressional tie breaker.
-------------------
The weird thing is that I agree the Vice president is not executive at least as set out in the constitution. Al Gore functioned as sort of a surrogate chief of staff to Bill Clinton which is actually not the role as written in the constitution.
The problem then is in the view of the VP as a political appointee Cheney is outside of executive privilege( Executive privilege is actually not consititutional itself it was something that nixon pulled out of his ass when watergate was bearing down on him.)
By all legal standards the only thing keeping Bush in office is how liberals are not the types to lead a legislative overthrow of bush.
the only group that has as low a rating as the current administration is Congress itself, last I checked.
However, when you break it down, it turns out that it's largely the Republicans in Congress who are dragging those numbers down, and the huge losses of Republican seats being predicted for November, as well as their recent loss of three seats in Republican stronghold districts reflects that. And while the Democratic leadership is somewhat spineless, the great majority of Democrats in Congress have repeatedly voted the right way -- e.g., 2/3 of Dems in the House voted against the new FISA bill. But far too many people ignore the inherent problem of democratic voting, and attribute the behavior of Republicans and blue dog Democrats to "Congress" or "the Democrats" as a whole.
Can the president teabag a suspect live on Pay-Per-View (with all proceeds going to pay for cocaine) while simultaneously setting fire to the Constitution and drinking absinthe?
The weird thing is that I agree the Vice president is not executive at least as set out in the constitution.
This simply isn't so. The executive powers of the President devolve onto the VP when the President is "unable" to discharge them -- one could argue that, in the case of Bush, that's all the time.
The problem then is in the view of the VP as a political appointee
The VP is not a political appointee; he's an elected officer, as laid out in the 12th amendment.
one could argue that, in the case of Bush, that's all the time.
LOL
Now if only we could get Pelosi to say that...
His argument was that the vice president is not constitutionally a member of the executive branch and instead is a congressional tie breaker.
That does make the false dichotomy quite explicit. He is, of course, both. Cheney is certainly no less a part of the executive branch than are the cabinet members and their staffs, whose powers are not detailed in the Constitution. The Cheney dodge was particularly absurd in light of his own "unitary executive" position, but absurdity of a position is no barrier to these people presenting it, and barely any barrier to others swallowing it.
The weird thing is that I agree the Vice president is not executive at least as set out in the constitution.
I would note that this "weird thing" would lead to the conclusion that a pinch hitter isn't a hitter, an understudy isn't an actor, a backup disk isn't a disk ...
I guess I'll go against the tide here and say that Mr. Conyers was being a bit of a dick.
Yoo was attempting to answer and Conyers just kept interrupting. Yoo didn't even get to complete a _single_ remark before Conyers started in on demanding answers.
After the second interruption, it's certainly clear that Yoo was intending to provide a very weasely, toady kind of answer to a very simple and direct question whose answer is equally simple and direct, but give the guy a fucking chance to say a single sentence before you pillory him for it. That way at least you don't look like you never intended to let the guy talk at all.
The single sentence he was supposed to say was "yes" or "no". I think Conyers gave him more than enough time to do that.
fuck that.
THE ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION ought to be held in contempt for the same reason.
*grrrrrrr*
gotta stop thinking about it before I blow a gasket.
Ian: "Mr. Conyers was being a bit of a dick."
No shit. That's the whole point. You don't take it easy on a mealy-mouthed weasel who is trying to justify torture. You make it hard on him, and you take matters to their logical conclusion and ask if they are just.
Bravo Rep. Conyers.
For all X, where X is an interrogation technique: if X is not torture, would you mind if The President ordered it applied to you?
What would he have to answer "no" to?
"Could the president order a suspect to be forced to declare that Jesus Christ is not his Lord and Savior?"
Can The President get AT&T and other phone companies to illegally spy on US citizens domestically, without wiretap court orders, and then retroactively make it legal so that they're protected against a lawsuit in progress?
He can answer that one "yes"
Fuck yeah, Keep it going, I'm already editting these down, I'm going to use this stuff on the radio tomorrow, no shit, got me LOL!!
noon o'clock Central
stream at http://kpft.org
or 90.1 fm if you're within 50 miles of Houston
Texus that isssss
notthedroids: "No shit. That's the whole point. You don't take it easy on a mealy-mouthed weasel who is trying to justify torture. You make it hard on him, and you take matters to their logical conclusion and ask if they are just.
Bravo Rep. Conyers."
There's a difference between being tough on somebody and being a fucktard. Asking straightforward questions with straightforward answers and being tough on them when they try to weasel out of answering it? Fine.
Asking straightforward questions with straightforward answers and start pitching the guy shit before he can even articulate a single thought? Now you're just announcing to the world "Hey! I'm an asshole and wasn't asking that question in good faith!"
I have been told by friends that the reason that "shrub" is still president is who it would be that would replace him/ would you really want a president Chaney?
actually they said that was why no one has tried to kill him. though most of the killings have been of more liberal leaders than conservative ones.
I will be amazed if the election comes off free & open at all let alone honest and fare.
uncle frogy
I heard part of that exchange on the radio almost sounded like a mafia hearing.
Could the President order the Justice Department to act with extreme partisanship and without conscience while ignoring the Constitution?
Oh wait... we know the answer to that one.
If there's justice in this world, things will be busy at The Hague come Jan. 21, 2009.
actually they said that was why no one has tried to kill him. though most of the killings have been of more liberal leaders than conservative ones.
well, apparently the conservatives get shot too.
they just
won't
die!
Asking straightforward questions with straightforward answers and start pitching the guy shit before he can even articulate a single thought? Now you're just announcing to the world "Hey! I'm an asshole and wasn't asking that question in good faith!"
you need to actually watch the whole proceeding to get an idea why he is reacting like that.
you should watch CSPAN more, evidently. You'd see this kind of thing a lot more, and realize it's the END result created by previous evasions on the part of who it is directed at.
He's acting entirely appropriately in attacking Yoo in this fashion.
as to the term "fucktard"...
I'm sorry, but that is entirely reserved for one Kent Hovind.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ge3bDSqKno
Obviously, a President can order whatever he darn well pleases. I, too, can order that a suspect be buried alive. The important question is not if he can give such orders, but rather whether those orders have to be followed. ;)
Can the president microwave a buritto so hot that he himself cant eat it?
MMmmm, buritto...
Can a President order that all his orders be disobeyed?
Can the President order his own grandparents killed before they give birth to his mother?
As I found out while writing this article, Yoo's hesitancy about that "hypothetical" question about whether it was OK for the President to order someone buried alive may have actually been because they threatened to bury someone alive.
So, in contrast to the question about whether the President could order a child's testicles crushed, this appears to have been too close to actual events for Yoo's comfort.
One of the many astounding things about this is that Yoo is now on the faculty at Stanford, one of the most prestigious law schools in the country.
Dear Mr. Yoo
Can the President make a rock so big that even he can't lift it?
Sincerely,
Stuart Weinstein
could the president order a tornado simply by flapping his wings on the other side of the world?
(i suspect this'd get a "yes").
Given the actual facts, those words apply to you, not Conyers.
As I found out while writing this article, Yoo's hesitancy about that "hypothetical" question about whether it was OK for the President to order someone buried alive may have actually been because they threatened to bury someone alive.
Something known to John Conyers. Ian's judgment lacks perspective.
Could the president order a Happy Meal with McNuggets?
I mean, seriously... Our president is the one we're talking about? Bush? This man thinks we're waterboarding Destro to give up the location of Cobra.
In related news, Christopher Hitchens says: "Believe Me, It's Torture".
Ragutis, thanks for the tip at #104. Worth reading for most. I have been waterboarded as part of training. Reading this brought back choking and suffocating as real as the day it happened. It is torture, saying anything else is a lie.
Ciao
Could the president order all these Lego bricks in order of size?
Can the president order two suspects to gay marry?
Bushie's wet dream:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=itmNiTwHOsM
Can the president order that insufficiently patriotic peasants be flung through the sky to be used as target practice for the amusement of the Cheney Fourth Branch of government?
It's good to be the president.
Can the pResident order a rock made so big that he can't order it lifted to drop on a prime selection of first-born male children?
Can the president order a suspect to slide down a greased razor sharp banister?
This reminds me of a game we'd occasionally play in talk.origins, of asking "what would your God have to do for you to think he was evil." It's amazing how willing some people are to defend things like the massacre of the Amalekites, the sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter, or roasting people forever in Hell.
Can the President order his bodyguards to shoot him as a matter of national safety ?
Can the president order a suspect to give John Yoo a hummer in a Hummer?
Can the president order a suspect to adopt the 8-Track tape format?
John Conyers is an American Hero.
Sophist FCD #44 nailed it!!
Can the President chop a line of coke so long that he could not snort it?
Can the president order that Mike Dukakkas's wife, Kitty, be raped and murdered?
Smurch (@63):
Wrong poem! When it's the Bushies we're talking about, the only Eliot to quote is "The Hollow Men"!
People like him are the same kind of people who did the dirty work for Hitler. Jews in the gas chambers ? Well if its for the best of our nation then let's get over with it.
Could the President order a suspect to watch the ENTIRE SET of Kent Hovind tapes?
(Sorry, that was probably over the line.)
Pharoah's power is unlimited
Will future Presidents be allowed to torture John Yoo's family members for his crimes against the American people?
Is not every presidential signing statement another authorization for everybody in the Executive Branch to go to Fourth Branch for jars of warm spit to lob at Congress?
Can the President order a suspect with fries on the side?
Can the president order a suspect dressed in ONLY Tutu's, a leash and canola oil be paraded through a leather bar during high tea with a sign on his ass reading "No deposit, No Return"?
Can the president order his sky fairy to turn down the temperature here in Phoenix? It's hot as hell (if that sort of thing existed)!
Can the president order the creation of a transcontinental road race in which points are awarded for running over pedestrians?
And if the president does order the creation of an actual Death Race 2000 style venture can he order Laura Bush to compete in it?
Can the President designate certain groups as "illegal enemy populations?"
Can the President order the "evacuation" and "resettlement" of entire groups of people?
Can the President designate Barack Obama for "special handling?"
Can the President ever run out of euphemisms to clothe the shocking and the unconscionable in the language of the bureaucratic and the banal?
Off topic considering the other comments but is anyone else seeing shades of Alberto 'I don't recall' Gonzales in Mr. Yoo?
Can the president order a suspect to ascend into heaven?
Can the president personally cut a living, consious suspect into pieces and eat them, washed down with the blood of children?
Can the president declare himself King for life, and have anyone who questions him murdered?
Perhaps the best question to ask Yoo would be a classic:
Wording on that classic question found here after a quick search, though there are surely plenty of sites.
Can the president order a person to have their foetus aborted?
Could the president order a suspect to shoot a loaded gun at his (the president's) head?
Can the President order someone to have sex with Ann Coulter?
If you're stuck in the Whitehouse with nothing to do
And think perhaps torture might be something new,
Then pick up the phone and call Mr. Yoo.
He'll be quick to inform you how easy it'd be
(It's the perfect deception, as you'll all soon see)
"If queried by Congress," says Yoo, "repeat after me:
'Mr. Chairman, you ask me to give you a clue
Whether the POTUS can order a torture or two,
When clearly the answer came straight from Yoo.'
The Chairman will think your barking up the wrong tree
And quick respond, 'What the hell do you mean me?'
At that point you'll know that you got off scot free.
You see, I won't answer as to whether it's true
Your nuts can be squeezed until they turn blue
If so says the POTUS, then so say we too."
Can the President order someone to have sex with Ann Coulter?
Sex with Ann Coulter? Logically impossible, surely?
Could the president order someone to give him a blowjob?
Re #81
Conyers wasn't being a dick, he was sick of Yoo dodging every question put to him which is why it eventually got down to the "buried alive" question. These weren't questions requiring long, involved answers, they were simple yes or no questions and Yoo refused to give any sort of answer.
What Conyers should have said is:
I'm going to ask you a question and if any word other than "yes" or "no" comes out of your mouth, you'll be held in contempt...
Can a homophobic president order an appointee to give a straight answer to Congress?
As a few others have pointed out, the president can issue an order of that sort. So can I, albeit I have absolutely no authority and would not expect anyone to even consider following my "order".
But, just because the president can say the words and may have relevant authority, that does not mean the order is lawful, moral, or sensible. The only rationale reply to such an order is "No, are you fecking insane?" And, perhaps especially if those sort of nonsensical, immoral, or unlawful orders don't stop, the 25th Amendment may apply--except that would mean Cheney becoming acting (formal) president instead of de facto president.
"COULD the president order the national prohibition of religion? Yes or no?"
It would be lovely to see him try to squirm out of that one.
Can the president, if he suspects your wife or daughter of being a terrorist, rape her right there in front of you, Mr Yoo?
Could the president have Yoo killed.
Can the president choose to repeatedly sodomize his legal advisor with a broken Coca-Cola bottle in order to extract useful information and answers vital to the legal enforcement of national security?
T
Can a president order John Yoo to say poop-poop-a-doo!
Can a president order someone to kill him?
Can the president have people thrown into an arena, to fight
wild animals, for his own entertainment?
The most telling moment is near the end - where Yoo answers
"I don't think the President would have to order that."
Let me repeat with emphasis: "would _have_to_ order that"
Does that mean that it would just be a wink and a nod?
Could the president order a suspect to eat a cock-meat sandwich?