Customer Reviews

Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy

5 star:		(36)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

There have been lots of books about the Bush-Cheney administration, and considerable coverage of efforts to increase presidential power. However, "Takeover's" well-researched, thoughtful and important material requires no outside leverage to gain a prominent spot amongst them.

Savage's summary asserts that Bush-Cheney have succeeded in seizing vast powers for the presidency by ignoring many of the restraints placed on it by Congress, the courts, and the Constitution. Warrantless waretapping, politicization of the Justice Department and the torture debate, use of "signing statements" to claim a right to defy new laws, efforts to impose greater control over military JAG lawyers, secrecy behind Cheney's energy task force (and innumerable other government actions), and holding U.S. citizens without trial as "enemy combatants" have all served this end.

Savage clearly sees Cheney as the force behind these moves, citing Cheney's earlier experiences and actions in government, beginning in the Nixon administration within the Office of Economic Opportunity with Don Rumsfeld, on to episodes of classified information disclosure (eg. illegal CIA spying on Americans, U.S. submarines eavesdropping on Soviet cables), Cheney's restricting access to President Ford by those with competing viewpoints (also reduced likelihood of leaks), and efforts within Congress to support Reagan-Bush power grabs (eg. forcing executive agencies to submit proposed rules to the White House before they could take effect).

The Bush-Cheney powergrab began immediately upon assuming the office. White House Counsel Gonzales was assigned a support role almost on the administration's opening day. September 11 clearly was a God-send to the Bush-Cheney efforts - protecting national security became the all-purpose rationale for more secrecy and more presidential power. However, it was not until January, 2002 that Cheney openly took ownership of the agenda to expand these powers.

Secrecy was extended wherever possible, even to rather mundane topics under the logic that even little pieces could be put together to provide information to terrorists. Republican congressional leadership was only too willing to assist by failing to oversee executive actions, and even restricting congressmen from mentioning the contents of intelligence authorization bills, for fear of criminal prosecution and expulsion. The administration also succeeded in shutting down embarrassing court cases (eg. claiming failure to pursue espionage) on the grounds of needed secrecy. Finally, suppressing scientific findings and rewriting reports has also been a major Bush secrecy tool.

Bush's power-grab even included abrogating signed international treaties. One of the administration's earliest actions was informing the Soviets that we would no longer be bound by the 1972 ABM treaty. The Geneva Accords followed, described as "quaint" by Gonzales, was later circumvented through a number of actions - Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib imprisonments, secret renditions, torture, plans for military tribunals at which defendants would not necessarily know what the evidence was against them, over-ruling JAG leadership, etc.

One of the best-known actions was Gonzales' effort to get A.G. Ashcroft to approve the administration's wiretapping program legality - while Ashcroft was under heavy sedation in an ICU bed. Ashcroft stood by his earlier refusal, while also reaffirming that he was no longer A.G. - he had temporarily ceded his power while in the hospital. (Bush authorized the program anyway. No wonder Ashcroft was booted at the beginning of Bush's second term!)

By the seventh year of Bush-Cheney, Bush had attached signing statements to about 150 bills and referenced 1,100 sections. (The latter figure compares to about 600 for all prior presidents. To be fair, Reagan was the primary prior promulgator.) During this same period, Bush vetoed only two bills. Those puzzled by the discrepancy soon realized that Bush's actions were equivalent to a line-item veto - banned by the Supreme Court in 1998, though supported by future Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito in a memo where he advocated implementation in slow motion so that opponents would be less likely to realize what was happening.

"Signing statements" have also been used by Bush as a means of controlling subordinates in the executive branch (another dimension of the Unitary Executive), and a way of combating "veto-proof" bills. All new bills are now reviewed by Cheney's staff for possible signing statements.

Why have signing statements continued? Savage contends that it is difficult to contest them in court, between all the administration's secrecy and the general inability to acquire legal standing.

So now we have a much-weakened system of government, per Savage. The question is "What will happen in the future?" These new tools lie ready to be used in any new "important cause," and may not be willingly put aside. In the meantime, our civics books are clearly out of date.

With each successive year, the Bush-Cheney administration gets scarier and undoubtedly more out of control. Political grabs for power have always been the name of the game in Washington, but the current White House has taken it to new and unprecedented levels, subverting the Constitution along the way. Charlie Savage's terrific new book, "Takeover", charts the "progress" of the Bush years and with it offers up some startling results.

It's been known for some time now that the run up to the war in Iraq was based on conjecture. As Savage reminds us, Tony Blair's cabinet had correctly surmised that (regarding the potential invasion) "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy". This was only the beginning for the Bush people and, having gotten their way with that, the rush to accumulate power within the executive branch of government was underway. Castrating Congress, disregarding the courts and avoiding public opinion, the administration went on a tear. Legalisms became the norm in order to sidestep the law as the White House pulled the wagons in closer and tighter.

One of the main thrusts of "Takeover" is a discussion about Unitary Executive Theory which amounts to an idea that an executive can ignore previous laws, precedents that are attached to them and to do pretty much at will as he so desires. This often takes the form of "signing statements". It is here that Savage really makes his case for how far out on a limb Bush-Cheney have gone. With their team of lawyers working seemingly around the clock to get around anything that might get in the way, (and in their mind, "weaken" the executive branch) Savage adeptly and successfully crashes their party. He documents the egregiousness and the shameful tactics that Bush has gone to with results that will be long-lasting. The precedents they set now are really the worst part and any future president can then look back on these years and claim them as their own. In the wrong hands, this could be devastating.

I highly recommend "Takeover" for the author's uncovering and recounting yet more of the disgrace that this administration has brought to America. It's a searing account of the past six and a half years in Washington and portends an even more frightful last year or so with Bush-Cheney in control. One would hope that Charlie Savage is working on a sequel that will deliver a final exposé to this most corrupt and harmful presidency.

The number of books being written about the excesses of the Bush years increase almost daily, and keeping up with all of them is becoming nothing short of impossible. That said, keep in mind that not much is new from volume to volume, but "Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency..." covers most of the issues competently if not completely.

It is difficult for some readers, especially those who refuse to see the inadequecies and subversions of this presidency to read books that are not flattering, but hopefully they can leave their ideology for a while.

Had some of the events that took place within the oval office during the last six years occured during the previous administration there would have been very credible reasons to seek impeachment, and the failure of Congress to demand a better accounting of the insane power grabs is incomprehensible, but partisan politics seems to be the only measure to take, not take action. America has lost so much credibility during this imperial presidency that it will take decades to even begin to repair some of the damage, and then only if our politicians on both sides of the aisle wake up, and soon.

There are "oh, now I get it!" moments on nearly every page of this highly readable, superbly-researched and sourced book. Although the title implies that this might be a book about George W. Bush, it's actually the story of how Dick Cheney visualized, masterminded, and executed the destruction of Constitutional limits to the power of the President. Savage shows us that starting with his work in the Nixon administration as Rumsfeld's assistant at the Office of Economic Opportunity, continuing with his term as Wyoming's representative to Congress, and then during his service in the administrations of Reagan and George H.W. bush, Cheney worked relentlessly to formulate his vision of an imperial presidency, and form a team that would assist him in stripping away Congressional oversight of the actions of the President. By the time he was selected to be George Bush's running mate for the Presidency, all the pieces and characters were in place, and the rest is history.

Savage looked at all the documents, court rulings, and white papers relating to Cheney's work, and in this book makes a powerful case that we would have known what we were in for today if we had studied the history of this man. It's a case-study of how to demolish democracy. This is compelling and mandatory reading for anyone who cares about the Constitution of the United States and the future of our democracy.

Horrible. Disgusting. I was filled with repulsion to the depths of my being, in reading this book.

Savage makes an exquisite case. He goes through, point by point, in excellently written prose, showing all the ways that Bush and Cheney have subverted the constitution. He doesn't do this just referring to obscure aspects. He doesn't just present opinions. He looks at the core of the constitution, at the Separation of Powers, and how Bush Cheney et.al. have worked to remove that from the basis of our country. Savage gives a huge amount of meticulous evidence, albeit written in a style that makes it feel like a story.

But it is a story worthy of the great Shakespearean or Greek tragedies. This is not a case where Cheney made a mistake, or misunderstood something. He has been working since his time under Nixon to expand the power of the President. It's not just a case where there's a disagreement on the interpretation of the constitution. He truly believes that Congress should have no oversight over the President, that the President should make laws, and that this was what the Founding Fathers intended. Far worse, over the last seven years, he's enacted his beliefs, so that they are now the custom of the land.

And then it got worse. This belief on the independence of the President, the "Unitary Presidential Theory", is believed by only a small minority of scholars. Most think it only slightly better than the gift your dog gives you when you take it on a walk. (I'm sorry. That was unfair. Dogs leave behind far higher quality.) But now, two Supreme Court Justices were found to believe this idea as well. So Busheney have worked to undermine the future of our country as well, inserting their viscous beliefs into the very top of our court system, that they might slowly win others to their cult of power.

A friend counseled me not to read this book, for it would just make me angry. He was right. But I think we need to be aware of what's going on. Where we once had a country built on the rule of law, with at the time the finest document devoted to freedom and equality in history, we now have only tattered cloth and shattered dreams. We have two men ruling us, devoted to power and control, with no compassion within them. And we have decades ahead of us, to work to correct the destruction they have wrought on our country and the world. I do not believe in my life I have seen a greater example of what it means to be a traitor. If you can stomach it, read this book, to see the work ahead of us, and the shame we now collectively own. For I do not believe in my life I will see us truly healed from these past seven years.

Terrific book.meticulously researched.70 pages of "footnotes"Shows how the two presidents have relentlessly,almost every day,destroyed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.The book will help you see it happening before your very eyes.For example,the upcoming attorney general is the judge who gave Bush the right to arrest American citizens on Americal soil and classify them as "Enemy Combatents".Therefor denying them any rights.No trial by jury.Can be held forever without charges.Can be sent by"rendition" to countries like Syria who have no rules about torture.Both sides of the aisle say this guy will breeze through the confirmation process.Send a copy of the book to your congress persons.

Charlie Savage has done an invaluable service in examining the Bush administration's attempts to augment executive power and effectively neuter the legislative and executive branches. The central villain in this tale is Vice President Dick Cheney. Savage documents Cheney's career as a staffer in the Nixon and Ford administrations, then as a Senator, Defense Secretary under George H.W. Bush, and finally as VP. In all of these various capacities Cheney has been an ardent advocate of expanding presidential power.

Savage also does a good job of analyzing the legal arguments that have been proposed to justify the expansion of executive power. Chief among these legal theories is the unitary executive, which holds that the president should have unfettered control over the activities of the executive branch and that the Congress should be limited in its oversight responsibilities. The unitary executive theory is a fringe philosophy among constitutional scholars, yet the Bush administration packed its staff with adherents to this marginal view. Chief among these was John Yoo, a controversial constitutional scholar who was given virtually unchecked powers to craft the administration's legal justification for its activities in the Office of Legal Counsel.

Savage discusses the various policy areas under which the administration has tried to expand its power. One of the recurrent subjects throughout the book is the Bush administration's creation of military commissions under which suspected terrorists are held indefinitely and not allowed to see the evidence that is being used against them. Another area is the administration's attempts to define the interrogation techniques that will be used on prisoners, in which it has consistently ignored the objections of JAG officers, as well as the program that was set up without Congressional authorization enabling the administration to wiretap the telephone calls of American citizens without warrants. He also also has a separate chapter on the administration's use of presidential signing statements, which enable the president to single out sections of bills that should not be implemented. He then looks at the recent Supreme Court appointees, John Roberts and Samuel Alito, and how they have consistently been unequivocal supporters of expanded presidential power. Finally, he looks at how the administration packed the Justice Department and other agencies with ideologically likeminded political appointees, and gave those appointees the responsibility for new hires.

I should point out, that while Savage is clearly no fan of the Bush administration, his overall argument is decidedly non-partisan. He provides a historical overview of how various post-war adminstrations have tried to expand presidential power, and makes clear that Democratic administrations have been just as assertive in this area. He argues that the Republican-led Congress delegated unprecedented powers to Bush at their own peril, because any Democratic president that comes to power in the near future will be able to exploit this authority. Overall, Savage presents a passionate, clear, well-informed intellectual critique of excessive presidential power in general, and he argues convincingly that Americans of all political persuasions should be alarmed by what the current administration as done in this area.

A lawyer and journalist, Charles Savage, writes like a journalist and summarizes complex legal issues clearly. He demonstrates how Dick Cheney , since being President Ford's Chief of Staff, has worked constantly to expand presidential power, and as Vice President has consistently and effectively argued that neither Congress nor the courts may check imperial presidential power. An excellent book.

A most disturbing aspect of the Bush Administration is how Cheney and his chief counsel (now Chief of Staff) David Addington have maneuvered their way into essentially giving themselves a blank check that allows them to do whatever they want behind the scenes in the name of national security. The enemy has been depicted as an incalculable threat, capable of the most murderous rampages with the worst of weapons, and it is up to the Executive to use every means available to thwart them in their tracks. The War on Terror, this argument implies, requires a constant and never-ending state of emergency, in which the Legislative and Judicial branches do not have the power to check the Presidency.

The author details how the efforts by Cheney and Addington to consolidate and extend Presidential power have a history that goes back to the Nixon Administration, to the time when a young Cheney was hired by Donald Rumsfeld. The power of the Presidency had reached a low point then, and as Cheney became more empowered in government, he became more determined to reverse that trend. David Addington solidified and emboldened Cheney's efforts to defend the actions of the Reagan Administration during Iran-Contra affair, and thereafter provided him with the force of legal arguments. During the first Bush Administration Cheney became Secretary of Defense and brought along Addington as legal counsel.

Even before 9/11, Cheney was busy putting into practice the theory of the Unitary Executive (the phrase was taken from the Federalist Papers) for the new Bush Administration. In a scenario that has became all too familiar, Cheney claimed that the Executive had a right not to disclose information about the Energy Task Force. According to Cheney, the public had no right to know about the origins of the decisions made concerning energy policy (that is, how the oil industry shaped the policy), a position which in effect frees the Executive from all accountability.

The problem of accountability, of course, becomes much more difficult after 9/11 when the matter of national security becomes significantly more critical. Although the actual maneuvers are difficult to follow, because of national security barriers, it is clear the Cheney and Addington sought a legal basis for defying the Geneva Conventions and that they used their influence to get the Office of Legal Counsel of the Justice Department to do their bidding. When Jack Goldsmith tried to make relatively small changes, he ran into a buzz saw in Addington. Clearly, it was their intention to control the Justice Department. Among the shenanigans was an effort to force John Ashcroft to sign off on warrantless surveillance from his sick bed, and people like Monica Goodling using a political litmus test to hire prosecutors.

But of all the tactics, the stamp of Executive arrogance is most keenly to be seen in the signing statements. The author notes that it is unprecedented in U.S. history for the office of the Vice-President to pore over every piece of legislation, and express the intention to refuse to abide by all the parts that it does not like. But Addington acted for Cheney in this way, apparently in Bush's name. Beside insisting that the President could bypass the torture ban passed by Congress, the signing statements seek to thwart all kinds of checks on the power of the Executive over information, whistle-blowing, etc.

Finally, the question that begs for an answer is: just exactly what role does George W. Bush play? In the beginning of the book, the author notes the incident on 9/11 when Cheney seems to have been the one who called the shots. The author notes that Bush has led the way with such things as faith-based initiatives. But as the "Decider", where does he get his information? When it comes to national security, the answer seems obvious. When it comes to legislative and judicial matters, the answer also seems obvious.

A wealth of material you will not find elsewhere.

Before this book I had not heard about Signing Statements. I thought a line-item veto was a good idea if it was to remove pork from large spending bills. But Bush used Signing Statements instead of vetoes and used them to sneakily overturn laws passed by Congress for one purpose: to put the president above the law and shatter the balance of power created by the founders.

Even though I've read other books on King George and the positively evil Cheney (Best Democracy Money Can Buy, State of Denial, Greatest Story Ever Sold, Hostile Takeover), Charlie Savage's Takeover is a must read. It contains a great deal of behind-the-scenes detail and is so well written it is as exciting as a movie script to those of us who are mentally awake. Calling Steven Spielberg and George Lucas!