STILL WIPING HIS ASS WITH THE BILL OF RIGHTS

John Ashcroft, well-known supporter of human rights, is using a little-known law meant to insure presidential security to arrest protestors:

The prosecutors say that Mr Bursey was not in a special “free-speech zone” that was set up for protesters half a mile from the hangar. The pro-Bush people did not need to be there because they were not protesting. Mr Bursey told the cops, defiantly, that he was under the impression that the whole of America was a free-speech zone.

Bill Nettles, Mr Bursey's lawyer, claims that the case is being driven not by the young Mr Thurmond but by higher-ups in Washington, who want a new way to stifle dissent. “This is the type of small-brained decision that could only have been made by bureaucrats inside the Beltway,” says the lanky Mr Nettles. Mr Thurmond's office declines to discuss the case. A spokesman says the office is aware of the letter from the 11 congressmen, but “unless we get a directive from Attorney-General Ashcroft's office [telling us to drop or settle the case], we shall proceed.”

Gee, and I remember Ari Fleisher making a statement that "anyone" could make their disapproval known to Bush, but that the crowds everywhere he went were all supportive ones. The reason I remember is, he was speaking about an event here in Philadelphia, where Bush spoke about port security - an event where protesters were kept far from Bush and even from the path of his motorcade. So just how would he know what people think, unless Karl tells him?

Well, Bush will be back in Philadelphia on July 4th to open the new National Constitution Center. (Yeah, I think it's ironic.) But a call has gone out to protest his appearance, so I'll be keeping an eye out to see if they arrest anyone under the law.
| |