Il faut noter combien, depuis l’inauguration du nouveau Congr\u00e8s (\u00e0 majorit\u00e9 d\u00e9mocrate), jeudi dernier, la possibilit\u00e9 d’une crise institutionnelle majeure<\/a> s’est impos\u00e9e dans les commentaires \u00e0 Washington. Il faut signaler ici un tr\u00e8s int\u00e9ressant article de Jeremy Brecher et Brendan Smith (historien et sp\u00e9cialiste de droit), sur CommonDreams.org<\/em>, du 6 janvier<\/a>. On y trouve une analyse \u00e0 la fois technique et circonstanci\u00e9e sur ce que pourrait \u00eatre cette crise.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tLes deux auteurs ne cachent pas la potentialit\u00e9 explosive de l’\u00e9v\u00e9nement. Ils citent le jugement de Tom Engelhardt : \u00abthe mother of all Constitutional crises<\/em>\u00bb. L’impression qu’ils laissent est celle d’une veill\u00e9e d’armes avant un affrontement qui pourrait avoir de tr\u00e8s importantes cons\u00e9quences en mati\u00e8re de politique int\u00e9rieure. \u00abThe consequence will be a power struggle which could if Democrats so choose be the defining moment in the effort to establish legal and constitutional accountability for the Bush administration and thereby force it to end the war.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tLa bataille semble devoir se concentrer autour des demandes du Congr\u00e8s d’acc\u00e8s \u00e0 des documents classifi\u00e9s de l’administration, et autour de l’audition au m\u00eame Congr\u00e8s de fonctionnaires au cours des myriades d’enqu\u00eates (treize sont annonc\u00e9es sur la seule guerre en Irak) qui vont \u00eatre lanc\u00e9es par les commissions des deux chambres. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abConstitutionalists and progressives need to start planning proactively to prepare the public to respond appropriately and effectively to this impending confrontation.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbFirst, that requires an on-going interpretation to people of what is happening and what it means.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbSecond, it involves defining venues for action in which large numbers of people can participate. Rep. John Conyers’ mobilization of popular support for demanding information about the Downing Street memos represents on a small scale what will need to be done on a larger scale.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThird, it requires creating some kind of infrastructure or rapid-response network with the capacity to support such a mobilization.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbFourth, it calls for a broad coalition that reaches far beyond progressives to include conservatives committed to the rule of law and a broad public concerned about the abuse of presidential power and the preservation of democracy. Such a coalition already exists in nascent form, for example in the Constitution Project, which has brought together such improbably allies as Al Gore and Bob Barr to articulate concern about Bush administration abuse of presidential power.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThe power and willingness of Congress to affect Bush’s Iraq policies depends on utilizing the vulnerability of the Administration and its Republican supporters to severe loss of effective power, criminal investigation, and\/or impeachment. That vulnerability is likely to be greatest, in turn, where the Administration can be shown to engage in Nixonian abuse of government power to suppress information in its own interest.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbA defeat of the Bush administration on the right of Congress and the public to know what the government is doing can be the starting point of a broader effort to establish institutional and cultural vehicles for controlling executive power in short, for a transition to democracy.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \tMis en ligne le 7 janvier 2007 \u00e0 14H57<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Il faut noter combien, depuis l’inauguration du nouveau Congr\u00e8s (\u00e0 majorit\u00e9 d\u00e9mocrate), jeudi dernier, la possibilit\u00e9 d’une crise institutionnelle majeure s’est impos\u00e9e dans les commentaires \u00e0 Washington. Il faut signaler ici un tr\u00e8s int\u00e9ressant article de Jeremy Brecher et Brendan Smith (historien et sp\u00e9cialiste de droit), sur CommonDreams.org, du 6 janvier. On y trouve une… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[6303,3285,6302,3228,3009],"class_list":["post-68382","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-auditions","tag-congres","tag-constitutionnelle","tag-crise","tag-democrates"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68382","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=68382"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68382\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68382"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68382"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68382"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}