General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsObama officials refuse to say if assassination power extends to US soil
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/22/obama-brennan-paul-assassinations-filibusterObama officials refuse to say if assassination power extends to US soil
Glenn Greenwald
guardian.co.uk, Friday 22 February 2013 09.46 EST
The Justice Department "white paper" purporting to authorize Obama's power to extrajudicially execute US citizens was leaked three weeks ago. Since then, the administration - including the president himself and his nominee to lead the CIA, John Brennan - has been repeatedly asked whether this authority extends to US soil, i.e., whether the president has the right to execute US citizens on US soil without charges. In each instance, they have refused to answer.
Brennan....was asked:
Could you describe the geographical limits on the Administration's conduct drone strikes?"
Brennan's answer was that, in essence, there are no geographic limits to this power: "we do not view our authority to use military force against al-Qa'ida and associated forces as being limited to 'hot' battlefields like Afghanistan." He then quoted Attorney General Eric Holder as saying: "neither Congress nor our federal courts has limited the geographic scope of our ability to use force to the current conflict in Afghanistan" (see Brennan's full answer here).
Revealingly, this same question was posed to Obama not by a journalist or a progressive but by a conservative activist, who asked if drone strikes could be used on US soil and "what will you do to create a legal framework to make American citizens within the United States believe know that drone strikes cannot be used against American citizens?" Obama replied that there "has never been a drone used on an American citizen on American soil" - which, obviously, doesn't remotely answer the question of whether he believes he has the legal power to do so. He added that "the rules outside of the United States are going to be different than the rules inside the United States", but these "rules" are simply political choices the administration has made which can be changed at any time, not legal constraints. The question - do you as president believe you have the legal authority to execute US citizens on US soil on the grounds of suspicions of Terrorism if you choose to do so? - was one that Obama, like Brennan, simply did not answer.
As always, it's really worth pausing to remind ourselves of how truly radical and just plainly unbelievable this all is. What's more extraordinary: that the US Senate is repeatedly asking the Obama White House whether the president has the power to secretly order US citizens on US soil executed without charges or due process, or whether the president and his administration refuse to answer? That this is the "controversy" surrounding the confirmation of the CIA director - and it's a very muted controversy at that - shows just how extreme the degradation of US political culture is....
....
BainsBane
(53,056 posts)Because it looks like the President may have actually answered the question.
Assassinating Americans within the US is obviously completely illegal and unconstitutional.
harmonicon
(12,008 posts)It's not as if assassinating Americans outside of the country is legal, but we do that. Our country does a lot of shit that's completely illegal; other countries do to. It basically boils down to "might makes right," like it or not.
BainsBane
(53,056 posts)But courts have jurisdiction over what they do within the US. I cannot believe even Scalia and Alito would rule that constitutional.
Oh, God. I'm naive, aren't I.
harmonicon
(12,008 posts)Courts, schmourts. Remember, there's a process before things get to the SC, and that process would never start. It never did when Bush admitted to eavesdropping on every single American with a telephone or internet connection (policies continued under Obama).
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)abomination forever but I don't. Not at all unless your next president is someone like Grayson or Kucinich.
Hugs.
white_wolf
(6,238 posts)We need a "sensible" president who will continue to free up the job creators, violate the U.S. Constitution, give billions to the MIC, and continue the Patriot Act.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Just joking of course. I know what you mean.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)There will always be those in power reaching farther and developing arguments that what they are doing is legal and constitutional.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)MadHound
(34,179 posts)And some American citizen is dead on American soil.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)jsr
(7,712 posts)dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Thus the "non-answer" becomes the answer in itself.
PufPuf23
(8,825 posts)with full followw through on the revelations.
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)EastKYLiberal
(429 posts)whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Neoliberals should be along shortly to remind you.
treestar
(82,383 posts)US citizen members of Al Qaeda are rare, but used as the victims of this, as if they were the most common ones.
Right wingers would cheer if it were Bush and chide us about how they want to kill us. And Al Awlaki did, apparently. At least he was specifically identified, as opposed to the "they" of right wing lore.
As to Glenn, he is determined to find the Obama administration wrong, and not an objective opiner on these things.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022421836