Attorney General Eric Holder was at Northwestern University Law School yesterday explaining President Barack Obama’s claimed authority to kill any American if he unilaterally determines them to be a threat to the nation. The choice of a law school was a curious place for discussion of authoritarian powers. Obama has replaced the constitutional protections afforded to citizens with a “trust me” pledge that Holder repeated yesterday at Northwestern. The good news is that Holder promised not to hunt citizens for sport.
Holder proclaimed that “The president may use force abroad against a senior operational leader of a foreign terrorist organization with which the United States is at war — even if that individual happens to be a U.S. citizen.” The use of the word “abroad” is interesting since senior Administration officials have asserted that the President may kill an American anywhere and anytime, including the United States. Holder’s speech does not materially limit that claimed authority. He merely assures citizens that Obama will only kill those of us he finds abroad and a significant threat. Notably, Holder added “Our legal authority is not limited to the battlefields in Afghanistan.”
The Obama Administration continues to stonewall efforts to get it to acknowledge the existence of a memo authorizing the killing of Awlaki. Democrats previously demanded the “torture memos” of the Bush Administration that revealed both poor legal analysis by Judge Jay Bybee and Professor John Yoo to justify torture. Now, however, Democrats are largely silent in the face of a president claiming the right to unilaterally kill citizens.
Holder became particularly cryptic in his assurance of caution in the use of this power, insisting that they will kill citizens only with “the consent of the nation involved or after a determination that the nation is unable or unwilling to deal effectively with a threat to the United States.” What on earth does that mean?
He was more clear in establishing that due process itself is now defined differently than it has been defined by courts since the start of this Republic. He declared that “a careful and thorough executive branch review of the facts in a case amounts to ‘due process.’” Of course, from any objective standpoint, that statement is absurd and Orwellian. It is basically saying that “we will give the process that we consider due to a target.” His main point was that “due process” will now longer mean “judicial process.”
That last statement goes to the heart of the controversy. Many reporters have bought into the spin of the Administration that there are real limits to this power because they perform their own constitutional analysis for each killing. This starts with the presumption that the Constitution does not require these determinations to be made by a court or that they be subject to court review. They then redefine the protections of due process as a balancing test within the administration. This Administration has consistently maintained that courts do not have a say in such matters. Instead, they simply define the matter as covered by the Law Of Armed Conflicts (LOAC), even when the conflict is a war on terror. That war, they have stressed, is to be fought all around the world, including the United States. It is a battlefield without borders as strikes in other countries have vividly demonstrated.
The result is that they are claiming that they are following self-imposed “limits” which are meaningless — particularly in a system that is premised on the availability of judicial review. The Administration has never said that the LOAC does not allow the same powers to be used in the United States. It would be an easy thing to state. Holder can affirmatively state that the President’s inherent power to kill citizens exists only outside of the country. He can then explain where those limits are found in the Constitution and why they do not apply equally to a citizen in London or Berlin.
All the Administration has said is that they closely and faithfully follow their own guidelines — even if their decision are not subject to judicial review. The fact that they say those guidelines are based on notions of due process is meaningless. They are not a constitutional process of review. They are a dressed claim of process for a unilateral power. Presumably, the President can override the panel or disregard the panel. The panel is an extension of his claim of inherent unilateral authority.
If the “limit” is the internal review described by the administration, we are speaking a different language. Any authoritarian measure can be dressed up as carefully executed according to balancing tests, but that does not constitute “fifth amendment analysis,” “fourth amendment analysis,” or any constitutional analysis that I know of. It is at best a loose analogy to constitutional analysis.
This is precisely why the Framers rejected the “trust me” approach to government, as discussed in this column.
Since last year, U.S. drones have killed three Americans overseas.
Source: LA Times
Mespo,
Such a peaceful slice of scripture before bedtime!
mespo727272 The sword coming from the mouth of Jesus is his word. Humans of flesh,and blood desperately want it to be a physical sword.
Gods light shining on those that love darkness is perceived by the wicked to be Gods wrath. Know the spirit of God who is Jesus before you open the K,J,V bible. Jesus does not even throw a grain of sand.
Jonathan Hughes:
“Had Gods word wanted to kill anyone for anything the word made flesh that dwelt among us would have made that abundantly clear that he wanted killing. Jesus showed us no such thing…”
************************
13 He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses. 15 From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will [a]rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the [b]wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty.
~Revelations 19:13-15
In developing your keen analysis of sacred scripture do you ever read the Bible?
One of the secrets of comedy is repetition.
Had Gods word wanted to kill anyone for anything the word made flesh that dwelt among us would have made that abundantly clear that he wanted killing. Jesus showed us no such thing.. He healed humans dried tears, and did all good things to humans.
Humans that are anointed by God do not kill they
kjv,
:Isaiah 61;1The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
and,
Luke 4:18 ;18The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
kjv,
Not even a hunt of killing in it. Why then do humans use Gods name to kill?
That makes what you think to kill anyone is a lie originating from the devil Hate to God is murder.
1 John 3:15 ;Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: Pretty clear isn’t it? Please teach others.
There is no truth in you. Jesus is God KJV, PHILIPPIANS 2 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
That is Jesus who is God without his glory. When he comes back it will be with power,and great glory.
John 20;28And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Matthew 24:30;:And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
There will be those that say Lord, Lord, but they will be rejected. Being saved is a lot more than that.
Matthew 12;50For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
Whosoever must have Jesus in them. Don’t and have the form of godliness without the power thereof.,
Had Gods word wanted to kill anyone for anything the word made flesh that dwelt among us would have made that abundantly clear that he wanted killing. Jesus showed us no such thing.. He healed humans dried tears, and did all good things to humans.
Humans that are anointed by God do not kill they
kjv,
:Isaiah 61;1The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
and,
Luke 4:18 ;18The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
kjv,
Not even a hunt of killing in it. Why then do humans use Gods name to kill?
That makes what you think to kill anyone a lie originating from the devil. killing. Hate to God is murder.
1 John 3:15 ;Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: Pretty clear isn’t it? Please teach others.
There is no truth in you. Jesus is God KJV, PHILIPPIANS 2 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
That is Jesus who is God without his glory. When he comes back it will be with power,and great glory.
John 20;28And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Matthew 24:30;:And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
There will be those that say Lord, Lord, but they will be rejected. Being saved is a lot more than that.
Matthew 12;50For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
Whosoever must have Jesus in them. Don’t and have the form of godliness without the power thereof.,
My wife and I are moving a couple of miles away from the future Oxford prison FEMA camp in WIsconsin. Like Merry says in Lord of the Rings, ” the closer you are to danger, the less it will find you…..”.
Hey Jonathan Hughes. Correction:
“No one should put anyone to death for anything…”
God’s word does not say this. You need to read Leviticus.
“God says thou shalt not kill…”
Actually it is, “Thou shalt not Murder.” Big difference.
“God says that so we will save our soul.”
No. God says to believe in His Son. Whomever shall call upon his name shall be saved.
Video stopped at 18:30 minutes when I viewed it.
Maybe some of the Nut Jobs in DC should volunteer for their own interpretations of the Law.
What happened to our Constitution and Bill Of Rights? What happened to America? We will not survive another 4 years of this tyranny.
Hotsie totsie, I smell a Nazi.
I agree queen29.
As long as we’re not getting water boarded, what’s a little death?
@Bathsheba
The liberal democrats don’t complain about this sort of thing because they can’t see that Obama is holding the neocon status quo — people who will “hold their nose and vote for Obama” contribute to the country’s movement to the right. Obama isn’t better than the other guy — he is the other guy. They see the (D) after his name and assume that voting for him is the only way to fight against a neocon take over. But that takeover has already happened…
There are no liberal democrats anymore. The 2000 elections killed the last vestiges of the progressive movement, and Obama’s presidency has put the nail in the coffin. Al gore should have called for protests in the streets after the Supreme Court stopped the recount, but instead he rolled over like every other spineless democrat.
The only alternative I can see at the present is to vote “no confidence” in 2012 by voting for yourself as a write-in. If you abstain from voting out of protest, nobody can distinguish the angry from the apathetic. If you vote for Democrats or Republicans, you’re part of the problem: if you’re like most Americans, you view polarization as a problem, but your solution is… more polarization. Vote “no confidence” and pass it along.
It would be the perfect excuse for wearing funny hats, mespo.
Blouise:
It’s a nasty habit I have of quoting the Bible so that only I and a select few can understand it.
Hey, maybe I can start my own religion!!
mespo,
Yes, I know, but I swear to Zeus, I’m going to fight it.
By the way, that Joshua 5 response was truly elegant but I suspect it flew right over the poster’s head.
Blouise:
Oh, but you will …
I will not be drawn into this, I will not be drawn into this, I will not be drawn
Jonathan Hughes:
“They were warmongers. See whoever that has a militarily, and see the same.”
*********************
13 Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, “Are you for us or for our enemies?”
14 “Neither,” he replied, “but as commander of the army of the LORD I have now come.” Then Joshua fell facedown to the ground in reverence, and asked him, “What message does my Lord[a] have for his servant?”
15 The commander of the LORD’s army replied, “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy.” And Joshua did so.
~Joshua 5
You little apostate, you.