This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
FBI Director: I Have to Check to See If Obama Has the Right to Assassinate Americans On U.S. Soil
Fox News reports:
FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “[criteria] for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.
***
“I have to go back. Uh, I’m not certain whether that was addressed or not,” Mueller said when asked by Rep. Tom Graves, R-Ga., about a distinction between domestic and foreign targeting
Graves followed up asking whether “from a historical perspective,” the federal government has “the ability to kill a U.S. citizen on United States soil or just overseas.”
“I’m going to defer that to others in the Department of Justice,” Mueller replied.
Indeed, Holder’s Monday speech at Northwestern University seemed to leave the door open.
Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley writes:
One would hope that the FBI Director would have a handle on a few details guiding his responsibilities, including whether he can kill citizens without a charge or court order.
***
He appeared unclear whether he had the power under the Obama Kill Doctrine or, in the very least, was unwilling to discuss that power. For civil libertarians, the answer should be easy: “Of course, I do not have that power under the Constitution.”
***
The claim 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 [Law Of Armed Conflicts] 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. Holder was not describing a constitutional process of review. They have dressed up a self-imposed review of a unilateral power as due process. Any authoritarian measure can be dressed up as carefully executed according to balancing tests, but that does not constitute any real constitutional analysis. It is at best a loose analogy to constitutional analysis.
When reporters asked the Justice Department about Mueller’s apparent uncertainty, they responded that the answer is “pretty straightforward.” They then offered an evasive response. They simply said (as we all know) that “[t]he legal framework (Holder) laid out applies to U.S. citizens outside of U.S.” We got that from the use of the word “abroad.” However, the question is how this inherent authority is limited as it has been articulated by Holder and others. What is the limiting principle? If the President cannot order the killing of a citizen in the United States, Holder can simply say so (and inform the FBI Director who would likely be involved in such a killing). In doing so, he can then explain the source of that limitation and why it does not apply with citizens in places like London. What we have is a purely internal review that balances the practicality of arrest and the urgency of the matter in the view of the President. Since the panel is the extension of his authority, he can presumably disregard their recommendations or order a killing without their approval. Since the Administration has emphasized that the “battlefield” in this “war on terror” is not limited to a particular country, the assumption is that the President’s authority is commensurate with that threat or limitless theater of operation. Indeed, the Justice Department has repeatedly stated that the war is being fought in the United States as well as other nations.
Thus, Mueller’s uncertainty is understandable . . . and dangerous. The Framers created a system of objective due process in a system of checks and balances. Obama has introduced an undefined and self-imposed system of review ….
Before you assume that Mueller’s comments are being blown out of proportion, remember that it has been clear for some time that Obama has claimed the power to assassinate U.S. citizens within the U.S. As we pointed out in December:
I’ve previously noted that Obama says that he can assassinate American citizens living on U.S. soil.
This admittedly sounds over-the-top. But one of the nation’s top constitutional and military law experts – Jonathan Turley – agrees.
***
Turley said [on C-Span]:
President Obama has just stated a policy that he can have any American citizen killed without any charge, without any review, except his own. If he’s satisfied that you are a terrorist, he says that he can kill you anywhere in the world including in the United States.
Two of his aides just … reaffirmed they believe that American citizens can be killed on the order of the President anywhere including the United States.
You’ve now got a president who says that he can kill you on his own discretion. He can jail you indefinitely on his own discretion
***
I don’t think the the Framers ever anticipated that [the American people would be so apathetic]. They assumed that people would hold their liberties close, and that they wouldn’t relax …
Indeed, given that virtually any American could be considered a suspected terrorist these days, no one is safe from an all-powerful president’s whims.
As I noted in another context, circular reasoning provides all the justification needed:
The government’s indefinite detention policy – stripped of it’s spin – is literally insane, and based on circular reasoning. Stripped of p.r., this is the actual policy:
- If you are an enemy combatant or a threat to national security, we will detain you indefinitely until the war is over
- It is a perpetual war, which will never be over
- Neither you or your lawyers have a right to see the evidence against you, nor to face your accusers
- But trust us, we know you are an enemy combatant and a threat to national security
- We may torture you (and try to cover up the fact that you were tortured), because you are an enemy combatant, and so basic rights of a prisoner guaranteed by the Geneva Convention don’t apply to you
- Since you admitted that you’re a bad guy (while trying to tell us whatever you think we want to hear to make the torture stop), it proves that we should hold you in indefinite detention
See how that works?
And – given that U.S. soldiers admit that if they accidentally kill innocent Iraqis and Afghanis, they then “drop” automatic weapons near their body so they can pretend they were militants – it is unlikely that the government would ever admit that an American citizen it assassinated was an innocent civilian who has nothing at all to do with terrorism.
»
- advertisements -
"the Democrats, the unions and their supporters will engage in"
Your still asleep mary
Perhaps it will be as you say. Perhaps not. I was simply referencing a fictitious Twighlight Zone scenario based on a posted article and previous comment by another ZH'r, and the scenario I laid out regarding Sheriff Joe is in fact happening regarding his investigation of BO.
As you say, nothing will change. Exactly the opposite of what BO kept promising all his believers in 08 (remember Hope and Change?).
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Nothing will change until YOU change.
Many months ago I noticed that there was lots of scifi news these days. I often wonder how some seem to not wake up with all this scifi news.
The better question would be, do I ever not?
Now more then ever I feel extremely suspicious over the Andrew Breitbart death. We all know Breitbart was a thorn in the side of Obama. We also know that the CIA has a dart gun that can shoot a dart that will cause a heart attack and the dart disolves leading not traces of it. Now ask yourself, if Obama thinks he is God, wouldn't he feel empowered to eliminate someone he dislikes and who was about to reveal some very negative video of Obama from his earlier years at Harvard.
Breitbart was the first.
Remember how the KGB assassinated the Soviet defector in London a couple of decades ago? I believe someone walked by and jabbed him with a needle.
The lamestream media immediately reported that Breitbart's death was from natural causes related to heart problems before his body was even delivered to the medical examiner.
It was a needle masquerading as the tip of an umbrella. The poison was ricin.
and the umbrella trick was invented and used by the Bulgarian Intelligence services, with several poisons
NDAA went into law officially on 3-1-2012. http://www.facebook.com/OccupyDallas/posts/303583576362948
Some interesting info from Alex Jones about Breitbart. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tafZTlhtoQA&feature=related
Breitbart had become a threat to "National Security" There is that word again..
And yes, if you are deemed "Enemy of the State" via MIAC report like yours truly, then you may be worried? I'm not.
drive by bitchez
It's pretty clear that agencies of the government have killed a president.
Thanks for promting discussion on this topic.
FFS, Obomber is THIRD generation CIA!!!!!! He was born on their side, trained on their side, and now leading their side.
Director Mueller, From a historical perspective, may the Executive rape my women, burn down my house and seize my lands without recourse? All in a playful freedom loving way of course...
Rape, pillage, then burn -- the order matters.
Yes, Bagbalm, the Executive could in theory take any of those steps as we have in the past on many many occasions in foreign lands, but we would never ever (cross our hearts and hope to die) do such despicable immoral things to US citizens unless we were absolutely, positively sure they were terrorists. Really, we promise. You can trust us. You have my word.
But first let me get back to you on the legal rationale for all this stuff. I'm pretty sure yes for #1 and #2, but we may have to provide a token payment for #3, that is unless you relinquish your rights during any routine water... errr I mean questioning.
/big fat sarc from me, but I can't speak for Mueller.
Sure, you can trust them...
Hey, Geronimo, what do you think about that?
+1 very germane
Ok this is simple
you mother fuckers send me 5000 dollars are I am going to report all of your nazii extremist terrporrist to my local gaurdian.
lets see place some automatics in your garage when you sleep. maybe alittle devel refer in your mail box, and for goood measure a few blogs about hating uncle ben from your IP address and woola.
you dead, in jail and I get your house.
This is one of the reasons why I hope that housing prices never start climbing back up. I've got a lot of equity in my home/property, and if prices go up I'm sure that you'll see confiscations pick up (thanks to Reagan's War on Drugs, which will have no expanded to include any "suspicion" that "terrorist" activities may [or may not] have been "observed" on your property).
tap tap tap
Have you noticed that the TSA are slowly becoming the brown shirts?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_shirts
The TSA can have my brown shorts.
What? They still let you keep some of your shorts so you could "brown" them sometime in the future?
Nahhh...they (SA) look a lot more disciplined.
If you are a normal contributing member of society, whos goal is not to spread chaos, there is nothing to fear from these new laws. The barbarian assault on this great empire must be dealt with using the heaviest hand possible - inside or outside America. Anyone who disrupts the functioning of the government, threatens the safety of the population or the international economic order, is a terrorist. There is no gray area here. I really don't understand the masochists who wish for disorder. Eliminate the terrorist threat, maintain a strong central government and central banking system that can properly regulate, guarantee fairness, and provide basic needs. Only then will we have peace.
You should read Yevgeny Zamyatin's science fiction novel, We. It was written in 1920 or '21 and pictures the result of a regime you imagine.
You forgot the /sarc tag. I mean, NOBODY could be stupid enough to actually believe this.
Then again, given the Santaya quote, ...
Or is it data mining?
I would see Obama as a terrorist who threathens the saftey of the population. Every action he takes weakens our country and our security. Cutting out nuclear stock pile drastically while Iran Build its Nuclear missles, while China continues to build its Military and nuclear capabilities is a clear threat to our security. Obama wants a weakened America. Obama flaunts the constitution. He continues to bager states that want to enforce their immigration laws. obama's failure to secure the border is also another threat to the overall population. A strong central banking system, whats that, Goldman sachs and Bank of America screwing the public along with freddie and fannie and the federal reserve printing money like there's no tomorrow. lol.
That will not get you peace, no matter how stridently you insist it will. It is simply not possible to "eliminate the terrorist threat," because terrorism, by definition, is a tactic, not a human attribute. And anymore, the word is used so casually as to have lost it's meaning altogether, becoming the equivalent of Orwell's Emmanuel Goldstein.
All empires fall, and the US will not be excluded from this outcome.
For someone with the handle diesheepledie, I'd expect some less, ummm, sheepish.
Uh ... OMG how dumb you sheeple are. That is precisely the point!! Duh! We are at war with a tactic. That tactic is spreading chaos. Mindless lawless animals! When a lawless animal is running amok on your property you shoot it! The massive unwashed are not people. They need to be ruled and told what to do. Without a firm boot on their neck they become the lawless animals. THE TERRORISTS. There is you see this ancient rag called "The Constitution". It was written with this naive assumption that men could govern themselves. Well its actually true. "Men", human beings homo-sapiens can govern themselves. But dumb carnivorous bipedal bovines CANNOT! When they begin thrashing about, because their rations aren't big enough, or they refuse to accept their place, they become terrorists. So while needing to maintain the pressure of the war on terror, we need to micromanage and balance the economy to make sure rations, gizmos, and goodies are properly divided amongst the draft animals so they continue to work. Its all just an equilibrium and can be explained mathematically.
And you are half right on your second point, the US will fall, but the empire will not. LLTNWO!!
D.S.D.
OK, you're just sick.
Damn. At least in clubs they have bouncers for people like you.
It is obvious by his above post that he employing pervasive sarcasm. "Jackboot on their necks" was the telltale clue.
check out diesheepledie's profile and you might want to re-evaluate that conclusion.
It's an IQ test. You failed. :-)
Not so sure about that. Sounds like something a zionist would say, and more importantly, believe.
... on the other hand, he does look like one very sick puppy!
Jawol,mein Fuhrer.
Now THAT's the kind of sarcasm that MillionDollarAnus can only strive to achieve!
The kind of sarcasm that brings about the "to red arrow or to green arrow?" dilemma.
I've pretty much had it with the unmarked sarc around here. If diesheepledie is being sarcastic, let him say so. Otherwise I'm going to take it literally. One MDB is more than enough.
Junked!
It's an IQ test. If you can't spot the obvious logic flaws and over-the-top mirroring of the herd's thoughts (eg. "central banking system that can properly regulate, guarantee fairness"), then you're not thinking, just reading.
Better that you go to Yahoo or PuffHost for spoonfed thoughts.
From diesheepledie's profile:
"Biography
Create a set of standardized world wide laws.
Create a one child per family rule.
Create a world police force.
Force more money to be spent on nuclear fusion and other environmentally friendly forms of energy.
Give more power to the IMF and have it replace the role of the Fed on an international scale
Have an international cashless money standard exchanged electronically in order to better regulate the economy.
Democracy does not need to be done away with, but we do need a more limited democracy in order to deal with the problems facing the world. Especially climate change, terrorism, and over population. We need a new government that can act much faster than democracy allows."
I think the data speaks for itself and I'll continue to think for myself, thank you very much.
I apologise, Geekgrrl, for being unduly harsh first time around (though I tried to correct it below after seeing his second rant, which is obviously deranged). And thanks for researching his background, which I failed to do in this instance.
I do, however, counsel all here to keep their thinking caps on at all times when reading on emotive topics - and also to use the 'track' facility to check a few previous posts if unsure of someone's agenda.
Censorship is not necessary if one can discern between opinion, sarcasm, misinformation and gratuitous grafitti. The red 'junk' button gives a "booooo!" and becomes effective when enough others join in.
It's cool i-dog. I saw your later post; my last response was emphatic mainly because of the HuffPo suggestion. :-)
You make some great points. It reminds me of McLuhan, and the limitations of the media. These posts come at us with very little understanding of the people we're interacting with and so much information is lost that it's very easy to misinterpret a post. I've done it so many times and I'm sure I'll do it again; it just seems to be the nature of the media.
Indeed.
At such times, I usually refrain from giving either (as I did here also).
America deemed a "Battle Feild" Yes, in the language of NDAA S1867, Obama CAN order CIA hit's on American soil.
Have a nice day!
For an extended period of time, I've pondered when it would become too dangerous to continue speaking the truth as my conscience dictates. I reluctantly conclude that time, for me personally, has arrived. I see no further benefit in revealing my inner-most beliefs in a public forum monitored by my adversary. From this point going forward, I will keep my own councel, trust in The God Of My Fathers and act in accordance with the values handed down to me as a free American. I sadly sign out of ZH for the last time and I wish ALL of you...God Speed.
That is truly pathetic!!!
Once you have signed into ZH -- or even just visited a few times for an inquisitive peek -- in the eyes of the evil empire you have been tainted by the truth and are a suspected potential terrorist. You have committed a thought crime!
By the way, they won't be sending out VIPR teams with an assortment of lists of varying degrees of dissent from 1 to 100. There will be one sweep in each area with everybody NOT on their "protected" list rounded up into the same trucks and the same disposal camps. You've seen it before ... in Germany, in Poland, in Armenia, in Russia, in China, in Cambodia, in Rwanda, in Kosovo, in Afghanistan, in Libya. They've had lots of practice.
Better to speak up and let your fellow man know that HE is not alone. Only in that way will the resistance grow and will you find, in return, that YOU are not alone.
You are far, far more likely to die of starvation, or at the hands of a zombie horde, when the supply chain breaks down, than at the hands of the criminal junta in DC.
-George Orwell
“The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.”
-Martin Luther King
"Don't let the door hit you in the mangina on the way out."
-ZH Best wishes