Skip to main content

View Diary: Assassination Rationales Then & Now--And How Awlaki Didn't Meet Any of the Criteria (163 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Again-this Administration will be gone in 4 years (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gerrilea, Bisbonian

    ...but, the policies will remain.  

    Yes, the GOPers will seize on any opportunity to challenge this Administration.  If there isn't anything they can seize on--they will make something up, and the media will make it the new focus of their reporting.  

    That should not prevent we the People form asking questions about the legalities of policies that could possibly endanger them, in the name of "national security".  

    If Administrations can interpret the Constitution to allow for "extra-judicial" (killing without trial) assassination of American citizens abroad--who can guarantee that future Administrations won't interpret the authority to allow targeting of American citizens who are deemed to be a "security threat"  with drone attacks in the US?  

    Are there guarantees against this?  I don't know--does anyone?, since the documents are secret, and the Administration won't release them, even to Congress.  

    •  I agree entirely (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kurious, Bisbonian

      The policy - which I think was started in the Bush administration, but greatly expanded by the Obama team - is horribly short-sighted.

      I think it is entirely likely that the GOP could raise a congressional hue and cry about the illegality of this policy and calls for impeachment, etc., as a way of scoring points against Obama, and then turn around and carry on the exact same methods and even expand them to cover "criminals" here inside the US when one of their own gets to be president.

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 08:48:46 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What exactly would be considered an Impeachable... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        aliasalias, gerrilea

        ...offense?  Killing American citizens without due process?  Claiming a secret legal justification for such an action.  Claiming the power of the courts and ignoring the constitutionally mandated powers of the Congress to check Executive power?  We're not talking about lying about Oval office blow jobs here.

        Btw, this did NOT start in the Bush administration.  The groundwork of claiming extra-judicial powers to eavesdrop and spy on Americans without obtaining a warrant is a FAR CRY from claiming the power to kill Americans without due process.  this is PURELY a construct of the current administration, as hard as that might be for you to accept.

        •  I do see the connections. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          It's not difficult at all to see this as the next chapter of a narrative started in 2001.

          if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

          by SouthernLiberalinMD on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 01:33:24 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Elizabeth Holtzman... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gerrilea, aliasalias

            "The Impeachment of George W. Bush"


            This book focuses on four articles of impeachment: The Offense of Wiretapping Surveillance in Defiance of the Law; the Offence of Lying and Inducing America to Support a War; The Offense of Reckless Indifference to the Lives and Welfare of American Troops; The Offense of Torture in Violation of U.S. Laws and Treaties. It also provides an invaluable guide to how citizens can get involved in campaigning for impeachment, as well as an important historical analysis of impeachments past. The publication of this book is a summons to action in this process.
            Funny, there were some credible Dems who were making a valid case for impeaching the former president regarding warrant-less wiretapping.  Wonder why, if this is the 'next chapter of a narrative (translated:  escalation of a policy considered an offense worthy of impeachment), it's unthinkable to consider impeachment (not necessarily Senate conviction) based on this escalation?

            I'm not making the argument that there hasn't been an expansion of dubious policies which were instituted after 9/11.  Obviously, there has been.  Had Holtzman carried the day back in 2006, this current chapter would never have been written.  Now we're left with the sad reality that if we once thought an impeachment of Bush was possible based on illegal eavesdropping, how can we not think the same of the current president for expanding those policies to include due process-free assassinations of Americans, making Bush look like a Peeping Tom in comparison?


            •  Hey, no argument here. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              4kedtongue, gerrilea

              If anybody ever got impeached for this sort of thing. Apparently having sex with interns is the only real impeachable offense.

              The "sad truth" is actually that an impeachment of Bush was not possible; both Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama threw that idea out.

              Although, in the interests of strict accuracy, you are putting words into my mouth as I said nothing about impeachment of anybody. Still, as it happens I agree with you, so no harm, no foul.

              if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

              by SouthernLiberalinMD on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 02:11:43 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site