Skip to main content

View Diary: Holder responds to Paul (91 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Two years of asking for information. (7+ / 0-)

    2 years of submitting questions to the administration.  And only now, during this confirmation process -- the confirmation of the Daddy of the Drone Program to head the CIA, does the administration

    A) Even formally acknowledge publicly that such a program exists

    B) after a leaked White Paper outlining the legal justifications for the power to target and kill US citizens accused but not charged of any crime on the authority of the president, does the administration agree to share SELECTED OLC legal rationales with the Senate Intelligence Committee -- and ONLY the members of the committee, not their legal staffs.

    C)  Rand Paul isn't the ONLY senator who has been making hay about it.  The ACLU and  Sen. Wyden, a frigging member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, have also complained about how their requests for information has been either ignored or rebuffed by the administration.

    Two years it took.

    •  a better question (may have been asked already) (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lina, 4kedtongue

      would be: under what conditions does the Administration believe a drone strike could be used on American soil?

      If the answer above has been two years in the making, I have to believe that my question has already been asked, and the "nibble around the edges" questions have come in response to the administration's stonewalling. I'd still like my question answered, though.

      Reforms come from below. No man with four aces howls for a new deal.
      Keystone XL will raise gas prices!

      by Turbonerd on Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 12:10:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Didn't Holder already answer that? (0+ / 0-)

        With, like, you know, the very 'effing answer everyone found so lacking just yesterday?

        This game of Calvinball is never going to end, is it?

        "Every now & then your brain gifts you with the thought, 'oh, that's right, I don't actually give a **** about this.' Treasure it" -- jbou

        by kenlac on Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 12:16:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I don't see a good answer to your question (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        4kedtongue, Catte Nappe

        In the sense that I think the actual answer is "when faced with an emergency situation where existing procedures and processes seem infeasible."  If the policy is that drone strikes will never be standard operating procedure, but they are reserved as an option on the table when there is no SOP, is there a way to convey that in a manner that would make you feel like your question has been answered?

        •  Well, given Holder's unequivocal 'No'... (0+ / 0-)

          ...which came after his qualified 'Yes', as you have paraphrased in your comment, the confusion is understandable.

          And since it has only been a few weeks since Michael Isikoff's scoop regarding the leaked White Paper which addressed certain OLC legal opinions creating the legal framework behind the Drone Program and Kill List that the administration has even admitted that such programs exists -- after 2 years of unanswered requests from multiple congresspeople and civil liberties groups -- a little confusion is understandable.

          Let's not pretend that Eric Holder has put this issue to rest.  There are still many issues surrounding these programs and the incremental chipping away of our Civil Liberties.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site