Jay Carney: Okay, fine, Obama doesn’t have the authority to use drones against Americans on U.S. soil

posted at 2:41 pm on March 7, 2013 by Allahpundit

Strictly speaking, Eric Holder already acknowledged this yesterday after three agonizing minutes of Ted Cruz teasing it out of him. But Rand Paul wanted a formal statement from the White House as a condition of ending his filibuster. And now, apparently, he’s got it:

White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters at 1:15 pm. that Mr. Holder’s letter to the Kentucky Republican went out shortly after noon, and just 12 hours after Mr. Paul stages a marathon talking filibuster on the Senate floor demanding clarification of U.S. drone policies and the president’s authority to order strikes on Americans.

Mr. Holder’s letter answers Mr. Rand’s question, “Does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill Americans not engaged in combat on U.S. soil,” Mr. Carney said.

“The answer to that question is no,” he said. “A letter signed by the attorney general has gone out in the last half an hour.”

That’s nearly the full text of the letter, a copy of which you can find at the Weekly Standard. All that’s missing is how it begins: “It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question.” Yeah? Paul’s been demanding an answer from the White House about this since mid-February at least. Only yesterday, after he spent 13 hours on the Senate floor repeating that question a few thousand times, did it finally come to Holder’s attention?

Also, before you celebrate, think carefully about whether Holder’s really answering his concerns. Paul wasn’t just asking about “weaponized drones.” He was asking about targeted killing generally. Sending the CIA in to shoot a guy in the head because he’s on O’s “kill list” doesn’t address the due process concerns just because no drone was used. The phrase “not engaged in combat” is also murky since the entire point of this debate is about defining what it means to be “engaged in combat” against the United States. Paul’s point yesterday was that, even if a U.S. citizen is an “enemy combatant,” the feds should be barred from summarily executing him if he’s on U.S. soil. Only if he’s in the process of carrying out an attack is lethal force justified. That’s his definition of “engaged in combat,” at least inside the continental U.S. The alternate definition is that an “enemy combatant” is, by his very nature, always engaged in combat against America. The DOJ itself more or less adopted that definition by defining “imminence” so broadly in its “white paper” on drone attacks as to suggest that members of Al Qaeda are always, at every moment, posing an imminent threat because they’re “continually plotting.” By that standard, Obama could drop a bomb on a U.S.-born jihadi hiding in an American safe house and still be okay under Holder’s letter here because the target was, as a member of Al Qaeda who was up to no good, necessarily “engaged in combat.” We’ll see what Paul has to say to all this. Not sure if he’s seen the letter yet, but for now he’s enjoying seeing them forced to speak up:

Update: Perhaps it’s time for Congress to stop letting Obama define his own authority on this:

We suspect the day an administration starts killing Americans with drones at cafes — to borrow one of Rand Paul’s hypotheticals — is the day impeachment proceedings begin. If Congress is worried, though, there is a simple expedient. As Andy McCarthy has written, “Nothing prevents Congress from amending the AUMF to provide explicit protections for Americans suspected of colluding with this unique enemy. Congress could, for example, instruct that in the absence of an attack or a truly imminent threat, the president is not authorized to use lethal force in the United States against Americans suspected of being enemy combatants. Congress could also define what it means by ‘imminent.’”

And in fact, Paul and Ted Cruz have a bill in the works that would do just that. Which poses a dilemma for O: Resist on grounds that the bill is a violation of separation of powers because it circumscribes his authority as commander-in-chief, or give in because it would be simply atrocious for a president to oppose a bill limiting his power to assassinate Americans?

Update: Paul says he’s A-OK with Holder’s response:

“I’m quite happy with the answer,” Paul told CNN. “Through the advise and consent process, I’ve got an important answer.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Opie, you told the truth, and I’m proud of you.

- Andy

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 2:44 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

The future is bright.

Bmore on March 7, 2013 at 2:46 PM

Miss Graham, the harlot, is not intoxicated on Obama-shit, and forgot her pet peeve.

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 2:46 PM

Well hey, good for him.

LukeinNE on March 7, 2013 at 2:46 PM

Who would have guessed, Obama gives another half answer.

Filiblizzard II!

LetsBfrank on March 7, 2013 at 2:47 PM

Mr. Holder continues, “We could have gotten away with it too if it weren’t for you meddling kids!

Lily on March 7, 2013 at 2:47 PM

Of course he doesn’t but sleazy Eric Holder would be the last to hold him to any culpability just as Clintoon and Reno skated completely for their administration’s massacre of eighty at Waco.

viking01 on March 7, 2013 at 2:47 PM

he won, and the rest of the GOP should take note. When you stand for liberty and the Bill of Rights – you can win. The liberty movement is the future, old guard RINOs like McCain are the past.

MoreLiberty on March 7, 2013 at 2:47 PM

Watching Paul’s filibuster last night, I couldn’t help but think that this is how Obama imagines himself – a principled crusader for justice. When Bush and Cheney were running the show, whatever could be said about them, at least they were consistent in supporting broad presidential powers in the realm of national security. But it’s hard to look back at the pre-2009 Obama and see him as anything other than an arrogant hypocrite now — somebody who thinks a muscular executive branch is okay so long as he’s running it.

–Philip Klein

Every leftie s/b ashamed. May hypocrisy eat them alive.

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 2:48 PM

is not now intoxicated

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 2:48 PM

Everything from this is good. Obama squirms. Dems interested in civil liberties are now seriously and openly questioning Obama. Civil liberties are put to the forefront of the public discourse. And best of all, McCain and the old coots in the GOP are shown to be utterly foolish to everyone but themselves.

Just brilliant all around.

happytobehere on March 7, 2013 at 2:48 PM

It’s sad that it takes an old-fashioned filibuster to get a simple answer. And still, eventually they’ll come up with some twisted definition of the word ‘engaged’.

Seriously, it depends on what the meaning of ‘engaged’ is.

Fenris on March 7, 2013 at 2:48 PM

SPANK!

CurtZHP on March 7, 2013 at 2:48 PM

There was another bi-product of the filibuster. It took the ‘alarming’ sequester off the front pages.

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 2:49 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

That’s irrelevant. And we should all be glad it hasn’t happened be cause if it had the WH and Justice Department would never have back tracked or given a simple no after Rand’s filibuster. It would have been a clear example of an impeachable offense.

MoreLiberty on March 7, 2013 at 2:49 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Not really the point.

steebo77 on March 7, 2013 at 2:49 PM

Awesome. Big win for Paul. I’m so happy. Obama seems to be losing momentum.

Flapjackmaka on March 7, 2013 at 2:50 PM

I just have to say, the way bho lies and ignores the courts/congress on issues, I do not believe one word from bho/team!

That handy eo pen gets it done as far as bho is concerned!
L

letget on March 7, 2013 at 2:50 PM

If getting the WH to issue a letter that took them 30 seconds to write is some sort of “grand victory” for the GOP then the GOP is doomed.

ronval912 on March 7, 2013 at 2:50 PM

You can parse a hole big enough in that statement to fly a preditor drone right through it.

WisRich on March 7, 2013 at 2:51 PM

Grrrrr!!!!! I hate when young radicals use all these political stunts to win “victories” against tyrants! In my day, we never sought answers from President Cleveland. If he wanted to send guys up in Wright Brothers contraptions to throw rocks and our heads, we thanked him! We certainly didn’t go around filibustering past 5!

Gingotts on March 7, 2013 at 2:53 PM

Mr. Holder’s letter answers Mr. Rand’s question, “Does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill Americans not engaged in combat on U.S. soil,” Mr. Carney said.

“The answer to that question is no,” he said. “A letter signed by the attorney general has gone out in the last half an hour.”

Well good. The lowest bar set in U.S. history has now been cleared by the most transparent, post-Bush-era, Nobel Peace Prize winning, administration evah.

Weight of Glory on March 7, 2013 at 2:53 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Refresh my memory, in the history of the world, how many buffoons thought that tyranny couldn’t happen, when it did?

All that tyranny needs are buffoons, who don’t think it can happen.

Buffoon.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 2:53 PM

There was another bi-product of the filibuster. It took the ‘alarming’ sequester off the front pages.

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 2:49 PM

We’ll know the cuts are too deep when the administration can’t find the money to buy ammo for their drones.

Lily on March 7, 2013 at 2:53 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

None to public knowledge, and even if we assume there have been none the first one would be one too many and even if we move to make sure it doesn’t happen again after the first one then the Constitution will still have been shredded.

alchemist19 on March 7, 2013 at 2:54 PM

It seems McCain and Graham have been made into bugger suckers. To get along with Obama, they turned on one of their own and Obama came up from behind to billy-club them in the knees.

Good! Obama is on record, too, so domestic drone strikes are one power trip he won’t be able to take.

Liam on March 7, 2013 at 2:54 PM

Which poses a dilemma for O: Resist on grounds that the bill is a violation of separation of powers because it circumscribes his authority as commander-in-chief, or give in because it would simply atrocious for a president to oppose a bill limiting his power to assassinate Americans?

This is an easy one…
That’s not much of a dilemma for The One. He cannot give up any power because he doesn’t want to look weak. “Atrocious” means nothing to him.

happytobehere on March 7, 2013 at 2:54 PM

Strictly speaking, Eric Holder already acknowledged this yesterday after three agonizing minutes of Ted Cruz teasing it out of him.

When he could/should have answered right away with “NO”. He is Obama’s capo. They are criminal thugs:

1. Federally sanctioned gun running/Mexico/Lybia/Syria.

2. Napolitano/Obama release criminal illegal aliens, 5000 planned, so far.

3. Drones and all AP wrote – drones are just another type of weapon. It’s about presidential authority, the constitution, invasion, no due process, jusdge, jury and executioner…

Leftists “trust their president”. They are convinced that Obama will be their dictator for life.

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 2:54 PM

If getting the WH to issue a letter that took them 30 seconds to write is some sort of “grand victory” for the GOP then the GOP is doomed.

ronval912 on March 7, 2013 at 2:50 PM

The White House responded to it, thus giving it credence. He played and they danced.

CurtZHP on March 7, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Didn’t Miz Lindsey say Rand’s question didn’t deserve an answer? LOL!

a capella on March 7, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord

Four fewer than noncombatant Americans killed on American soil by the National Guard in Ohio. Your point?

Knott Buyinit on March 7, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Rush just played a lengthy response by Paul, and he believes Obama’s response is binding for all U.S. presidents and sets a precedent for future actions towards U.S. citizens and their due process rights.

Weight of Glory on March 7, 2013 at 2:56 PM

Big victory for Paul here and the Republicans in general. I wonder if he will vote for Brennan’s confirmation now that he’s received a satisfactory answer.

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

None, and we’re making sure it stays that way.

Doomberg on March 7, 2013 at 2:56 PM

Didn’t Miz Lindsey say Rand’s question didn’t deserve an answer? LOL!

a capella on March 7, 2013 at 2:55 PM

No, he said it was an insult. Imagine, he is a lawyer.

Get rid
Of this twit

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 2:56 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Refresh my memory: How many emails had been sent when the Founding Fathers wrote the First and Fourth amendments?

If you think that this is solely about Obama, then you are a FOOL!

Resist We Much on March 7, 2013 at 2:57 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Hey simpleton, “he hasn’t abused it yet” is no reason to excuse a toddler running around with a lit blowtorch. There are some ‘tools’ that should not be available to anyone, much less flaming socialist wannabe-rulers like Oafbama while they are in charge of a nation.

MelonCollie on March 7, 2013 at 2:57 PM

If getting the WH to issue a letter that took them 30 seconds to write is some sort of “grand victory” for the GOP then the GOP is doomed.

Welcome to the party, better late than never I guess.

LeftCoastRight on March 7, 2013 at 2:57 PM

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 2:53 PM

Excellent post.

KCB on March 7, 2013 at 2:57 PM

Due process is one of the Left’s favorite phrases to stretch and accommodate to their agenda—except, of course, when actual due process is at stake.

INC on March 7, 2013 at 2:59 PM

Four fewer than noncombatant Americans killed on American soil by the National Guard in Ohio. Your point?

Knott Buyinit on March 7, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Ruby Ridge
Delta Force and tanks at Waco.

a capella on March 7, 2013 at 2:59 PM

AP,

Note that Holder did not answer Paul’s question whether the president has the authority to kill noncitizen noncombatants on U.S. soil without due process. If Holder and Obama the Constitutional scholar can limit discussion to U.S. citizens, despite the first two words of the Fifth Amendment, then can they expand drone powers to the territorial U.S.?

Christien on March 7, 2013 at 3:00 PM

a capella on March 7, 2013 at 2:59 PM

A minor child kidnapped and deported to Cuba.

MelonCollie on March 7, 2013 at 3:01 PM

someone asked last night how this will end. Early returns are favorable. McCain has, yet again, made a fool of himself, evidently not understanding that the Congress and Executive branch are co-equal and yes, a junior senate, if lucky, can actually take the floor…and hold it to make good constitutional questions…and expanding it to include over-reaches of W. Bipartisan.

By foregounding the issues of limited government, transparency, and oversight as they relate specifically to the most obvious and brazen threat to civil liberties imaginable, Rand Paul and his filibuster have also tied a direct line to a far more wide-ranging and urgently needed conversation about what sort of government we have in America – and what sort of government we should have.

The filibuster succeeded precisely because it wasn’t a cheap partisan ploy but because the substance under discussion – why won’t the president of the United States, his attorney general, and his nominee to head the CIA explain their views on limits to their power? – transcends anything so banal or ephemeral as party affiliation or ideological score-settling.

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/07/3-takeaways-from-rand-pauls-standwithran

read the whole thing, as they say.

but of course, this is a small victory in the re-balancing of the American political class…and a long, long road ahead

r keller on March 7, 2013 at 3:02 PM

National Review sorta dismissed Paul’s concerns in that op ed. I don’t get it…it ought to be critically important to define the limits to this kind of power, no matter how unlikely the hypotheticals may be.

changer1701 on March 7, 2013 at 3:02 PM

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

If you wouldn’t have said anything we would still doubt. Now we know what you are.

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 3:03 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Refresh my memory, in the history of the world, how many buffoons thought that tyranny couldn’t happen, when it did?

All that tyranny needs are buffoons, who don’t think it can happen.

Buffoon.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 2:53 PM

“You are a slow learner, Winston.”

“How can I help it? How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.”

“Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.”

― George Orwell, 1984

Polish Rifle on March 7, 2013 at 3:03 PM

See, that wasn’t so hard was it.

It is really sad that we have an AG, (senior Law Enforcement Officer in the U.S.)who cannot give a yes or no answer to any question put to him by Congress. I weep for our Country.

D-fusit on March 7, 2013 at 3:04 PM

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are really putting on a clinic on how to get under Obama’s skin and beat him at his own game.

Curtiss on March 7, 2013 at 3:04 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Really? We need to wait for the Gov. to abuse its power on US citizens before we start asking questions?

It is shocking to think that a GOV (both parties) that likes to regulate everything “just because” it may cause harm people down the line (from salt and sugar to CO2) is not even concerned with regulating itself from doing harm to its people.

ptcamn on March 7, 2013 at 3:04 PM

One of the better #StandWithRand Tweets taking the RINO sisters to task:

The Bader Nation‏@TheBaderNation

My response when I hear McCain and Graham don’t support @SenRandPaul, http://i.imgur.com/Y0nQE5n.gif #StandwithRand

PolAgnostic on March 7, 2013 at 3:05 PM

“You are a slow learner, Winston.”

“How can I help it? How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.”

Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.”

― George Orwell, 1984

Polish Rifle on March 7, 2013 at 3:03 PM

Love it! Where ya been, PR?

[PR is my Orwell go-to-guy]

And Orwell needs to be quoted – DAILY.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 3:06 PM

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are really putting on a clinic on how to get under Obama’s skin and beat him at his own game.

Curtiss on March 7, 2013 at 3:04 PM

They can actually speak, coherently, for long spans, even finish a sentence, without a prompter.

He is jealous of their oratory talents.

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 3:06 PM

Bmore on March 7, 2013 at 2:46 PM

How, and why, did you make Ted Cruz look like John Belushi?

cozmo on March 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM

Barry butthurt more than usual this morning.

BHO Jonestown on March 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM

It indeed was a say day for the Constitution when Janet Reno perpetrated her Waco Massacre then got away with government entitled lawbreaking faster than you can say David Gregory.

viking01 on March 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are really putting on a clinic on how to get under Obama’s skin and beat him at his own game.

Curtiss on March 7, 2013 at 3:04 PM

Needs repeating.

D-fusit on March 7, 2013 at 3:08 PM

And Orwell needs to be quoted – DAILY.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 3:06 PM

Orwell is quoted daily by Jay Carney.

Curtiss on March 7, 2013 at 3:08 PM

Dorner was killed with out due process

Politricks on March 7, 2013 at 3:09 PM

McCain pulls a two-fer. In one swoop he was humilitaed by Rand Paul and Obama.

tommyboy on March 7, 2013 at 3:09 PM

Is it just my naivete, or are the ROE for the U.S. Military actively engaged in combat zones far stricter and far clearly defined than this hullabaloo regarding if and when the POTUS can use force against U.S. citizens on U.S. soil?

Does that seem backwards to anyone else?

parke on March 7, 2013 at 3:09 PM

If getting the WH to issue a letter that took them 30 seconds to write is some sort of “grand victory” for the GOP then the GOP is doomed.

ronval912 on March 7, 2013 at 2:50 PM

The White House responded to it, thus giving it credence. He played and they danced.

CurtZHP on March 7, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Exactly! The victory isn’t that Paul managed to confirm the obvious about our most basic human rights…

The victory is that the left put themselves in an indefensible position, Sen. Paul caught them with their pants down, and exposed them – for 13 hours – playing politics over principle. The victory is he went on the offensive against this administration, and forced them to react. One of ours controlled the narrative in God knows how long.

Need further proof that this was a victory? Look at the reactions of those who weren’t on the winning side. From the doddering weaksauce attempt of Dingy Harry to shut this down yesterday afteroon, to Durbin’s midnight rambling and squirming, to the GOP Old Farts Brigade pissing and whining today.

Sen. Paul forced a reaction all around. And in doing so he’s put himself on the scoreboard over Jindal, Ryan, Rubio (who indeed got in on this… 5th… but we’re looking for leaders not followers here), and McDonnell. Christie is on there with negative six million points.

Gingotts on March 7, 2013 at 3:10 PM

“Strictly Speaking” you can not trust any of them.
Put it this simple way, the Constitution was just talked over and a say Washington himself spoke it in a offical meeting.

It is a two party evil money cult who have spent U.S. bankrupt, put 1,000,000 rules and regulations on top of the Constitution and they met last night for a incest feast of the re-election money whores.

When the meeting in the White House was done the RINO’s had more ear marks with $ signs on them.

OUR DAM TAX MONEY was buing them off as Rand Paul and Ted Cruz put a head lock on the lies of commie Democrats speaking.

Now make this commie sign the letter in front of U.S. all so we know its not a dam forgery.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on March 7, 2013 at 3:10 PM

How, and why, did you make Ted Cruz look like John Belushi?

cozmo on March 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM

Lol! Just using the photos he has made available to me. For what its worth the better half says he looks like Bill Murray. ; )

Bmore on March 7, 2013 at 3:11 PM

Excellent post.

KCB on March 7, 2013 at 2:57 PM

Much appreciated, KCB.

I think that the thing that most alarms me are the herd of cattle, who chew their cud, while our country rots.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 3:11 PM

If a tree falls in the woods and no ones around to hear it does it make a sound? If a politican commits an act that excites no one but other politicians and political junkies, does it really matter?

Politricks on March 7, 2013 at 3:11 PM

The future is bright.

Bmore on March 7, 2013 at 2:46 PM

Nicely done.

You are quite talented with the old photoshop thingy.

D-fusit on March 7, 2013 at 3:11 PM

Dorner was killed with out due process

Politricks on March 7, 2013 at 3:09 PM

In fairness it would have taken a lot of effort for him to provide himself with a trial by jury before blowing his own stupid crazy brains out.

Gingotts on March 7, 2013 at 3:12 PM

Just when wannabe Republican lap dogs are about to get they longed for pats on the head by a liberal president, Rand happens.

Speakup on March 7, 2013 at 3:12 PM

Orwell is quoted daily by Jay Carney.

Curtiss on March 7, 2013 at 3:08 PM

Orwell is proved daily!

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 3:13 PM

McCain/Graham: “And, we would have gotten away with being Vichy Republicans, if not for you meddlesome kids!” Rooby-Ro!

kingsjester on March 7, 2013 at 3:13 PM

But it’s hard to look back at the pre-2009 Obama liberals in their entirety and see him them as anything other than an arrogant hypocrites now — somebody people who thinks a muscular executive branch is okay so long as he’s they’re running it.

Fixed.

Washington Nearsider on March 7, 2013 at 3:13 PM

If a tree falls in the woods and no ones around to hear it does it make a sound?

Politricks on March 7, 2013 at 3:11 PM

yes…

equanimous on March 7, 2013 at 3:14 PM

Sen. Rand Paul and the senators that supported his filibuster defending the Constitution did proud service to the states they represent and to the citizenry.

workingclass artist on March 7, 2013 at 3:14 PM

cozmo on March 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM

P.S. You know who is going to be sent to the Principals Office over all of this? This girl.

Bmore on March 7, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Orwell is proved daily!

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 3:13 PM

Point.

Curtiss on March 7, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Rand Paul

Ted Cruz

staff etal.

Take some advise from some who have been in a fight or two.

The Democrats ambushed you guys and our constitution.

You did a counter attack and a sort of “direct action drill” and busted them up a bit.

Now you can not allow them to regroup for another ambush or attack on your (our) flanks and win a battle.

Push them back, send out scouts find out what they intend to do, recon the crap out of them, buy info, and for sure watch your ass as these ones are snakes and they have snake helpers laying about in the grass. Some of the snakes as you know have Republican stripes down their backs but if you flip them over you see full red under bellies.

Now move out.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on March 7, 2013 at 3:16 PM

And Orwell needs to be quoted – DAILY.

Any American who hasn’t read or watched ’1984′ should do so! When I see the photo of bho HA sometimes has of bho, it looks just as I imagine what ‘big brother’ looks like? An evil horrible sub-human! And I imagine what bho/team would want the US to be like in ’1984′!

Thank YOU Sen.’s Paul, Cruz, Lee, and a precious few others for standing up for our Republic.

And as for graham/mccain, may God give you the same fate I pray bho/team gets in the after life for your krap against true American’s!
L

letget on March 7, 2013 at 3:16 PM

Gingotts. Yes he shot himself after the dwelling he was in was set on fire. Theres an arguement about if the police said “burn him alive” or not but everyone knew that tear gas canisters have been know to ignite inside of dwellings and especially wooden ones.

I guess Obama could send Drones out on training missions and if they just “accidently” drop a bomb on a u.s. citizen then hey, all is well. Accidents happen.

Politricks on March 7, 2013 at 3:16 PM

D-fusit on March 7, 2013 at 3:11 PM

Just having fun. ; ) Plus I am not good at writing the way many here at HA are.

Bmore on March 7, 2013 at 3:16 PM

So Obama can still sneak up on me with a 2×4? After he’s determined I’m a threat, of course.

Hucklebuck on March 7, 2013 at 3:16 PM

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 3:11 PM

“It can’t happen here” is a terrifying sentiment that too many in this country share. I say,”We cannot allow it to happen here!”

KCB on March 7, 2013 at 3:17 PM

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are really putting on a clinic on how to get under Obama’s skin and beat him at his own game.

Curtiss on March 7, 2013 at 3:04 PM

Agreed, but the next step is building a concensus. All the Ron Paul fans loved him but he did squat to move his agenda forward because he was a loner.

If Rand and Ted can show this GOP crowd they can have victory through there path, they will follow.

WisRich on March 7, 2013 at 3:17 PM

P.S. You know who is going to be sent to the Principals Office over all of this? This girl.

Bmore on March 7, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Heh. Amusing. Nice job with that one.

Curtiss on March 7, 2013 at 3:18 PM

By statute, the CIA is prohibited from operating in the U.S. By the Constitution, the military can’t act due to posse comitatus. By statute, police are prohibited from arming their helicopters (this should be expanded to their drones). What worries me? What are the rules for the DHS ( headed by Incompitano)?

compass and chain on March 7, 2013 at 3:19 PM

Politricks on March 7, 2013 at 3:16 PM

What is it about the fact that he murdered people, including an innocent couple, and then, killed himself, that you don’t understand?

An unmanned drone did not take him out. The demons inside of him did.

kingsjester on March 7, 2013 at 3:19 PM

If a tree falls in the woods and no ones around to hear it does it make a sound?

Politricks on March 7, 2013 at 3:11 PM

The only sound I’m hearing are busy signals and “this mail box is full” at Graham and McCains offices…
Yeah no one cares.

MontanaMmmm on March 7, 2013 at 3:19 PM

From J. E. Dyer today. Her last paragraphs:

No situation involving a terrorist can ever trump the enduring importance to America of restraining the executive’s armed hand against the American people. Constitutional protections for U.S. citizens do not tie our hands in this matter in any way that is problematic for prosecuting the war on terror. We will not lose the war on terror – we will not even be slowed down in fighting it – because U.S. citizens are off-limits for drone assassinations. Period.

There are significant things I disagree with Rand Paul on, but I support his filibuster and I am increasingly disgusted with Americans who are so cavalier about our constitutional protections as to snicker at him. Paul shouldn’t be a lone voice on this matter. No presidential administration can be entrusted with the power to assassinate the citizens using drones. The authors of the Bill of Rights knew precisely that; the weapons have changed since 1789, but the shortcomings of human nature haven’t.

Obama and his appointees ought to acknowledge, explicitly and categorically, that they are prohibited by the Constitution from assassinating the citizens. In the matter of drone strikes, no consideration of any kind is higher than that one.

INC on March 7, 2013 at 3:19 PM

Also, before you celebrate, think carefully about whether Holder’s really answering his concerns. Paul wasn’t just asking about “weaponized drones.” He was asking about targeted killing generally. Sending the CIA in to shoot a guy in the head because he’s on O’s “kill list” doesn’t address the due process concerns just because no drone was used. The phrase “not engaged in combat” is also murky since the entire point of this debate is about defining what it means to be “engaged in combat” against the United States. Paul’s point yesterday was that, even if a U.S. citizen is an “enemy combatant,” the feds should be barred from summarily executing him if he’s on U.S. soil. Only if he’s in the process of carrying out an attack is lethal force justified. That’s his definition of “engaged in combat,” at least inside the continental U.S. The alternate definition is that an “enemy combatant” is, by his very nature, always engaged in combat against America. The DOJ itself more or less adopted that definition by defining “imminence” so broadly in its “white paper” on drone attacks as to suggest that members of Al Qaeda are always, at every moment, posing an imminent threat because they’re “continually plotting.” By that standard, Obama could drop a bomb on a U.S.-born jihadi hiding in an American safe house and still be okay under Holder’s letter here because the target was, as a member of Al Qaeda who was up to no good, necessarily “engaged in combat.”

Word parsing is the Dems’ favorite game. A Bill Clinton legacy.

Bitter Clinger on March 7, 2013 at 3:19 PM

Does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill Americans not engaged in combat on U.S. soil?

The answer to that question is no.

Good.

But one thing we learned from Bill Clinton is that you :

Must. Parse. Every. Word.

How about non-weaponized drones? Are they being used to watch U.S. citizens without a warrant?

ITguy on March 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM

there s/b their

WisRich on March 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM

I’m for a law requiring any drones deployed upon The People in the USA must bear the logo:

“Big Brother Is Watching You.”

viking01 on March 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM

KCB on March 7, 2013 at 3:17 PM

America is a dictatorship waiting to happen.

I couldn’t agree with you more.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM

Paul’s been demanding an answer from the White House about this since mid-February at least. Only yesterday, after he spent 13 hours on the Senate floor repeating that question a few thousand times, did it finally come to Holder’s attention?

“Like I’ve always said, all you had to do was ask.” – the Obama Campaign

forest on March 7, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Exactly! The victory isn’t that Paul managed to confirm the obvious about our most basic human rights…

The victory is that the left put themselves in an indefensible position, Sen. Paul caught them with their pants down, and exposed them – for 13 hours – playing politics over principle. The victory is he went on the offensive against this administration, and forced them to react. One of ours controlled the narrative in God knows how long.

Need further proof that this was a victory? Look at the reactions of those who weren’t on the winning side. From the doddering weaksauce attempt of Dingy Harry to shut this down yesterday afteroon, to Durbin’s midnight rambling and squirming, to the GOP Old Farts Brigade pissing and whining today.

Sen. Paul forced a reaction all around. And in doing so he’s put himself on the scoreboard over Jindal, Ryan, Rubio (who indeed got in on this… 5th… but we’re looking for leaders not followers here), and McDonnell. Christie is on there with negative six million points.

Gingotts on March 7, 2013 at 3:10 PM

.
Without his filibuster, the “lead story” for today would have been:

Obama reaches out to GOP & gets support for $ 600 billion tax increase.

For once, reality ruled over the usual Washington kabuki theater.

PolAgnostic on March 7, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Looked at a certain way, one could say the death of border agent Brian Terry via the government’s idiotic Fast and Furious program was a targetted killing, seeing as the entire point of F&F was to get a bunch of people killed to push for gun control legislation.

Over to you on F&F, Holder.

BKennedy on March 7, 2013 at 3:21 PM

What worries me? What are the rules for the DHS ( headed by Incompitano)?

compass and chain on March 7, 2013 at 3:19 PM

I don’t think it’s limited by posse comitatus. I believe there are other exempts. Those more knowledgeable than me can speak to that, but I do think the law should be tightened up.

INC on March 7, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Update: Perhaps it’s time for Congress to stop letting Obama define his own authority on this:

It’s time to stop letting the Indonesian Dog-Eater redefine everything he feels like, to make him feel more at home, as if he were back in Jakarta, nibbling on Fido.

Impeachment should have happened years ago. So much irreparable damage in the meantime … there’s hardly anything left, honestly. America cannot be salvaged from this monstrous American Socialist Superstate. Too many people have accepted making a mockery of the law and of Americanism for anyone to turn around and say, “Okay … from NOW on … we’ll follow the law.” Nope. Doesn’t work that way. Once the trust is lost and it is apparent that the thin veneer of civilization is easily scrapped in favor of some retarded affirmative action America-hating moron, then there’s not really anything left that one can take seriously. You can only start over, at this point. America has been totaled. Period.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 7, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Refresh my memory: how many noncombatant Americans have been killed by drone strikes on American soil?

Time Lord on March 7, 2013 at 2:45 PM

How many such killings does there have to be before it becomes an important issue to the sycophant lefties like you?

sharrukin on March 7, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Which poses a dilemma for O: Resist on grounds that the bill is a violation of separation of powers because it circumscribes his authority as commander-in-chief, or give in because it would be simply atrocious for a president to oppose a bill limiting his power to assassinate Americans?

Pretzeled hypocritical ‘constitutional scholar’, Lilliputian mind.

Politricks, how stupid you are. You just confirmed it, again.

Schadenfreude on March 7, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3