4 ms·

They pretend to that. But the fact is, nothing in the Constitution authorizes the President to waste anybody he wants, nor is the Congress authorized to extend

by ncmncm 5y ago

They pretend to that. But the fact is, nothing in the Constitution authorizes the President to waste anybody he wants, nor is the Congress authorized to extend such a privilege to the President. It would take a constitutional amendment to extend such a privilege, and that has not happened. So, every argument that it is already legal is necessarily specious, from the outset, and succeeds only because the people responsible for prosecuting abuses are refusing to do their assigned job. This is how lawful government is subverted everywhere it happens. And, it does happen everywhere it is not stopped.

trevorboaconstr 5y ago
Please start on page 67 and read from there: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/second-circuit-foia-ruling-awlaki-olc-memo/65ac10d47e3cc031/full.pdf https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/second-circuit-foia-r...
- yucky 5y ago
  You didn't answer his question, and your source doesn't either. Where is Due Process? The memo written by the killers tries to claim Due Process isn't relevant because of a ruling on a case on a battlefield, in the heat of an actual battle. Except this wasn't a battle, nor on a battlefield. So, the memo is once again just the guilty party trying to exonerate themselves. You know that none of this is new, you're not shedding light on anything. You're just trying to carry water for the same people who hold prisoners in Guantanamo indefinitely. There is not a Constitutional basis for it, and everybody understands that. Just call it what it is, you're not fooling anybody and they're clearly not going to face justice for it so it doesn't matter. But everybody knows what was done. You just sound like the guy explaining how OJ didn't kill anybody because the jury said so. lol k
- ncmncm 5y ago
  Your page 67 could have relevance in an attempt at a defense against charges of murder brought against the conspirators in the wasting. It has exactly zero relevance in whether a crime has occurred. Which manifestly has. The only thing blocking indictment is that the perps control the DoJ.

by ncmncm 5y ago

trevorboaconstr 5y ago

Please start on page 67 and read from there: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/second-circuit-foia-ruling-awlaki-olc-memo/65ac10d47e3cc031/full.pdf https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/second-circuit-foia-r...

yucky 5y ago
You didn't answer his question, and your source doesn't either. Where is Due Process? The memo written by the killers tries to claim Due Process isn't relevant because of a ruling on a case on a battlefield, in the heat of an actual battle. Except this wasn't a battle, nor on a battlefield. So, the memo is once again just the guilty party trying to exonerate themselves. You know that none of this is new, you're not shedding light on anything. You're just trying to carry water for the same people who hold prisoners in Guantanamo indefinitely. There is not a Constitutional basis for it, and everybody understands that. Just call it what it is, you're not fooling anybody and they're clearly not going to face justice for it so it doesn't matter. But everybody knows what was done. You just sound like the guy explaining how OJ didn't kill anybody because the jury said so. lol k
ncmncm 5y ago
Your page 67 could have relevance in an attempt at a defense against charges of murder brought against the conspirators in the wasting. It has exactly zero relevance in whether a crime has occurred. Which manifestly has. The only thing blocking indictment is that the perps control the DoJ.