Barack Obama may not realize it, but I may have just helped save his presidency. How? By winning a drawn-out fight to protect his powers as commander in chief to wage war and keep Americans safe.And he goes on from there on a real tirade, spending the remaining 80% of the article lambasting the DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility for daring to even think about going after him, citing "rank bias and sheer incompetence" as America's "junior varsity CIA". In the end, Yoo repeats his claim that he is the ultimate patriot for allowing Obama to prevent terror attacks (thus "saving his presidency") and that Obama and America basically owe him.
He sure didn't make it easy. When Mr. Obama took office a year ago, receiving help from one of the lawyers involved in the development of George W. Bush's counterterrorism policies was the furthest thing from his mind. Having won a great electoral victory, the new president promised a quick about-face. He rejected "as false the choice between our safety and our ideals" and moved to restore the law-enforcement system as the first line of defense against a hardened enemy devoted to killing Americans.
In office only one day, Mr. Obama ordered the shuttering of the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, followed later by the announcement that he would bring terrorists to an Illinois prison. He terminated the Central Intelligence Agency's ability to use "enhanced interrogations techniques" to question al Qaeda operatives. He stayed the military trial, approved by Congress, of al Qaeda leaders. He ultimately decided to transfer Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the planner of the 9/11 attacks, to a civilian court in New York City, and automatically treated Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who tried to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas Day, as a criminal suspect (not an illegal enemy combatant). Nothing better could have symbolized the new president's determination to take us back to a Sept. 10, 2001, approach to terrorism.
Yeah. You're breathing only because John Yoo made it possible for the President to assassinate and torture and go all Jack Bauer on raghead sunzabitches, and don't you ever, ever forget it, you dirty hippie asshole.
Yoo's massive ego aside, this is where America is right now: where a man whose job it was to justify war crimes is crowing about how his success in allowing Presidents to subvert international and Constitutional law is allowed to have a national forum to tell his detractors to go screw themselves. The Wingers are ecstatic.
As far as they are concerned, this is now settled law.
War crimes are now permissible in America.
Jesus wept.
Just... wow. It is a stark reminder that Obama has a long way to go before America is free of these assclowns. And even longer before the MSM keeps giving them a platform of legitimacy.
ReplyDelete"where a man whose job it was to justify war crimes is crowing about how his success in allowing Presidents to subvert international and Constitutional law is allowed to have a national forum to tell his detractors to go screw themselves."
ReplyDeleteUm what? Where is that in the constitution? I want to see the section that says "Waterboarding is torture therefore illegal." I'm sorry but when lives are on the line I don't care if they have to cut fingers off to get information, they just need to keep it out of the publics eye. They weren't cutting off fingers though, they were placing a washcloth over their face and pouring water on it. Simulated drowning which if not properly done can be dangerous, however the 3 people that it was done to are still alive. If you want to be self righteous and feel good about yourself fine, become a priest or get a job in a children s hospital, but if you wanna save lives that would otherwise be taken without any just cause you have to make difficult decisions.
I did not do this to win any popularity contests, least of all those held in the faculty lounge. I did it to help our president—President Obama, not Bush. Mr. Obama is fighting three wars simultaneously in Iraq, Afghanistan, and against al Qaeda. He will call upon the men and women serving under his command to make choices as hard as the ones we faced. They cannot meet those challenges with clear minds if they believe that a bevy of prosecutors, congressional committees and media critics await them when they return from the battlefield.
I'm sure he's not self sacrificing or a patriot but is he wrong? How can you expect people to make tough decisions in the face of adversity when they have to constantly have that little voice in their mind reminding them that they could be thrown under the bus at any time.
Also as I understand it, the terrorists aren't protected under the Geneva Convention because they are unlawful combatants and they aren't protected under the civilian rights because they are taking hostile action. They fall into a gray area.
ReplyDeleteAnd Yoo's entire argument is that the President has the authority to declare anyone an enemy combatant with no legal recourse against it: the President's word on this is law without any checks or balances on it.
ReplyDeleteThis is the concept of the all-powerful "plenary executive."
Glad you trust Barack Obama with that power, then.
Your argument is that the President is able to "subvert international and Constitutional law." While it's a nice sounding sentence, almost makes you sound intellectual until the sentence is evaluated and it doesnt pass the sanity check. It has absolutely no substance and is false.
ReplyDeleteWhat international law?
What constitutional law?
Also where did I state that I agree with everything Yoo stated? Don't assume. Also did you even read the entire article? I wouldn't sum it up as "his entire argument is that the President can declare anyone..." it was also about the mishandling of his case amongst other things.
You seem to have some Palpatine is going to take over the republic view here but that's not what is going on. He cannot just point at someone walking down the street and declare them an "enemy combatant" and next thing you know they're in Cuba getting a rag thrown over their face. To think that's the case is ignorant.
As a matter of fact, the President can do exactly that if the President deems that person to be a terrorist. This judgment is also solely up to...the President.
ReplyDeleteYoo's interpretation of the law is that there is no power that can check or balance the Executive Branch in such a decision. Not the people. Not Congress. Not the Supreme Court.
Plenary Executive. All powerful.
Just cause IS required. Barack could not just arbitrarily declare someone an enemy of the state or he would have done so with Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, the list goes on and on.
ReplyDeleteWell now, since Obama has not done so, that means he's not a fascist dictator, now doesn't it? Because we've certainly established that he can.
ReplyDeleteThe point is, we've now established that accepted legal precedent for the use of this power. John Yoo is bragging about it, as a matter of fact.
Nice country we live in, eh?
Obama has not done so because he can't.
ReplyDelete