Holder: Yep, Obama could kill Americans on U.S. soil

[jrs]

President Barack Obama has the legal authority to unleash deadly force—such as drone strikes—against Americans on U.S. soil without first putting them on trial, Attorney General Eric Holder wrote in a letter released Tuesday.

But Holder, writing to Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, underlined that Obama “has no intention” of targeting his fellow citizens with unmanned aerial vehicles and would do so only if facing “an extraordinary circumstance.”

Paul had asked the Obama administration on Feb. 20 whether the president "has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil and without trial." On Tuesday, he denounced Holder's response as “frightening” and “an affront to the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans.”

“The U.S. government has not carried out drone strikes in the United States and has no intention of doing so,” Holder assured Paul in the March 4, 2013 letter. The attorney general also underlined that “we reject the use of military force where well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat.”

Holder added: “The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no President will ever have to confront."

But "it is possible, I suppose to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States," Holder said. "For example, the President could conceivably have no choice but to authorize the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstances of a catastrophic attack” like Pearl Harbor or 9/11.

“Were such an emergency to arise, I would examine the particular facts and circumstances before advising the President on the scope of this authority,” said Holder.

Paul, whose office released the letter, denounced the attorney general’s comments.

"The U.S. Attorney General's refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening—it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans," the senator said in a statement.

The exchange came as the White House agreed to give Senate Intelligence Committee members access to all of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel opinions justifying Obama's expanded campaign of targeted assassination of suspected terrorists overseas, including American citizens. Some lawmakers had warned they would try to block top Obama counterterrorism adviser John Brennan's nomination to head the CIA unless they were able to see the memos.

A few hours after the White House agreed to share the information, the committee approved Brennan 12-3, setting the stage for a full Senate vote.

Obama's drone war—relatively popular at home, reviled across the Muslim world—has drawn fresh scrutiny ever since NBC News obtained and published a Justice Department memo that lays out the legal justification behind it. The White House has defended the policy as “necessary,” “ethical” and “wise.” But civil liberties champions have sharply criticized it.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

--------
jrs - how long before the first 'crisis' and citizen on U.S. soil is murdered?

[twa2471]

That sure gives me a warm fuzzy feeling!!!!

It just goes to show you how some officials really feel,,, do you think for one minute I'd believe anything that POS holder has to say????.

[2ndAmendican]

I'm just waiting to start hearing about mysterious "Gas main explosions" and the like around the US in the MSM. I figure they'll be drone strikes that the Gov and MSM are are hiding from the public, by calling them something else. Gas main, sewer gas, gas station fuel tank, etc....

[j427x]

is either a "gas main" or a "illegal meth lab" in YOUR future? holder thinks so--

[1biggun]

MAN IT GETS SCARIER ALL THE TIME.

THEY USE PEARL HARBOR AS AN EXAMPLE WTF?????? PEARL HARBOR WAS A ATTTACK NY A FOREGIN MILITARY . HOW DOES THIS APPLY TO US CITIZENS ?????????

AT WHAT POINT DOES DISSAGREAING WITH THE GOVERMENT BECOME A REASON IN THE FUTURE TO CALL IN A DRONE STRIKE?????????

AT WHAT POINT WILL DUE PROCESS BE IGNORED BEFORE KILLING AMERICANS ON AMERICAN SOIL???????????????????????????

[twa2471]

To answer your question 1biggun,,,,,, the day the next American Revaluation starts!!

[ak9]

The drones ... abeit most unarmed, are being used alot in the us and have been for 10 ish years ... Pay attention to um when the G20/G8 or a motorcade /AF1/2 come into your town... let alone @ the un/NYC /dc area.I've some powerful optics and if You pay attention you'll C um..
Any one thats feelin a little sqirrely ...go drive fast at the next VIP motor cade and see what happens LOL .....
What got me concerned Is the d.o.d. report that said our Networks can and are being hacked .. so I guess in theory a "_____" could potentially assume control over said drones ...NFG ... Afterall it is a series of 010101101010110 s and a signal....and jamming is not that hard to acomplish too.
So the hypothetical answer POS holder gave is BS on a few levels
Ak9

[Abukai08]

Well this doesn't surprise me that EC feels this way. Apparently it's also legal to place Black Panthers outside of voting locations with clubs and traffic weapons to drug Cartels.

[Big Don]

One of my guys is the know says that there are over 10,000 drones already spying on us. Most are local police units. His question was, how long before there are so many that they begin crashing into each other? Or other planes with people in them?

[klauss]

Legal or not he will try and do what he wants. Sooner this is realized the better. Realistically what are the chances an legal challenge would be succesfull.