Obama overruled top Pentagon, DOJ lawyers on Libya war powers

[Trajan]

well, saw this on Memorandum.....I saw it at hot air as well and, frankly, I would be just robing their words so I will let them tell it...

first the Times;

2 Top Lawyers Lost to Obama in Libya War Policy Debate

WASHINGTON — President Obama rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and the Justice Department when he decided that he had the legal authority to continue American military participation in the air war in Libya without Congressional authorization, according to officials familiar with internal administration deliberations.

Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had told the White House that they believed that the United States military’s activities in the NATO-led air war amounted to “hostilities.” Under the War Powers Resolution, that would have required Mr. Obama to terminate or scale back the mission after May 20.

But Mr. Obama decided instead to adopt the legal analysis of several other senior members of his legal team — including the White House counsel, Robert Bauer, and the State Department legal adviser, Harold H. Koh — who argued that the United States military’s activities fell short of “hostilities.” Under that view, Mr. Obama needed no permission from Congress to continue the mission unchanged.

Presidents have the legal authority to override the legal conclusions of the Office of Legal Counsel and to act in a manner that is contrary to its advice, but it is extraordinarily rare for that to happen. Under normal circumstances, the office’s interpretation of the law is legally binding on the executive branch…

The administration followed an unusual process in developing its position. Traditionally, the Office of Legal Counsel solicits views from different agencies and then decides what the best interpretation of the law is. The attorney general or the president can overrule its views, but rarely do.

In this case, however, Ms. Krass was asked to submit the Office of Legal Counsel’s thoughts in a less formal way to the White House, along with the views of lawyers at other agencies. After several meetings and phone calls, the rival legal analyses were submitted to Mr. Obama, who is a constitutional lawyer, and he made the decision.

more at-
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/18/world/africa/18powers.html?_r=2&hp=&pagewanted=all


comment-
The Times is treating it as the major story that it is, but under a Republican president (especially one named, say, George Bush) it would be a scandal of nuclear proportions. What they’re basically saying here, without actually saying it, is that the president’s own lawyers told him that the Libya war is illegal and he responded by looking around for other lawyers who’d tell him what he wanted to hear.

See what he did here? The OLC is typically called “the president’s law firm” because it’s tasked with advising him on what he can and can’t legally do with his office. They study the law and consult with relevant agencies, and then they make a formal determination to guide his actions. That’s what should have happened here — they likely would have determined that he was violating the War Powers Act, which in turn would have forced him to go to Congress and finally request formal authorization of the mission. (In fact, Johnson, the Pentagon’s counsel, reportedly told Obama he’d be on firmer ground if he stopped the drone strikes, at least. Obama refused.) This time, because he almost certainly knew that they’d tell him that he was in violation, he bypassed the normal procedures to avoid a binding ruling and treated the OLC as if it was just one lawyer among many. He rigged the game because he knew what the probable outcome would be if he didn’t. Disgraceful.

NYT: Obama overruled top Pentagon, DOJ lawyers on Libya war powers « Hot Air

"Disgraceful"? What was the Presidents intent in moving against Kadafi? What was his motivation? As to his actions being criminal, consider a person must be acting with a guilty mind, or mens rea, to have criminal intent in an act.

what was boooosh's intent in moving against saddam?

see how easy that was? ....

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Mr. Obama decided instead to adopt the legal analysis of several other senior members of his legal team — including the White House counsel, Robert Bauer, and the State Department legal adviser, Harold H. Koh — who argued that the United States military’s activities fell short of “hostilities.” Under that view, Mr. Obama needed no permission from Congress to continue the mission unchanged.

Wow...now where have I heard this before...it's coming to me now...

 

[Polk]

Every President since Nixon has maintained that the law is unconstitutional anyway.

Now we get to test it out in court

Yep, yet every president before Obama has Followed the Law. Obama has this habit of thinking he is the supreme court, and can choose not to follow a law because he thinks it is unconstitutional.

Sorry that's not how it works, until the courts says so, It's the law.

This is pretty funny, coming from a support of an administration who felt it had the power to literally rewrite laws.

 

[Trajan]

Every President since Nixon has maintained that the law is unconstitutional anyway.

Now we get to test it out in court

Yep, yet every president before Obama has Followed the Law. Obama has this habit of thinking he is the supreme court, and can choose not to follow a law because he thinks it is unconstitutional.

Sorry that's not how it works, until the courts says so, It's the law.

This is pretty funny, coming from a support of an administration who felt it had the power to literally rewrite laws.

thx, thats about what I expected.

 

[Momanohedhunter]

well, saw this on Memorandum.....I saw it at hot air as well and, frankly, I would be just robing their words so I will let them tell it...

first the Times;

2 Top Lawyers Lost to Obama in Libya War Policy Debate

WASHINGTON — President Obama rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and the Justice Department when he decided that he had the legal authority to continue American military participation in the air war in Libya without Congressional authorization, according to officials familiar with internal administration deliberations.

Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had told the White House that they believed that the United States military’s activities in the NATO-led air war amounted to “hostilities.” Under the War Powers Resolution, that would have required Mr. Obama to terminate or scale back the mission after May 20.

But Mr. Obama decided instead to adopt the legal analysis of several other senior members of his legal team — including the White House counsel, Robert Bauer, and the State Department legal adviser, Harold H. Koh — who argued that the United States military’s activities fell short of “hostilities.” Under that view, Mr. Obama needed no permission from Congress to continue the mission unchanged.

Presidents have the legal authority to override the legal conclusions of the Office of Legal Counsel and to act in a manner that is contrary to its advice, but it is extraordinarily rare for that to happen. Under normal circumstances, the office’s interpretation of the law is legally binding on the executive branch…

The administration followed an unusual process in developing its position. Traditionally, the Office of Legal Counsel solicits views from different agencies and then decides what the best interpretation of the law is. The attorney general or the president can overrule its views, but rarely do.

In this case, however, Ms. Krass was asked to submit the Office of Legal Counsel’s thoughts in a less formal way to the White House, along with the views of lawyers at other agencies. After several meetings and phone calls, the rival legal analyses were submitted to Mr. Obama, who is a constitutional lawyer, and he made the decision.

more at-
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/18/world/africa/18powers.html?_r=2&hp=&pagewanted=all


comment-
The Times is treating it as the major story that it is, but under a Republican president (especially one named, say, George Bush) it would be a scandal of nuclear proportions. What they’re basically saying here, without actually saying it, is that the president’s own lawyers told him that the Libya war is illegal and he responded by looking around for other lawyers who’d tell him what he wanted to hear.

See what he did here? The OLC is typically called “the president’s law firm” because it’s tasked with advising him on what he can and can’t legally do with his office. They study the law and consult with relevant agencies, and then they make a formal determination to guide his actions. That’s what should have happened here — they likely would have determined that he was violating the War Powers Act, which in turn would have forced him to go to Congress and finally request formal authorization of the mission. (In fact, Johnson, the Pentagon’s counsel, reportedly told Obama he’d be on firmer ground if he stopped the drone strikes, at least. Obama refused.) This time, because he almost certainly knew that they’d tell him that he was in violation, he bypassed the normal procedures to avoid a binding ruling and treated the OLC as if it was just one lawyer among many. He rigged the game because he knew what the probable outcome would be if he didn’t. Disgraceful.

NYT: Obama overruled top Pentagon, DOJ lawyers on Libya war powers « Hot Air

Damn, Its like Obama and the Dems, said " I will see your two wars, and raise you three. Ware is code pink and all those who wanted to hang bush ? Hypocrisy has no limits.

 

[Polk]

Yep, yet every president before Obama has Followed the Law. Obama has this habit of thinking he is the supreme court, and can choose not to follow a law because he thinks it is unconstitutional.

Sorry that's not how it works, until the courts says so, It's the law.

This is pretty funny, coming from a support of an administration who felt it had the power to literally rewrite laws.

thx, thats about what I expected.

What else could you expect? This is a bogus controversy. I will give you credit for not putting a more sensationalist headline on your thread like the other one on the topic did, but it's still absurd.

 

[candycorn]

well, saw this on Memorandum.....I saw it at hot air as well and, frankly, I would be just robing their words so I will let them tell it...

first the Times;

2 Top Lawyers Lost to Obama in Libya War Policy Debate

WASHINGTON — President Obama rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and the Justice Department when he decided that he had the legal authority to continue American military participation in the air war in Libya without Congressional authorization, according to officials familiar with internal administration deliberations.

Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had told the White House that they believed that the United States military’s activities in the NATO-led air war amounted to “hostilities.” Under the War Powers Resolution, that would have required Mr. Obama to terminate or scale back the mission after May 20.

But Mr. Obama decided instead to adopt the legal analysis of several other senior members of his legal team — including the White House counsel, Robert Bauer, and the State Department legal adviser, Harold H. Koh — who argued that the United States military’s activities fell short of “hostilities.” Under that view, Mr. Obama needed no permission from Congress to continue the mission unchanged.

Presidents have the legal authority to override the legal conclusions of the Office of Legal Counsel and to act in a manner that is contrary to its advice, but it is extraordinarily rare for that to happen. Under normal circumstances, the office’s interpretation of the law is legally binding on the executive branch…

The administration followed an unusual process in developing its position. Traditionally, the Office of Legal Counsel solicits views from different agencies and then decides what the best interpretation of the law is. The attorney general or the president can overrule its views, but rarely do.

In this case, however, Ms. Krass was asked to submit the Office of Legal Counsel’s thoughts in a less formal way to the White House, along with the views of lawyers at other agencies. After several meetings and phone calls, the rival legal analyses were submitted to Mr. Obama, who is a constitutional lawyer, and he made the decision.

more at-
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/18/world/africa/18powers.html?_r=2&hp=&pagewanted=all


comment-
The Times is treating it as the major story that it is, but under a Republican president (especially one named, say, George Bush) it would be a scandal of nuclear proportions. What they’re basically saying here, without actually saying it, is that the president’s own lawyers told him that the Libya war is illegal and he responded by looking around for other lawyers who’d tell him what he wanted to hear.

See what he did here? The OLC is typically called “the president’s law firm” because it’s tasked with advising him on what he can and can’t legally do with his office. They study the law and consult with relevant agencies, and then they make a formal determination to guide his actions. That’s what should have happened here — they likely would have determined that he was violating the War Powers Act, which in turn would have forced him to go to Congress and finally request formal authorization of the mission. (In fact, Johnson, the Pentagon’s counsel, reportedly told Obama he’d be on firmer ground if he stopped the drone strikes, at least. Obama refused.) This time, because he almost certainly knew that they’d tell him that he was in violation, he bypassed the normal procedures to avoid a binding ruling and treated the OLC as if it was just one lawyer among many. He rigged the game because he knew what the probable outcome would be if he didn’t. Disgraceful.

NYT: Obama overruled top Pentagon, DOJ lawyers on Libya war powers « Hot Air

Doesn't sound illegal; just unorthodox.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I love reading the leftist rants on how the President can do whatever the fuck he deems necessary when 3 years ago they ranted on how the Executive branch was subservient to the other two branches.

 

[Too Tall]

Good for Obama he did the right thing.

Hell yeah! Kill all them effing Arabs.

 

[Too Tall]

Mr. Obama decided instead to adopt the legal analysis of several other senior members of his legal team — including the White House counsel, Robert Bauer, and the State Department legal adviser, Harold H. Koh — who argued that the United States military’s activities fell short of “hostilities.” Under that view, Mr. Obama needed no permission from Congress to continue the mission unchanged.

Since when is launching 112 Tomahawk Cruise missiles at a sovereign nation considered a hostile act? Then following up with daily bunker buster bombs. Only in Obama speak is this considered falling short of "hostilities."

 

[boedicca]

Yet another example of the Leftwing Ruling Elite philosophy: Rules For Thee, But Not For Me.

 

[Too Tall]

well, saw this on Memorandum.....I saw it at hot air as well and, frankly, I would be just robing their words so I will let them tell it...

first the Times;

2 Top Lawyers Lost to Obama in Libya War Policy Debate

WASHINGTON — President Obama rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and the Justice Department when he decided that he had the legal authority to continue American military participation in the air war in Libya without Congressional authorization, according to officials familiar with internal administration deliberations.

Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had told the White House that they believed that the United States military’s activities in the NATO-led air war amounted to “hostilities.” Under the War Powers Resolution, that would have required Mr. Obama to terminate or scale back the mission after May 20.

But Mr. Obama decided instead to adopt the legal analysis of several other senior members of his legal team — including the White House counsel, Robert Bauer, and the State Department legal adviser, Harold H. Koh — who argued that the United States military’s activities fell short of “hostilities.” Under that view, Mr. Obama needed no permission from Congress to continue the mission unchanged.

Presidents have the legal authority to override the legal conclusions of the Office of Legal Counsel and to act in a manner that is contrary to its advice, but it is extraordinarily rare for that to happen. Under normal circumstances, the office’s interpretation of the law is legally binding on the executive branch…

The administration followed an unusual process in developing its position. Traditionally, the Office of Legal Counsel solicits views from different agencies and then decides what the best interpretation of the law is. The attorney general or the president can overrule its views, but rarely do.

In this case, however, Ms. Krass was asked to submit the Office of Legal Counsel’s thoughts in a less formal way to the White House, along with the views of lawyers at other agencies. After several meetings and phone calls, the rival legal analyses were submitted to Mr. Obama, who is a constitutional lawyer, and he made the decision.

more at-
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/18/world/africa/18powers.html?_r=2&hp=&pagewanted=all


comment-
The Times is treating it as the major story that it is, but under a Republican president (especially one named, say, George Bush) it would be a scandal of nuclear proportions. What they’re basically saying here, without actually saying it, is that the president’s own lawyers told him that the Libya war is illegal and he responded by looking around for other lawyers who’d tell him what he wanted to hear.

See what he did here? The OLC is typically called “the president’s law firm” because it’s tasked with advising him on what he can and can’t legally do with his office. They study the law and consult with relevant agencies, and then they make a formal determination to guide his actions. That’s what should have happened here — they likely would have determined that he was violating the War Powers Act, which in turn would have forced him to go to Congress and finally request formal authorization of the mission. (In fact, Johnson, the Pentagon’s counsel, reportedly told Obama he’d be on firmer ground if he stopped the drone strikes, at least. Obama refused.) This time, because he almost certainly knew that they’d tell him that he was in violation, he bypassed the normal procedures to avoid a binding ruling and treated the OLC as if it was just one lawyer among many. He rigged the game because he knew what the probable outcome would be if he didn’t. Disgraceful.

NYT: Obama overruled top Pentagon, DOJ lawyers on Libya war powers « Hot Air

"Disgraceful"? What was the Presidents intent in moving against Kadafi? What was his motivation? As to his actions being criminal, consider a person must be acting with a guilty mind, or mens rea, to have criminal intent in an act.

what was boooosh's intent in moving against saddam?

see how easy that was? ....

Bush got permission from Congress and the United Nations before moving against Saddam. See how easy that was?

 

[Trajan]

"Disgraceful"? What was the Presidents intent in moving against Kadafi? What was his motivation? As to his actions being criminal, consider a person must be acting with a guilty mind, or mens rea, to have criminal intent in an act.

what was boooosh's intent in moving against saddam?

see how easy that was? ....

Bush got permission from Congress and the United Nations before moving against Saddam. See how easy that was?

he did?

 

[The T]

what was boooosh's intent in moving against saddam?

see how easy that was? ....

Bush got permission from Congress and the United Nations before moving against Saddam. See how easy that was?

he did?

I thinkthe poster was trying to cite the enforcement of the UN Sanctions against Saddam's Iraq...but WE don't need the blessing of the UN to do squat. Only Obama looks for such a pat on the head.

 

[peach174]

If Bush had done this, the left would be screaming at the top of their lungs to impeach him.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

This is just very sad. No one has yet explained in a coherent & logical manner why we're bombing & killing Libyans. Our President simply decided he was going to drag us into their Civil War. He didn't bother to go to our U.S. Congress and instead chose to go with UN & NATO approval. All Americans should be disturbed by his behavior. Congress needs to step up and restore Checks & Balances. Both Democrats & Republicans need to get together and do this in a Bi-Partisan fashion. This Libyan War is expected to cost American Taxpayers well over a $Billion for this year alone. No one understands why we're bombing & killing Libyans. To spend over a $Billion on it just makes no sense and is criminal. Congress needs to get involved.

 

[peach174]

If Bush had done this, the left would be screaming at the top of their lungs to impeach him.

he did, they did, you guys made excuses for it.

I'm saying that the left are not doing the same thing now to Obama like they did with Bush.
On this so called non war in Libya,the left should be screaming to impeach Obama.
If Bush had done this very same thing, all of the mainstream media would be screaming about how illegal it is.

 

[The T]

If Bush had done this, the left would be screaming at the top of their lungs to impeach him.

he did, they did, you guys made excuses for it.

I'm saying that the left are not doing the same thing now to Obama like they did with Bush.
On this so called non war in Libya,the left should be screaming to impeach Obama.
If Bush had done this very same thing, all of the mainstream media would be screaming about how illegal it is.

They seem to forget that BUSH went to the Congress directly and got their blessing. Obama did not.

Obama is in violation of the War Powers Act...and it's that simple. he's trying to weasel his way out of it with lawyers.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Even their BOOOOOOOSH Boogeyman went to our Congress for approval of his Wars. "Protecting Civilians" is Bullshit. We had no business getting involved with their Civil War. I suspect that's why this President didn't even try to go to Congress. This Libyan War is only about Oil. Western European nations like Great Britain & France want it. It has nothing to do with "Protecting Civilians." And bombing & killing certainly isn't "Humanitarian" in any way. I mean are Americans really proud of the fact our bombs murdered Gaddafi's Son and Grandchildren? Hell of a thing to be proud of. Over a $Billion spent on madness. How sad.

 

[The T]

Even their BOOOOOOOSH Boogeyman went to our Congress for approval of his Wars. "Protecting Civilians" is Bullshit. We had no business getting involved with their Civil War. I suspect that's why this President didn't even try to go to Congress. This Libyan War is only about Oil. Western European nations like Great Britain & France want it. It has nothing to do with "Protecting Civilians." And bombing & killing certainly isn't "Humanitarian" in any way. I mean are Americans really proud of the fact our bombs murdered Gaddafi's Son and Grandchildren? Hell of a thing to be proud of. Over a $Billion spent on madness. How sad.

And to boot? WE don't know whom the Rebels against Mo-Mo really are with certitude...lol. Word has it the so-called Arab Spring is a rouse...frought with al-Queida and the Muslim Brotherhood.