Romney needs to withdraw. open the convention.

Killing of Al-Awlaki: Even When Trying to Fight Terrorism, the President Must Still Follow the Constitution
By Josh Bell, ACLU at 4:34pm

The debate over the U.S. government's targeted killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki continued this week. ACLU Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer took on former Bush lawyer (and torture memo writer) John Yoo on Southern California Public RadioÂ’s AirTalk (listen here), and also explored the issue on CBC's The Current (listen here).

Much of the debate thus far has focused on Al-Awlaki. But we should be thinking about not only the people the government killed last week, but the power that’s being claimed by the president – and the administration has not said nearly enough about the power President Obama is claiming. No one is asking for the government to reveal confidential sources or intelligence-gathering methods – but why can't it even explain its legal justification for essentially executing an American?

Reuters reported on the process, revealing virtually all that's known about it:

American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.

There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House's National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.​

....

But what it does show is the other disturbing aspect of what happened: the executive branch acting without oversight by other branches. The Constitution made the judiciary a co-equal branch of government so that there would be a check against overreach by the political branches. ....​

Killing of Al-Awlaki: Even When Trying to Fight Terrorism, the President Must Still Follow the Constitution
 
Last edited:
Run with it, fudge packer.

That's all you assholes have.

Romney has Obama's FAILED presidency.

I'm sure Romney will use that tool.

What's Romney's message, Swiss bank accounts for everybody? You know the OP's right, but is there really a better choice? :lol:

LOL How about you listen to Romney's message instead of the left talking points you so love. Why isn't Obama running on his record?? Why is his campaign focused on "evil Bain" rather than on his signature accomplishment, ObamaTax??

I've listened and it tends to change every hour.
 
Habeus corpus is what REQUIRES a person to be brought in front of a judge or some sort of court.

No. Habeus Corpus is a judge's demand that a person be brought before the court so that the court can determine the detainer's legal standing to hold said person. A person files a petition to request the writ be issued when they are in custody. Habeus Corpus does not, and cannot, apply to someone who is not in custody. You're completely off base here and need to educate yourself more before you bother trying to continue this uneducated position.

Habeas corpus | LII / Legal Information Institute

Habeas Corpus Defined and Explained
What you're simply not grasping here is that habeus coprus is THE principle that requires a person to know what legal reasons they are being detained. It is an inherent right of citizens along with the rest of DUE PROCESS.
 
Last edited:
A Cain Palin ticket would STILL be better than obama. A Putin/Jintao ticket would be better than obama. I'd be tempted to say a Bin Laden/Hussein ticket would be the only one worse, but we already have a Hussein on the ballot.

Bin Laden's dead. I think we could make an argument that a dead man could run the country better.

Wow, absolutely appalling, both of you.
 
Killing a US citizen??
Three of them, actually. He was judge, jury, and executioner. Sorta not what our Founders designed.
all the lawyers and advisers said he was within his duties as president...it wasn't done on a whim....have you read anything on it that the advisers said? of course, Bush's advisors said he too had done nothing unconstitutional with preemptive war....going to war against a country that was not at our door step, trying to kill us.... that was a new precedence for us.....but apparently not unconstitutional according to his advisers...

There has never been anything unconstitutional about going to war so long as Congress approves. If President Obama and Congress decided to invade Canada because their citizens say aboot, as long as they followed proceedures, it would be fully Constitutional. Just because something is stupid, doesnt mean it's unconstitutional.

And for the record, preemptive strikes arent necessarily stupid.
 
Romney's record at Bain is helping him. Everytime Obama brings it up he looks foolish except among the left. And they aren't gonna vote Romney anyhow.
 
The only people that Care about your Hate the Rich, Class warfare Bull shit, is your Base. A recent poll says 75% of Americans could care less about how Rich a Candidate is, and Most see little difference between Romneys Hundreds of Millions and Obama's 14 Million.

It's not about how rich he is. It's about Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island investment vehicles.

OK, when you all start worrying about all the Democrats who have this, then we'll get excited over it.

All this over a bank account while Pelosi sits in the Speakers chair and fudges on the stock market.
 
Bain is hurting him among those who watched their job go overseas but the GOP stopped caring about those lazy losers years ago, among the GOP base the simple act of making a pile of cash is honorable and admirable no matter what sleazy destructive methods were employed.
 
Bain is hurting him among those who watched their job go overseas but the GOP stopped caring about those lazy losers years ago, among the GOP base the simple act of making a pile of cash is honorable and admirable no matter what sleazy destructive methods were employed.
Shouldn't you finally take a shower?
 
Bain is hurting him among those who watched their job go overseas but the GOP stopped caring about those lazy losers years ago, among the GOP base the simple act of making a pile of cash is honorable and admirable no matter what sleazy destructive methods were employed.

:eusa_boohoo:
 
Right now most Republicans secretly want Paul to pull off an upset. Think of the disaster that would be for the money currently spent to destroy Mitt… Then of course the “how the **** do we attack Paul’s record” issue. They can try and make him out to be a racist but let’s be honest, they are doing that with Mitt LOLOLOLz.

So we secretly want someone we overwhelmingly voted against?
 
I see we have another couple of fans of offshoring jobs.
 
I see we have another couple of fans of offshoring jobs.

I'm not as big a fan as Immelt and Obama.

Whatever that means, Romney has a serious image problem that is not going away and I see nothing he can do to mitigate the fact that he is incapable of looking like he gives a **** about about everyday Americans.
 
I see we have another couple of fans of offshoring jobs.

I'm not as big a fan as Immelt and Obama.

Whatever that means, Romney has a serious image problem that is not going away and I see nothing he can do to mitigate the fact that he is incapable of looking like he gives a **** about about everyday Americans.
I have no doubt for the refusing-to-wash-shit-on-cars-rape-women Occupiers that his image is disgusting to them.

I doubt that bothers him all that much, either
 
15th post
I'm not as big a fan as Immelt and Obama.

Whatever that means, Romney has a serious image problem that is not going away and I see nothing he can do to mitigate the fact that he is incapable of looking like he gives a **** about about everyday Americans.

YOU have a serious image problem.

Shit on any police cars lately?

I remember when you had some serious concerns about Romney, I guess you can't remember back that far.
 
romney is getting destroyed with all this bain stuff. open the convention so we can choose a better candidate.
The Bain attacks are getting no traction except with the Beltway boys.
 
Whatever that means, Romney has a serious image problem that is not going away and I see nothing he can do to mitigate the fact that he is incapable of looking like he gives a **** about about everyday Americans.

YOU have a serious image problem.

Shit on any police cars lately?

I remember when you had some serious concerns about Romney, I guess you can't remember back that far.

So am I supposed to dwell on the negative day after day? I'll take Romney's negatives over Obama's any day of the week. Besides most if not all of my concerns were image based issues that Obama has tried to capitalize on and thus far he remains stagnant in the polls so I guess I was worried for naught.
 
YOU have a serious image problem.

Shit on any police cars lately?

I remember when you had some serious concerns about Romney, I guess you can't remember back that far.

So am I supposed to dwell on the negative day after day? I'll take Romney's negatives over Obama's any day of the week. Besides most if not all of my concerns were image based issues that Obama has tried to capitalize on and thus far he remains stagnant in the polls so I guess I was worried for naught.
It'd be nice to think that this will be an election based on substance, not image. But since the majority of the public is not paying attention till after the convention, it's kinda irrelevant.

That said, if Romney does not try to make this election on substance and achievement, he's boned because the media's just one giant campaign organ for P-BO.
 
Back
Top Bottom