ucrdem
ucrdem's JournalI'm not sure "blank check" is entirely accurate .
It's a characterization we hear often I suppose but that doesn't make it true. Holdover policies like Gitmo and drone strikes are only part of the picture and don't acknowledge the secret prisons that were closed or the practices that were ended like renditions and torture, not to mention two wars if we count Afghanistan. Gitmo was a failure but he did what he promised and introduced legislation, which was defeated. And he made an attempt to rationalize the drone policy by personally stepping in, but thanks to the NYT that was a p.r. fiasco. Now he's rolling out a complete redo to once and for all bring an end to the Bush legacy of permanent emergency.
Scahill explains why Obama is worse than Bush, Cheney, Romney, and McCain:
all in one paragraph. I underlined the 4 names so you won't miss them:
So, you know, I think that becausebecause its a popular Democratic president, I think people have been convinced that things have really radically shifted, and in reality, they havent.
And I think a lot of the Bush people stand in awe of what President Obama has been able to do, because they know that they probably wouldnt have been able to get it done themselves.
So, you know, there are ways in which Obama pushed the Cheney agenda far beyond what a President McCain or a President Romney would have been able to do, because he had his base of supporters.
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/4/24/the_world_is_a_battlefield_jeremy
And that my friend is the ratbaggers' gospel of drone. Any questions?
That's the point of repealing it.
And you left out the best part of that clip, which is the smack-down from Angus King that follows:
SEN. ANGUS KING: Gentlemen, Ive only been here five months, but this is the most astounding and most astoundingly disturbing hearing that Ive been to since Ive been here. You guys have essentially rewritten the Constitution here today. The Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, clearly says that the Congress has the power to declare war.
Thisthis authorization, the AUMF, is very limited. And you keep using the term "associated forces." You use it 13 times in your statement. That is not in the AUMF. And you said at one point, "It suits us very well." I assume it does suit you very well, because youre reading it to cover everything and anything.
And then you said, at another point, "So, even if the AUMF doesnt apply, the general law of war applies, and we can take these actions." So, my question is: How do you possibly square this with the requirement of the Constitution that the Congress has the power to declare war?
This is one of the most fundamental divisions in our constitutional scheme, that the Congress has the power to declare war; the president is the commander-in-chief and prosecutes the war. But youre reading this AUMF in such a way as to apply clearly outside of what it says. . . .
Obama calls on Congress to repeal the Bush-Cheney AUMF (military authorization)
Source: TPM
From today's Counterterrorism speech:
And that is why I intend to engage Congress about the existing Authorization to Use Military Force, or AUMF, to determine how we can continue to fight terrorists without keeping America on a perpetual war-time footing.
The AUMF is now nearly twelve years old. The Afghan War is coming to an end. Core al Qaeda is a shell of its former self. Groups like AQAP must be dealt with, but in the years to come, not every collection of thugs that labels themselves al Qaeda will pose a credible threat to the United States. Unless we discipline our thinking and our actions, we may be drawn into more wars we dont need to fight, or continue to grant Presidents unbound powers more suited for traditional armed conflicts between nation states.
So I look forward to engaging Congress and the American people in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMFs mandate. And I will not sign laws designed to expand this mandate further. Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue. But this war, like all wars, must end. Thats what history advises. Thats what our democracy demands.
Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/read-transcript-of-obamas-speech-on-counterterrorism-policy
Pretty damn good news
BO renews calls for media shield law:
a free press is also essential for our democracy. I am troubled by the possibility that leak investigations may chill the investigative journalism that holds government accountable.
Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs. Our focus must be on those who break the law. That is why I have called on Congress to pass a media shield law to guard against government over-reach. I have raised these issues with the Attorney General, who shares my concern. So he has agreed to review existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters, and will convene a group of media organizations to hear their concerns as part of that review. And I have directed the Attorney General to report back to me by July 12th.
Obama calls on Congress to allow transfer of GITMO detainees
Source: TPM
From text of today's Counterterrorism speech:
Today, I once again call on Congress to lift the restrictions on detainee transfers from GTMO. I have asked the Department of Defense to designate a site in the United States where we can hold military commissions. I am appointing a new, senior envoy at the State Department and Defense Department whose sole responsibility will be to achieve the transfer of detainees to third countries.
I am lifting the moratorium on detainee transfers to Yemen, so we can review them on a case by case basis. To the greatest extent possible, we will transfer detainees who have been cleared to go to other countries. Where appropriate, we will bring terrorists to justice in our courts and military justice system. And we will insist that judicial review be available for every detainee.
Even after we take these steps, one issue will remain: how to deal with those GTMO detainees who we know have participated in dangerous plots or attacks, but who cannot be prosecuted for example because the evidence against them has been compromised or is inadmissible in a court of law. But once we commit to a process of closing GTMO, I am confident that this legacy problem can be resolved, consistent with our commitment to the rule of law.
I know the politics are hard. But history will cast a harsh judgment on this aspect of our fight against terrorism, and those of us who fail to end it. Imagine a future ten years from now, or twenty years from now when the United States of America is still holding people who have been charged with no crime on a piece of land that is not a part of our country. Look at the current situation, where we are force-feeding detainees who are holding a hunger strike. Is that who we are? Is that something that our Founders foresaw? Is that the America we want to leave to our children?
Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/read-transcript-of-obamas-speech-on-counterterrorism-policy
"legacy problem" -- Sounds like he means it.
Link: Text Of Obama’s Speech On Counterterrorism Policy As Prepared For Delivery
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/read-transcript-of-obamas-speech-on-counterterrorism-policyp.s. here's the note:
FYI - Obama's Counterterrorism speech starts @ 2:00 pm EDT - live link:
May 23, 2013 2:00 PM EDT
President Obama Speaks on Counterterrorism Policies
Washington, DC
http://www.whitehouse.gov/live
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora la Reina de los Angeles
Home country: US
Current location: East of East L.A.
Member since: Sun Jan 20, 2013, 08:15 PM
Number of posts: 15,512