Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Obama Administration Says President Can Use Lethal Force Against Americans on US Soil [View all]The Stranger
(11,297 posts)60. Timothy McVeigh doesn't count (he's the wrong color)
The two possible examples of such "extraordinary" circumstances were the attack on Pearl Harbor and the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Just in case you were wondering.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
204 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Obama Administration Says President Can Use Lethal Force Against Americans on US Soil [View all]
WilliamPitt
Mar 2013
OP
If this is true, then the Obama admin should start with the republicants in congress!
TheDebbieDee
Mar 2013
#87
Work backward: DC needed every rancid piece of legislation they passed since 9/11 to get to this
blkmusclmachine
Mar 2013
#154
Bonnie and Clyde were killed in a firefight with local law enforcement officials
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#29
That may well be the case, but I wasn't there, as it was all before my time,
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#46
In any case, neither FBI nor US Marshalls were responsible for the events of 23 May '34
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#58
The newsreel about the ambush implied that the Federal posse just started shooting
Art_from_Ark
Mar 2013
#147
It was eighty years ago; I'm no expert on the subject; and accounts differ
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#156
But this is the President of the United States with a whole hell of a lot different accountability!
riderinthestorm
Mar 2013
#66
Well...OK - my take is more cynical than that. The government as a whole has the ability
cliffordu
Mar 2013
#70
I actually agree you. Its the fact they are acknowledging that accountability is for shit
riderinthestorm
Mar 2013
#91
Mr Obama has nowhere adopted Mr Nixon's view, argued by St Clair before the Supreme Court,
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#23
Facts should precede analysis, but you would it the other way around
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#197
You could be right. I regard your post as plausible, although uncertainty rules the day. (NT)
proverbialwisdom
Mar 2013
#200
So, if I flip off a drone flying overhead, my neighborhood will not get blown up, as a result?
RC
Mar 2013
#7
I haven't ever seen any reports of Americans being offed by Mr Obama for flipping the bird
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#26
Necessarily deny? The right to repel an armed attack against the US has never been
geek tragedy
Mar 2013
#17
if a republican pretzeldent would not have this power available and wanted to have it
Amonester
Mar 2013
#135
In cases of invasion, or armed rebellion, when the usual instruments of the lawful civil government
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#16
Yeah, we can't allow an armed overthrow of the US government or anything, now can we.
yodermon
Mar 2013
#19
I'm starting to understand why US citizens are hoarding high power weapons. Not what I voted
Purveyor
Mar 2013
#25
In neither of the cases that Holder so conveniently presented were the perps 'American citizens'.
Purveyor
Mar 2013
#33
No, you've been 'played' by this administration for supporting this policy. Carry on, indeed. eom
Purveyor
Mar 2013
#55
What you do not understand is that every President has had the authority to
geek tragedy
Mar 2013
#116
They you need only go back a few weeks - because the FBI used lethal force on the Alabama
24601
Mar 2013
#44
Posse comitatus forbid the use of the armed forces for law enforcement, not
geek tragedy
Mar 2013
#63
If he had ordered the shooting down of Flight 93, yes I would have supported that.
geek tragedy
Mar 2013
#120
rand paul is the fetid dropping from his libertarian asshole of a father.
Jakes Progress
Mar 2013
#115
Is the definition of "extraordinary circumstances" also at the discretion of the President? n/t
hughee99
Mar 2013
#48
Well, who else would make that call in the middle of an ongoing armed attack?
geek tragedy
Mar 2013
#56
Actually, I do have a problem with that. Fortunately for me, that is explicitly
geek tragedy
Mar 2013
#169
Again, Coast Guard drones. Posse Comitatus does not apply to the Coast Guard,
hughee99
Mar 2013
#174
Yes, and because of their law enforcement component, they are not subject to Posse Comitatus
hughee99
Mar 2013
#176
GWB could have ordered jet fighters to shoot down the planes that flew into the WTC.
Lint Head
Mar 2013
#53
That claim requires better evidence than yet another Rand Paul tantrum
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#110
So President Bush-43 would have the authority to use military force against Americans on US soil?
AnotherMcIntosh
Mar 2013
#82
This president is different from all other presidents in that he is the only one - ever - to claim
AnotherMcIntosh
Mar 2013
#137
Overseas (tribal Yemen) and within the US are two entirely different legal and factual situations.
geek tragedy
Mar 2013
#138
How about Bėll Clinton had the same authority to kill Timothy McVeigh just minutes before...
Amonester
Mar 2013
#141
How about Richard Nixon who had an "enemies list" of those who criticized him?
AnotherMcIntosh
Mar 2013
#142
Why would you ask me, "How about Bėll Clinton had the same authority to kill Timothy McVeigh
AnotherMcIntosh
Mar 2013
#148
You can even go back further. Washington-1 used this authority to put down the Whiskey Rebellion.
jeff47
Mar 2013
#203
"Dr" Paul, if Obama had an "R" instead of a "D," you would support this. Hypocritical asshole!
Nanjing to Seoul
Mar 2013
#85
Wait, THOSE were his examples? Pearl Harbor, which Truman had advance notice and declined to act...
DRoseDARs
Mar 2013
#95
Harry Truman wasn't even VP until Jan '45 and only became POTUS in Apr '45
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#99
My timeline was wrong I fess up to that, but the debate about the government's foreknowledge is real
DRoseDARs
Mar 2013
#100
You have simply moved from a weird attack on Truman to a vaguer weird attack on "the government"
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#104
I have done no such thing, but please continue condescending. As much as I loathe doing this, here:
DRoseDARs
Mar 2013
#108
If you're going to dismiss it out-of-hand because of one word, then this isn't worth our time.
DRoseDARs
Mar 2013
#117
You provided a link to a Wikileaks page that discusses a hodge-podge of conspiracy theories,
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#122
Wasn't aware Wikileaks.org existed before it was registered in 2006, or that Wikipedia = Wikileaks.
DRoseDARs
Mar 2013
#123
As was mine. We're family here, let's just agree to disagree. I've respected you a long time...
DRoseDARs
Mar 2013
#129
Why not, when we still have torture camps, criminal banks and 2 sets of laws
just1voice
Mar 2013
#98
It's a good thing Obama is good instead of evil, or this would be something to worry about.
Pterodactyl
Mar 2013
#121
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime,...
Deep13
Mar 2013
#131
Feel free to register at Free Republic based on a letter you didn't bother
geek tragedy
Mar 2013
#167
"No person...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..." nt
Deep13
Mar 2013
#189
We're returning to the days when the military was used to put down strikes. That wasn't so long ago
leveymg
Mar 2013
#134
The article, like Rand Paul, completely misrepresents Holder's response:
struggle4progress
Mar 2013
#143
look how the bush gang was ready to down planes filled with innocents, we're lucky canda let them in
Sunlei
Mar 2013
#177