Tue Mar 5, 2013, 04:36 PM

Obama Administration Says President Can Use Lethal Force Against Americans on US Soil

Source: Mother Jones

Yes, the president does have the authority to use military force against American citizens on US soil—but only in "an extraordinary circumstance," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a letter to Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) Tuesday.

"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," Paul said Tuesday. "It is an affront the constitutional due process rights of all Americans."

Last month, Paul threatened to filibuster the nomination of John Brennan, Obama's pick to head the CIA, "until he answers the question of whether or not the President can kill American citizens through the drone strike program on U.S. soil." Tuesday, Brennan told Paul that "the agency I have been nominated to lead does not conduct lethal operations inside the United States—nor does it have any authority to do so." Brennan said that the Justice Department would answer Paul's question about whether Americans could be targeted for lethal strikes on US soil.

Holder's answer was more detailed, however, stating that under certain circumstances, the president would have the authority to order lethal attacks on American citizens. The two possible examples of such "extraordinary" circumstances were the attack on Pearl Harbor and the 9/11 terrorist attacks. An American president order the use of lethal military force inside the US is "entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no president will ever have to confront," Holder wrote.

Read more: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/03/obama-admin-says-it-can-use-lethal-force-against-americans-us-soil

Look at the bright side: at least they answered the question.

204 replies, 8481 views

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

204 replies	Author	Time	Post
Obama Administration Says President Can Use Lethal Force Against Americans on US Soil (Original post)	WilliamPitt	Mar 5	OP
And an informed, high-level official will decide	jsr	Mar 5	#1
That makes me feel soooo much better. nt	awoke_in_2003	Mar 5	#77
If this is true, then the Obama admin should start with the republicants in congress!	TheDebbieDee	Mar 5	#87
Yes, one as well informed as these:	AnotherMcIntosh	Mar 5	#93
yeah,	dtom67	Mar 6	#152
Work backward: DC needed every rancid piece of legislation they passed since 9/11 to get to this	blkmusclmachine	Mar 6	#154
Or ...	GeorgeGist	Mar 6	#160
I don't always agree with you but I certainly do on that post.	Nihil	Mar 6	#161
So, Obama really does have death panels? n/t	fasttense	Mar 6	#157
just great	In_The_Wind	Mar 6	#183
Could Congressional Republicans be declared Enemy combatants?	Katashi_itto	Mar 6	#186
US Marshals, the FBI and a couple other agencies	cliffordu	Mar 5	#2
Agree but this is significantly different in my opinion....	Swede Atlanta	Mar 5	#13
Well written and I will think about what you have posted -	cliffordu	Mar 5	#14
Obama was the Lesser evil	Stewland	Mar 5	#41
Did you actually read Holder's letter to Rand Paul?	struggle4progress	Mar 6	#155
Bonnie and Clyde were killed in a firefight with local law enforcement officials	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#29
No one wanted to take them alive.	cliffordu	Mar 5	#31
That may well be the case, but I wasn't there, as it was all before my time,	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#46
From all accounts, because they were folk heroes among many of the poor,	cliffordu	Mar 5	#50
In any case, neither FBI nor US Marshalls were responsible for the events of 23 May '34	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#58
This is true, although	cliffordu	Mar 5	#67
Actually, Bonnie and Clyde were ambushed	Art_from_Ark	Mar 6	#145
See my #46 upthread	struggle4progress	Mar 6	#146
The newsreel about the ambush implied that the Federal posse just started shooting	Art_from_Ark	Mar 6	#147
It was eighty years ago; I'm no expert on the subject; and accounts differ	struggle4progress	Mar 6	#156
But this is the President of the United States with a whole hell of a lot different accountability!	riderinthestorm	Mar 5	#66
Well...OK - my take is more cynical than that. The government as a whole has the ability	cliffordu	Mar 5	#70
I actually agree you. Its the fact they are acknowledging that accountability is for shit	riderinthestorm	Mar 5	#91
Cue Tricky Dick...	slackmaster	Mar 5	#3
Mr Obama has nowhere adopted Mr Nixon's view, argued by St Clair before the Supreme Court,	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#23
I can't believe nobody sees what he's doing.	sofa king	Mar 7	#196
Facts should precede analysis, but you would it the other way around	struggle4progress	Mar 7	#197
Here's a tip for you.	sofa king	Mar 7	#198
Please forgive my snippiness.	sofa king	Mar 7	#201
You could be right. I regard your post as plausible, although uncertainty rules the day. (NT)	proverbialwisdom	Mar 7	#200
Was this even a question, "Whiskey Rebellion" anybody?	SpartanDem	Mar 5	#4
Or the Civil War. nt	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#10
Rand Paul didn't see that on Faux, so it never happened.	freshwest	Mar 5	#42
Ugly. Unacceptable. Beyond fucking disappointing.	AzDar	Mar 5	#5
+1	rachel1	Mar 5	#69
Constitutional Professor	tblue	Mar 5	#6
"Scholar." HA!	blkmusclmachine	Mar 6	#153
So, if I flip off a drone flying overhead, my neighborhood will not get blown up, as a result?	RC	Mar 5	#7
I haven't ever seen any reports of Americans being offed by Mr Obama for flipping the bird	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#26
everybody else can...	stillcool	Mar 5	#8
Exactly, how many good Americans are storing up weapons to fight	Heather MC	Mar 5	#71
To all those getting worked up about this:	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#9
imagine	GRENADE	Mar 5	#11
Lincoln was a Republican. And he did use it. nt	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#12
I think you know what Grenade means...	Jeff In Milwaukee	Mar 5	#15
Necessarily deny? The right to repel an armed attack against the US has never been	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#17
I'm not disagreeing with you...	Jeff In Milwaukee	Mar 5	#22
Civilian authorities can't repel a catastrophic armed attack.	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#28
lincoln	GRENADE	Mar 6	#159
All presidents have ALWAYS had this power	SpartanDem	Mar 5	#18
Grenade	donnasgirl	Mar 5	#64
if a republican pretzeldent would not have this power available and wanted to have it	Amonester	Mar 6	#135
Lincoln did more than voilate it, he shredded the Constitution	Ter	Mar 5	#20
Worst president ever!!!! nt	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#21
Oh hush you...	Jeff In Milwaukee	Mar 5	#24
He's up there	Ter	Mar 6	#194
Yeah, Lincoln	John2	Mar 5	#45
Lincoln declared martial law during a civil war . . .	another_liberal	Mar 5	#75
Or the rioters in NYC. nt	Javaman	Mar 6	#163
In cases of invasion, or armed rebellion, when the usual instruments of the lawful civil government	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#16
+100	JoePhilly	Mar 5	#76
Yeah, we can't allow an armed overthrow of the US government or anything, now can we.	yodermon	Mar 5	#19
I'm starting to understand why US citizens are hoarding high power weapons. Not what I voted	Purveyor	Mar 5	#25
It says we can actually read the English language.	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#27
In neither of the cases that Holder so conveniently presented were the perps 'American citizens'.	Purveyor	Mar 5	#33
Shooting down the planes on 9/11 would have meant blowing up	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#36
No, you've been 'played' by this administration for supporting this policy. Carry on, indeed. eom	Purveyor	Mar 5	#55
What policy? Sorry, there's not a single credible constitutional	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#59
This message was self-deleted by its author	Purveyor	Mar 5	#65
Yeah. Those lashes are shredding your pom poms.	Jakes Progress	Mar 5	#37
No, I just value accuracy over poutrage. nt	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#39
No, you just value personality over principal.	Jakes Progress	Mar 5	#52
Tell us which language from Holder's letter, given the specific	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#54
Tell us the language from Holders letter	Jakes Progress	Mar 5	#109
What you do not understand is that every President has had the authority to	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#116
Nutzies hoard weapon cuz they are nutzy	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#97
Considering the headlines, why would this not encourage them?...	Purveyor	Mar 5	#102
It's pointless to try to understand the thought processes of wackos	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#107
And the first time they do this, they will lose my support.	kestrel91316	Mar 5	#30
They you need only go back a few weeks - because the FBI used lethal force on the Alabama	24601	Mar 5	#44
So you've never supported any US president then?	jeff47	Mar 7	#202
You would be all be screaming if the Bush administration said this	alarimer	Mar 5	#32
^^^THIS^^^ +1000 eom	Purveyor	Mar 5	#34
Hypocrisy thy name is reagan democrat.	Jakes Progress	Mar 5	#35
The downfall is people too stupid to pick history books	SpartanDem	Mar 5	#43
Wow. Spitting out your cheerios over my post?	Jakes Progress	Mar 5	#47
The Posse Comitatus Act.	SpartanDem	Mar 5	#62
Nice wiki cut and paste.	Jakes Progress	Mar 5	#111
Nice deflection.	SpartanDem	Mar 6	#140
Posse comitatus forbid the use of the armed forces for law enforcement, not	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#63
You haven't boned up enough in the 16 minutes	Jakes Progress	Mar 5	#113
If he had ordered the shooting down of Flight 93, yes I would have supported that.	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#120
John Yoo approves.	OnyxCollie	Mar 5	#130
It all depends	John2	Mar 5	#61
rand paul is the fetid dropping from his libertarian asshole of a father.	Jakes Progress	Mar 5	#115
Lincoln did it. Heck, George Washington personally led an army	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#38
So I guess Washington was a criminal for putting down the Whiskey Rebellion	SpartanDem	Mar 5	#40
So I guess you don't keep up with history.	Jakes Progress	Mar 5	#49
@alarimer That's indisputable	rachel1	Mar 5	#51
++++100	840high	Mar 5	#68
Quiet you, what did I tell you about point out the obvious?huh???	Javaman	Mar 6	#164
Is the definition of "extraordinary circumstances" also at the discretion of the President? n/t	hughee99	Mar 5	#48
Well, who else would make that call in the middle of an ongoing armed attack?	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#56
It's good to see that they've streamlined this to the point where	hughee99	Mar 5	#86
Who else has authority to authorize military action in immediate response	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#88
Whoa, what is this "immediate response to an ongoing attack"?	hughee99	Mar 5	#96
The 9/11 or Pearl Harbor examples were not chosen by accident. nt	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#101
Great, but two good "For instances" don't make any kind of actual guideline.	hughee99	Mar 5	#105
A guideline covering every possible hypothetical event?	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#106
How about some sort of guideline laying out what's NOT covered?	hughee99	Mar 5	#114
Ruby Ridge was obviously not an extraordinary, catastrophic attack.	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#119
Sorry, didn't see "catastrophic attack" just "circumstances" after	hughee99	Mar 5	#124
Holder used the language "catastrophic attack"	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#125
He gave "catastrophic attack" as an example of when it might be used.	hughee99	Mar 6	#168
Actually, I do have a problem with that. Fortunately for me, that is explicitly	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#169
The Coast Guard is already using drones,	hughee99	Mar 6	#170
I have no problem with the Coast Guard using drones to patrol the coast.	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#171
I'm all for the coast guard using drones for such purposes (patrol)	hughee99	Mar 6	#172
Posse Comitatus has very limited exceptions.	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#173
Again, Coast Guard drones. Posse Comitatus does not apply to the Coast Guard,	hughee99	Mar 6	#174
Coast Guard is a law enforcement agency as well as part	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#175
Yes, and because of their law enforcement component, they are not subject to Posse Comitatus	hughee99	Mar 6	#176
Well, by that token police could kill someone and do so every day.	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#179
I didn't realize Nebraska was on the coast.	hughee99	Mar 6	#181
If the President wants to murder someone, he can probably	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#182
You now seem far less confident in your legal protections	hughee99	Mar 6	#184
The scary thing about laws is that they're only as good as the people	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#185
GWB could have ordered jet fighters to shoot down the planes that flew into the WTC.	Lint Head	Mar 5	#53
"Give a boy a stick and he'll find something that needs to be hit. nt"	ladjf	Mar 5	#57
Timothy McVeigh doesn't count (he's the wrong color)	The Stranger	Mar 5	#60
I had the same thought: What if Bill Clinton had a few minutes warning...	Amonester	Mar 6	#139
American citizens were involved in the attack on Pearl Harbor . . .?	another_liberal	Mar 5	#72
(-)<>(-)	Mutatis Mutandis	Mar 5	#78
Well . . .	another_liberal	Mar 5	#118
Stimson, Marshall, McCloy, Lovett, and Bundy were Americans	Mutatis Mutandis	Mar 6	#158
Discussed or facts presented? nt	Javaman	Mar 6	#165
I've read some books . . .	another_liberal	Mar 6	#192
Rall	Mutatis Mutandis	Mar 5	#73
Worse then anything bush proposed...	bowens43	Mar 5	#74
He's declared himself King	FiveGoodMen	Mar 5	#79
That claim requires better evidence than yet another Rand Paul tantrum	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#110
thank goodness that he'll be president for life..	frylock	Mar 5	#80
Ted Nugent and Rush Limbaugh should be looking skyward, ROFL!	4bucksagallon	Mar 5	#81
So President Bush-43 would have the authority to use military force against Americans on US soil?	AnotherMcIntosh	Mar 5	#82
41 and Nixon had that authority as CiC	SpartanDem	Mar 5	#89
Yes, Bush had the authority to shoot down the airliners on 9/11	geek tragedy	Mar 5	#103
This president is different from all other presidents in that he is the only one - ever - to claim	AnotherMcIntosh	Mar 6	#137
Overseas (tribal Yemen) and within the US are two entirely different legal and factual situations.	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#138
How about Bìll Clinton had the same authority to kill Timothy McVeigh just minutes before...	Amonester	Mar 6	#141
How about Richard Nixon who had an "enemies list" of those who criticized him?	AnotherMcIntosh	Mar 6	#142
1. You didn't answer the question (yet).	Amonester	Mar 6	#144
Why would you ask me, "How about Bìll Clinton had the same authority to kill Timothy McVeigh	AnotherMcIntosh	Mar 6	#148
I don't agree with it. But I live in reality.	Amonester	Mar 6	#149
You can even go back further. Washington-1 used this authority to put down the Whiskey Rebellion.	jeff47	Mar 7	#203
This message was self-deleted by its author	damnedifIknow	Mar 5	#83
Rand Paul, spare me the drama queen routine	Politicub	Mar 5	#84
"The justice department policy allows killing of bonafide criminals"	FiveGoodMen	Mar 5	#128
Like I said, I take the policy at face value	Politicub	Mar 6	#162
Don't give a rat's ass what Paul says	FiveGoodMen	Mar 6	#180
"Dr" Paul, if Obama had an "R" instead of a "D," you would support this. Hypocritical asshole!	Nanjing to Seoul	Mar 5	#85
If it happens, impeachment would be a good move	Blandocyte	Mar 5	#90
Not sure why we focus on the method rather than the action.	Paul E Ester	Mar 5	#92
What the fuck are you talking about?	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#94
Seriously!	mimi85	Mar 5	#133
No. And no one beyond you is making that claim.	jeff47	Mar 7	#204
Wait, THOSE were his examples? Pearl Harbor, which Truman had advance notice and declined to act...	DRoseDARs	Mar 5	#95
Harry Truman wasn't even VP until Jan '45 and only became POTUS in Apr '45	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#99
My timeline was wrong I fess up to that, but the debate about the government's foreknowledge is real	DRoseDARs	Mar 5	#100
You have simply moved from a weird attack on Truman to a vaguer weird attack on "the government"	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#104
I have done no such thing, but please continue condescending. As much as I loathe doing this, here:	DRoseDARs	Mar 5	#108
So you're pushing a conspiracy theory	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#112
If you're going to dismiss it out-of-hand because of one word, then this isn't worth our time.	DRoseDARs	Mar 5	#117
You provided a link to a Wikileaks page that discusses a hodge-podge of conspiracy theories,	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#122
Wasn't aware Wikileaks.org existed before it was registered in 2006, or that Wikipedia = Wikileaks.	DRoseDARs	Mar 5	#123
Thanks for the correction. Dumb typo	struggle4progress	Mar 5	#127
As was mine. We're family here, let's just agree to disagree. I've respected you a long time...	DRoseDARs	Mar 5	#129
Why not, when we still have torture camps, criminal banks and 2 sets of laws	just1voice	Mar 5	#98
It's a good thing Obama is good instead of evil, or this would be something to worry about.	Pterodactyl	Mar 5	#121
Hear that teabaggers?	Renew Deal	Mar 5	#126
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime,...	Deep13	Mar 5	#131
Feel free to register at Free Republic based on a letter you didn't bother	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#167
The correct answer is...	Deep13	Mar 6	#187
Problem is the constitution doesn't flatly prohibit it in all cases.	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#188
"No person...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..." nt	Deep13	Mar 6	#189
So, police may never use lethal force?	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#190
the police example is personal self-defense,...	Deep13	Mar 6	#191
"Due process" certainly involves a lot of wiggle room.	geek tragedy	Mar 6	#193
The President's authority is one thing...	davidthegnome	Mar 5	#132
We're returning to the days when the military was used to put down strikes. That wasn't so long ago	leveymg	Mar 5	#134
Preparing for the Hour of Need: Emergency Powers in the United States	OnyxCollie	Mar 6	#136
The article, like Rand Paul, completely misrepresents Holder's response:	struggle4progress	Mar 6	#143
Monsieur Holder, Talk is Cheap	harkonen	Mar 6	#150
9/11 was a handy excuse.	blkmusclmachine	Mar 6	#151
Well this opens the door for some future nut bag prez. nt	Javaman	Mar 6	#166
look how the bush gang was ready to down planes filled with innocents, we're lucky canda let them in	Sunlei	Mar 6	#177
Well, well, isn't that comforting?	Beacool	Mar 6	#178
Listening to Thom Hartmann today and reading friend's twitter about drones killing Obama voters	alp227	Mar 7	#195
state murder laws still apply. nt	quadrature	Mar 7	#199

Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Mar 5, 2013, 04:39 PM

jsr (3,497 posts)

1. And an informed, high-level official will decide

whether you should be killed or not.

Obama Administration Says President Can Use Lethal Force Against Americans on US Soil

1. And an informed, high-level official will decide

77. That makes me feel soooo much better. nt

87. If this is true, then the Obama admin should start with the republicants in congress!

93. Yes, one as well informed as these:

152. yeah,

154. Work backward: DC needed every rancid piece of legislation they passed since 9/11 to get to this

160. Or ...

161. I don't always agree with you but I certainly do on that post.

157. So, Obama really does have death panels? n/t

183. just great

186. Could Congressional Republicans be declared Enemy combatants?

2. US Marshals, the FBI and a couple other agencies

13. Agree but this is significantly different in my opinion....

14. Well written and I will think about what you have posted -

41. Obama was the Lesser evil

155. Did you actually read Holder's letter to Rand Paul?

29. Bonnie and Clyde were killed in a firefight with local law enforcement officials

31. No one wanted to take them alive.

46. That may well be the case, but I wasn't there, as it was all before my time,

50. From all accounts, because they were folk heroes among many of the poor,

58. In any case, neither FBI nor US Marshalls were responsible for the events of 23 May '34

67. This is true, although

145. Actually, Bonnie and Clyde were ambushed

146. See my #46 upthread

147. The newsreel about the ambush implied that the Federal posse just started shooting

156. It was eighty years ago; I'm no expert on the subject; and accounts differ

66. But this is the President of the United States with a whole hell of a lot different accountability!

70. Well...OK - my take is more cynical than that. The government as a whole has the ability

91. I actually agree you. Its the fact they are acknowledging that accountability is for shit

3. Cue Tricky Dick...

23. Mr Obama has nowhere adopted Mr Nixon's view, argued by St Clair before the Supreme Court,

196. I can't believe nobody sees what he's doing.

197. Facts should precede analysis, but you would it the other way around

198. Here's a tip for you.

201. Please forgive my snippiness.

200. You could be right. I regard your post as plausible, although uncertainty rules the day. (NT)

4. Was this even a question, "Whiskey Rebellion" anybody?

10. Or the Civil War. nt

42. Rand Paul didn't see that on Faux, so it never happened.

5. Ugly. Unacceptable. Beyond fucking disappointing.

69. +1

6. Constitutional Professor

153. "Scholar." HA!

7. So, if I flip off a drone flying overhead, my neighborhood will not get blown up, as a result?

26. I haven't ever seen any reports of Americans being offed by Mr Obama for flipping the bird

8. everybody else can...

71. Exactly, how many good Americans are storing up weapons to fight

9. To all those getting worked up about this:

11. imagine

12. Lincoln was a Republican. And he did use it. nt

15. I think you know what Grenade means...

17. Necessarily deny? The right to repel an armed attack against the US has never been

22. I'm not disagreeing with you...

28. Civilian authorities can't repel a catastrophic armed attack.

159. lincoln

18. All presidents have ALWAYS had this power

64. Grenade

135. if a republican pretzeldent would not have this power available and wanted to have it

20. Lincoln did more than voilate it, he shredded the Constitution

21. Worst president ever!!!! nt

24. Oh hush you...

194. He's up there

45. Yeah, Lincoln

75. Lincoln declared martial law during a civil war . . .

163. Or the rioters in NYC. nt

16. In cases of invasion, or armed rebellion, when the usual instruments of the lawful civil government

76. +100

19. Yeah, we can't allow an armed overthrow of the US government or anything, now can we.

25. I'm starting to understand why US citizens are hoarding high power weapons. Not what I voted

27. It says we can actually read the English language.

33. In neither of the cases that Holder so conveniently presented were the perps 'American citizens'.

36. Shooting down the planes on 9/11 would have meant blowing up

55. No, you've been 'played' by this administration for supporting this policy. Carry on, indeed. eom

59. What policy? Sorry, there's not a single credible constitutional

37. Yeah. Those lashes are shredding your pom poms.

39. No, I just value accuracy over poutrage. nt

52. No, you just value personality over principal.

54. Tell us which language from Holder's letter, given the specific

109. Tell us the language from Holders letter