Posting Shortly: State Sen. Says CSCOPE Will be Yanked in Texas

As Heard on Beck Radio: Wait Until You Read that Poem By One of Those Punished for Benghazi Lapses

Government

Obama to Provide Congress With Legal Rationale Used for Drone Strikes on American Citizens

Feb. 6, 2013 8:30pm
Obama to Provide Congress With Legal Rationale Used for Drone Strikes on American Citizens

Credit: AFP/Getty Images

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama has directed the Justice Department to give Congress’ intelligence committees access to classified legal advice providing the government’s rationale for drone strikes against American citizens working with al-Qaida abroad, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

A drumbeat of demands to see the document has swelled on Capitol Hill in recent days as the Senate Intelligence Committee prepares to hold a confirmation hearing for John Brennan, who helped manage the drone program, to be CIA director.

Those demands were only intensified by the leak this week of an unclassified “white paper” on how decisions are made to target U.S. citizens abroad that the Justice Department confidentially sent to key lawmakers last year. The unclassified memo says it is legal for the government to kill U.S. citizens abroad if it believes they are senior al-Qaida leaders continually engaged in operations aimed at killing Americans, even if there is no evidence of a specific imminent attack.

The senior official said Obama decided to send lawmakers the classified rationale on Wednesday as part of his “commitment to consult with Congress on national security matters.” Obama directed the Justice Department provide the Senate and House intelligence committees access to classified advice from its Office of Legal Counsel that the white paper is based on, the official said.

Legal opinions produced by the legal counsel’s office are interpretations of federal law that are binding on all executive branch agencies.

The administration official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the matter by name.

Earlier Wednesday, White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama was engaged in an internal process deliberation to determine how to balance the nation’s security needs with its values. He said Obama was committed to providing more information to Congress, even as he refused to acknowledge whether the drone memo even existed.

“He thinks that it is legitimate to ask questions about how we prosecute the war against al-Qaida,” Carney said. “These are questions that will be with us long after he is president and long after the people who are in the seats that they’re in now have left the scene.”

Eleven senators, including Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon, called on Obama to provide lawmakers “any and all legal opinions” that outline the president’s authority to use legal force against Americans.

“Every American has the right to know when their government believes that it is allowed to kill them,” Wyden said in a statement. The Oregon lawmaker is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Justice’s unclassified 16-page white paper says that it is lawful to target al-Qaida linked U.S. citizens if they pose an “imminent” threat of violent attack against Americans and that delaying action against such people would create an unacceptably high risk. Such circumstances may necessitate expanding the concept of imminent threat, the memo says.

“The threat posed by al-Qaida and its associated forces demands a broader concept of imminence in judging when a person continually planning terror attacks presents an imminent threat,” the document added.

A September 2011 drone strike in Yemen killed Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, both U.S. citizens. A separate drone strike two weeks later killed al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, a Denver native. The strikes came after U.S. intelligence concluded that the elder al-Awlaki was senior operational leader of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula plotting attacks on the U.S., including the abortive Christmas Day bombing of an airplane landing in Detroit in 2009.

The memo does not require the U.S. to have information about a specific imminent attack against the U.S. But it does require that capture of a terrorist suspect not be feasible and that any such lethal operation by the United States targeting a person comply with fundamental law-of-war principles.

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Comments (64)

1 2
  • noslave
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 10:45pm

    bill&hillary are saying DANG WHYD WE DINT THINK OF DAT??when we wanted to get them pesky malitias,etc. that didnt like us??

    Report this comment

    noslave  
    • ICRedifURBlue
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 11:06pm

      Every American has the right to know when their government believes that it is allowed to kill them ………..and the government has the right to know when every American believes they are ……………

      Report this comment

      ICRedifURBlue  
    • WarMunger_Al
      Posted on February 7, 2013 at 6:04am

      Obama can’t write laws, so shouldn’t the Legal justification come from congress? There is no legal violation of the constitution, this tyrant needs to be dealt with. Where is our representation?

      Report this comment

      WarMunger_Al  
    • naughtycal
      Posted on February 7, 2013 at 8:25am

      WAR,
      You’re right an even with these clear example of treason,unconstitutional executive orders,and breaking of his presdential oath the Republicans in Congress never bring up impeachment.
      Why,because they believe that Obama tyranny is paving the way for their tyranny when they have a man in office. Someone should remind them of what happened to the jewish community when it remained silent while the Nazi regime grabbed more power.

      Report this comment

      naughtycal  
    • richauthor
      Posted on February 7, 2013 at 1:24pm

      First Obama and Holder all but require our troops to read the terrorists their Miranda Rights on the battlefield; then they tried to have the terrorists brought to criminal trial in New York City. They did everything possible to institute DUE PROCESS for our enemies.

      Now, they simply IGNORE due process when it comes to killing Americans abroad.

      Impeach these two legal morons.

      Report this comment

      richauthor  
  • Advection
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 10:25pm

    This reminds me of Sting’s song, “They Dance Alone” about the mothers who protested the murders of their sons and husbands by dancing with their ghosts. It was the only form of protest they were allowed by the dictator, Pinochet. Like Obama, he secretly slaughtered citizens.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MS_bN5ECJTI

    Report this comment

    Advection  
  • crueltiming
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:57pm

    This time around he’ll have to really earn his Nobel Peace Prize!

    Report this comment

    crueltiming  
    • lovenfl3
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 10:15pm

      I believe it’s called “hypocrisy” Mr. President. You can call it whatever you want, but more and more Americans are waking up to your propaganda. Too bad they didn’t wake up a little bit sooner, but we are waking up. Interrogation is bad, killing with drones is good. Just like this video points out!

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z85X6im-4Qs

      Report this comment

      lovenfl3  
    • RabidPatriot
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 10:16pm

      “I’m the King… uh, I mean, I’m the President. That is all the rational you need.”

      ~President Obama

      Report this comment

      RabidPatriot  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:43pm

    Murder is still murder Mr Obama, and that is what you should be charged with in addition to treason.

    Report this comment

    Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
  • firman
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:34pm

    The next “right thing to do” will be to take out an american terrorist “threat” in THIS country with a drone…suddenly there will be “threats” near people and places they want taken out? Giving the government this option is extremely dangerous. Anyone remember Waco? Ruby ridge?

    Report this comment

    firman  
  • AUsername
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:33pm

    lets impeach and get this monster out of office and put in Rand Paul already.

    Report this comment

    AUsername  
  • bigbear_awake
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:28pm

    IMPEACH THE PoS

    Report this comment

    bigbear_awake  
  • Salamander
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:26pm

    Remember when President Johnson used to sit in the Oval Office and pick out bombing targets in Viet Nam? Why do President’s feel the need to do this? I’d think one might use the George Bush approach–pick good men for the task at hand, and let them run with it!

    Report this comment

    Salamander  
    • Advection
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:42pm

      America was sickened by the arrogant presidents choosing individual targets.

      And now history repeats. Only this time, the president is secretly choosing which citizens to kill, and he’s not accountable to anyone.

      Report this comment

      Advection  
  • Maxim Crux
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:24pm

    What will the sentiment be towards Obama and Congress when the first American is killed by a drone on this soil?

    Report this comment

    Maxim Crux  
  • Salamander
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:24pm

    Help me out, here! I don’t understand how their citizen status has anything to do with the decision! A police officer can fire at a citizen! A security guard can fire at a citizen! The FBI can fire at a citizen! Now, I’ll admit that the ammo carried on a drone has a little more punch than the ‘assault rifle’ represented (falsely) to have been used in Sandy Hook (present, but not fired). But, if we’re killing foreign combatants for their affiliation with al Qaeda, why wouldn’t we snuff out our own for the same offense?

    Report this comment

    Salamander  
    • Pondskum
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 10:19pm

      Amendment 5 of the constitution the parts that apply are

      No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except the Militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger..

      This would explain why an officer can take a life if necessary it’s under public danger. Again i’m not a scholar this is just my take on it.

      Far as I can tell and i’m not a scholar this means that you need to be tried before sentence is given unless as it says your in service at time of war or a matter of public danger.

      Report this comment

      Pondskum  
    • WarMunger_Al
      Posted on February 7, 2013 at 6:11am

      An officer firing on a suspect in the act of committing violence is vastly different than sending a drone to kill a guy eating breakfast with his family for being “involved” with a terror group. Particularly since the definition of terror group seems to expand daily along with the governments definition of “imminent”

      Report this comment

      WarMunger_Al  
  • sURFNmADNESS
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:24pm

    King O : Because I say it is ok to do. That is good enough for a King!!!! F the laws of the this land, they do not apply to royalty.

    Report this comment

    sURFNmADNESS  
    • Advection
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:35pm

      You’re wrong. The laws do apply to royalty. Kings who murdered their subjects didn’t last.

      Obama is acting like a despotic dictator. He’s the “Butcher of Chicago”.

      Report this comment

      Advection  
  • CatherineAnn
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:16pm

    I think we all saw that coming. How if you fear your government you are no longer crazy, you are a normal American!

    Report this comment

    CatherineAnn  
  • Advection
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:12pm

    Even kings daren’t arrogate to themselves the authority to slaughter their subjects with impunity. Not in the last thousand years, anyway. One has to look to tyrants like Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot to find this sort of tyrannical bloodlust.

    Why wasn’t Obama deposed after this was exposed? If it’s not a high crime when the President murders citizens in secret, then there are no crimes.

    Report this comment

    Advection  
    • subic
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:42pm

      Obama is hell bent on justifying this. He wants to kill any C I AlQaeda assets that has the goods on his weapoms smuggling & the Benghazi coverup.

      Oh, and he wants to use these drones here at home against anyone that deposes him, ie political enemies, gun owners, conservatives, libertarians, returning veterans, constitutionalists and the like.

      This guy is sick. Time for a mutiny

      Report this comment

      subic  
    • Advection
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 10:01pm

      The memo says that Obama granted himself the authority to kill anyone without any intelligence to support his decision. All he needs is personal suspicion. And Obama has routinely obstructed even basic oversight.

      Obama thinks that he can kill anyone, anywhere, anytime for any reason, and nobody can know who he killed or why. If that’s not tyranny, can someone explain what it is? I’m curious to know what that’s called.

      Report this comment

      Advection  
  • Salamander
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:12pm

    So, we’ve got a pot-smoker pushing the button? Cool!

    Report this comment

    Salamander  
  • TRILO
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:58pm

    It appears that our government crossed the line years ago on what is or is not Constitutional under the auspices of ” If it protects the American citizens it is therefore Constitutional”. Let’s see how well that has worked over the years.

    Lincoln – suspension of Habeus Corpus during the Civil War
    FDR – internment and theft of property against Japanese citizens and others
    Bush – warrant-less wire taps, Patriot Act and enhanced interrogation techniques
    Obama – Assassinations of Americans, drones, expansion of the Patriot Act

    Clinton/ Bush – Recent evidence of severe infringement of Constitutional rights surrounding Ruby Ridge and Waco. Lets not forget rendition.

    Sadly, there is a common thread among most of these issues – democrats and republicans both seem to support most of these infringements against our Constitution. Of course, they only support the unconstitutional actions made by their party.

    Where the hell did you people think this type of thinking was going to go? Pandora’s Box was opened a long time ago. Just remember, the sheeple believe the saying “If it saves (fill in the blank), then it is worth it.” This is why we are failing as a country and becoming slaves of the government.

    Report this comment

    TRILO  
    • ALL4FREEDOM
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:38pm

      Your only mistake here is Lincoln. The Constitution, in Article I Section 9 states “The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public safety may require it.” The Civil War meets the standard. FDR’s internment of the Japanese-Americans, for example, does not, as these folks didn’t lift a finger against America.

      Report this comment

      ALL4FREEDOM  
    • WarMunger_Al
      Posted on February 7, 2013 at 6:15am

      All4-
      Lincoln violated more than habeaus corpus, he imprisoned people for speaking out against him. He basically sett he stage for total freeze on constitutional protections. Lincoln was a tyrant. The ends do not justify the means.

      Report this comment

      WarMunger_Al  
  • zetuff
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:52pm

    there is so much air traffic in the USA.. they will be forced to fly them at low range… another reason they want to take away your rifles and long range bullets… wake up people…

    Report this comment

    zetuff  
    • oldguy49
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:24pm

      #6 bird shot

      Report this comment

      oldguy49  
    • Dodsfall
      Posted on February 7, 2013 at 10:18am

      It would be extremely difficult if not impossible to shoot down a Predator drone with small arms. They can get through military-grade air defenses. It’s what they were built for.

      Report this comment

      Dodsfall  
  • LakeHartwellSailor
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:46pm

    I can not believe we are even going down this road. The Administration justifies this as kind of a “lasts ditch effort”, and the scenario is an over-seas theater and an American is involved. If there is an American involved, I would think the LAST thing you would want to do is take him out with a drone. This American should be captured and intelligence developed. Perhaps the American was a hostage? If the American truly was a subversive, then due process is afforded to this American. After all, if the theater of drone activity which permits the killing of Americans, is truly on foreign soil, it is likely there is no direct threat to American interests at least on our shores.

    But even if the kill could be justified overseas (lets just pretend), what is preventing the government from going one more step further…killing Americans suspected of subversion ON AMERICAN SOIL WITHOUT DUE PROCESS?

    Slippery slope.

    Report this comment

    LakeHartwellSailor  
  • Tri-ox
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:46pm

    I’m still waiting for a LEGAL RATIONALE for obama’s occupation of OUR White House.

    Report this comment

    Tri-ox  
  • denkat56
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:44pm

    Never mind rights, legal or ethical, just pick a target any target and pull the trigger or push the button, no more worries for Obama. Too much power especially for someone who couldn’t make a decision about Bengazi. Wrong temperament , wrong attitude, and especially the wrong weapon in his hands. Sorry Mr. President I just don’t think your mature enough for this kind of power.

    Report this comment

    denkat56  
  • RJJinGadsden
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:44pm

    I can hear now like all of his other speeches, this one will also end with “And, its the right thing to do.”

    Report this comment

    RJJinGadsden  
  • dublinthewagons
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:43pm

    Classified rationale. That is anybody that he doesn’t like. Radical islamist can have due process as Barry and the terrorist have like ideas. They hate America

    Report this comment

    dublinthewagons  
    • Shasta
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 9:01pm

      He ordered the defense department to mirandize the captured enemy combatants on the field in Iraq and Afghanistan. But citizens just get executed?

      Report this comment

      Shasta  
  • whatthecrazy
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:42pm

    Is it just me or do most of his photos seem more evil since election?

    Report this comment

    whatthecrazy  
    • dublinthewagons
      Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:49pm

      No the turd has bleached out in the sunlight. It’s normal for one to do that

      Report this comment

      dublinthewagons  
    • Fla.Patriot
      Posted on February 7, 2013 at 12:44am

      No, I think you’re right. Something in his eyes…very creepy. Kind of like looking into a rabid dogs eyes. Doesn’t matter what the rest of his face is doing, the eyes tell all. This man (and I use the term loosely) has a narcasistic view and a short fuse…very dangerous combination. First time I really started to notice it was during the Presidential Debates, but that’s probably because I make it a point to change the channel when he’s pushing his poison. But yeah, have noticed the same thing

      Report this comment

      Fla.Patriot  
  • whatthecrazy
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:40pm

    Translation………..Obama to BS congress with BS rational used for murdering American citizens?

    Report this comment

    whatthecrazy  
  • FloridaFarmGirl
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:39pm

    Watch your back my fellow Southerners, you are a target for this pos. Be prepared, get ready and lock and load. It is coming from a liberal near you that the takers just reelected. May God Bless America, for no one else will. Hold your children tight and close to you!!

    Report this comment

    FloridaFarmGirl  
  • John 1776
    Posted on February 6, 2013 at 8:36pm

    So, let me get this straight….
    It’s not ok for citizens to protect themselves with a gun….
    But it’s ok if the president decides you should be dead and orders a missile fired at you…

    …But…

    We’re all equal !

    Report this comment

    John 1776  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love