Tag Archives: No imminent and immediate threat of death and bodily harm

Attorney General Eric Holder states no, Constitution allow a US citizen on US soil to be killed by a drone?, No imminent and immediate threat of death and bodily harm

Attorney General Eric Holder states no, Constitution allow a US citizen on US soil to be killed by a drone?, No imminent and immediate threat of death and bodily harm

“In the Department’s view, a lethal operation conducted against a U.S. citizen whose conduct poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States would be a legitimate act of national self-defense that would not violate the assassination ban. Similarly, the use of lethal force, consistent with the laws of war, against an individual who is a legitimate military target would be lawful and would not violate the assassination ban.”…Obama DOJ Memo

“I just want you to know that we are working on it (gun control)….We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”…Barack Obama

“Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.”…George Washington 

From Mediaite March 6, 2013.

“Ted Cruz Goads Eric Holder Into Admitting That Killing Americans With Drones On U.S. Soil Is Unconstitutional”

“On Tuesday, the Department of Justice sent shockwaves through the nation when Attorney General Eric Holder informed Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) in writing that the White House would be within its legal authority to execute an American citizen via drone on U.S. soil if that person was determined to pose a threat to national security. On Wednesday, testifying before a Senate panel, Holder was prodded repeatedly about this assertion by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). Holder eventually admitted that it would not be constitutional to execute an American citizen without due process.

“In your legal judgment, does the Constitution allow a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil to be killed by a drone?” Cruz asked Holder pointedly.

“For sitting in a café and having a cup of coffee?” Holder replied. Cruz clarified that his hypothetical individual subject to a drone strike did not pose an “imminent and immediate threat of death and bodily harm,” but that person is suspected to be a terrorist.

“I would not think that that would be an appropriate use of any kind of lethal force,” Holder replied.”

““You keep saying appropriate – my question isn’t about propriety,” Cruz goaded. “My question is about whether something is constitutional or not.”

When Cruz was about to abandon his line of questioning after a number of equivocations from Holder, the attorney general clarified that he was saying “no” such actions would not be constitutional.”

Watch video:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/ted-cruz-goads-eric-holder-into-admitting-that-killing-americans-with-drones-on-u-s-soil-is-unconstitutional/

Advertisements