Not to nitpick, but wasn’t the Alawaki incident shown to be legal per the Constitution, hence no precedent to set?
Warning: light hearted intentional whataboutism to follow. Big Data, the NYT thinks it’s cool when Obama uses it to beat Romney.
You need to actually watch the video.
Fallout’s already begun:
I did. Hence light hearted. They actually sound like the people that got the pee tape and dossier on Trump. Former mi5 agents you say? Like Steele?
Good for the goose, good for the gander.
You couldn’t have when you posted that article unless you watched it before I put it up. It’s 19m long and your response came 14m later after I submitted it.
And he would gotten away with it to. If it wasn’t for you meddling kids and your puppy
Probably because the FAILING fake news NYT is caught up on things like “felonies” and “too many Russian nationals working for Putin” irt Trump’s Big Data successes.
Dirty liberals and their bias. It’s no wonder they don’t want to make America great again. They hate happiness and capitalism. They’re just waiting to elect wacky -insert dem here- and push their socialist agenda and take yer guns.
edit: SAD
He had an enemy of the USA killed, not a personal political enemy, so the analogy is off.
Yeah but then the GOP talking point kicks in. This guy was public about his Obamahate (alqueda member hating one of it’s own?!? Now I’ve seen it all). Due to that Obamahate, this HAD to be a person hit against the BoR, basically spitting on George Washington’s mother’s grave. Like I’m pretty sure Obama actually spit on her grave. Srs face -.-
You guys are comparing apples and oranges here - discussing how a US President, whether Trump, Obama or someone else would operate in a different political system without any checks and balances that would basically glorify state-sponsored violence.
And that’s especially the case in Russia and similar dictatorships where the sexual prowess and attractiveness of a leader is through state sanctioned propaganda closely intertwined with his capacity to inflict violence on political opponents
In other words, imagine a parallel universe in which Trump realizes that young, willing, beautiful women (not ageing porn stars) find extrajudicial killings attractive.
To be fair, I’m not saying that Trump would be some one-of-a-kind monster. Other presidents, hell, even all of us here would behave completely differently in a rough environment where our worst personality traits would be brought out to the forefront - think Sierra Leone/Liberia, northern Nigeria, Caucasus…
Edit: Alexander the Great burned down Persepolis and killed thousands because he was “dared to do it by a drunken prostitute” - so much for great historical figures and their noble impulses
That’s why rich Westerners like hanging out with tinpot dictators - it feels sooo liberating. Being rich and powerful is much, much more fun and liberating in the East.
Just look at Trump - if you want to do some philandering, you have to do it with a washed up porn star in a hotel room, notify your lawyer in advance and fork out 130k later, while your verbal remarks about sexual advances are subjected to media scrutiny and faux-outrage.
Meanwhile, Putin doesn’t have to worry about Non disclosure agreements (this video titled “Vladdy, Vladdy” is not a satire, they really mean it)
Well if being rich in Moscow means u can do what u want &whores everywhere maybe this take over isn’t so bad… I’ll skip the water sports tho
Thank you for expressing for what I was trying (poorly) to say.
Nah you expressed yourself just fine. It’s just a Benghazi esque distraction point from the GOP news circuit. Obama fully acting within the law isn’t sexy. You need to remember he’s an anti 'Murica monster, even when he’s killing terrorists…
Not siding with one argument or the other and Obama may very well have acted within the law, but that doesn’t mean there still aren’t very real concerns regarding due process and the assassination, for lack of a better term, of a US citizen abroad.
It certainly doesn’t help that Anwar al Awlaki was a giant heaping pile of shit.
This is an interesting read if the subject interests you:
http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1674&context=wmborj
Sure there are. I’d hope people voice these concerns to their respective legislators. The ones that keep/decide its legality.
Tbh, when the president has the ability to kill a terrorist, and is acting within the law, this no longer becomes an “Obama” thing.
That being said, if people are going to call their respective legislation, they should also remember to bring up the Patriot act before killing terrorists needing better guidelines
Imo it helps a great deal. We’d all be losing our shit if he killed a school teacher visiting to spread the good word instead of a terrorist
I meant it doesn’t help highlight the potential 4th amendment issue because no one cares if a terrorist, alleged or otherwise, is killed.
