Skip to comments.Was Breitbart LEGALLY Assassinated?
Posted on 03/04/2012 8:28:17 AM PST by null and void
If Breitbart was assassinated, it could be perfectly legal under current US laws and policy.
CIA Lawyers Maintains Citizens Could be Targets if they are at War With the U.S.What is a weapon?
December 1, 2011
The Associated Press has reported that top national security lawyers in the Obama administration have determined that U.S. citizens are legitimate military targets when they take up arms with al-Qaeda.
Answering questions at a national security conference Thursday about the CIA killing of Anwar al-Alwaki, a radical American-born Muslim cleric who Obama descirbed as "the leader of external operations for Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.
Al-Alwaki had been killed in a September 30 U.S. drone strike led by the CIA in the mountains of Yemen. The radical, whos fiery sermons made him a larger-than-life figure in the world of Jihad, had long eluded capture by CIA and Yemeni security operatives.
However, in 2011, after days of surveillance, the New York Times reported, armed drones operated by the CIA took off from a new secret American base in the Arabian Peninsula, crossed into the northern Yemen border and rained a barrage of Hellfire missiles at a car carrying al-Alwaki and other top operatives from Al-Qaeda's branch in Yemen.
According to the AP, the government lawyers - CIA counsel Stephen Preston and Pentagon counsel Jeh Johnson - did not directly address the al-Alwaki case. But they said U.S. citizens don't have immunity when they're at war with the United States.
Johnson said only the executive branch, not the courts, are equipped to make decisions about who qualifies as an enemy, the AP reported.
Is someone who threatened to end the Obama presidency "at war" with the U.S. in the eyes of the president?
IF the president determined that Andrew Breitbart's release of video of his college days would threaten his presidency, and
IF the president believes his presidency is essential to the continuation of the US government,
THEN the president would be OBLIGATED to remove the threat.
As such he would be required, in his own mind, to issue a presidential finding that Andrew Beritbart needs to be eliminated before the videos are released.
The CIA, would legally be bound to follow the presidential directive and eliminate the threat in a timely fashion.
After all, destabilizing the US government is an act of war, and in perfect alignment with al Qaeda's goals, isn't it? Isn't it?
Although some of us old fashioned folks, bitterly clinging to the Constitution, might argue that it is a freedom of speech issue
It's also available at Western Center for Journalism
I watched the full hour and twenty minute presentation. Damning, to put it mildly.
Castle—A mystery show on ABC monday night at 10— rather well written for the most part. About a mystery writer named Castle shadowing and helping a NY police detective who is a beautiful woman. Its rather well done for TV fare— This show as one of the better ones.
Hi, stuck-in-new-orleans, I’m often a *tin foil* nut job; but occasionally, I’m right.
Know where Kenner is? I was “stuck-in-kenner” years ago. Plan to visit NO soon, if only by webcam. I like NO!
Does anybody know of somebody who does that kind of analysis?
Thanks for the post; ping; article (as important as anything you have written...BTTT!); thread (yes I read every post and clicked on many links).
R.I.P. Andrew Breitbart. Thank you, sir.
Yep. Used to live in Kenner for a while. Be safe visiting nola.
” The American government, under Obama, has turned on the citizens of America.”
” They have already crossed the rubicon of deliberate mass murder with Operation Fast And Furious/Murdergate.
Killing an AB or three now would mean nothing to them.”
Just remember, Breitbart was actually dangerous. He brought down Weiner, he brought down ACORN, he brought down Sherrod (sp?). He was not just some windbag who made people uncomfortable. He actually was cleaning out the rats nest.
He also along w Okeefe nailed NPR to the wall.
"Conspiracy theories" is a nasty propaganda buzzphrase invented by leftist propaganda artists. Many times I post the dictionary defnition of "conspiracy". It does not mean "paranoid fantasy".
I don't know why Breitbart died, and neither do you.
If his wife and friends are reading this, here is my message to them:
Andrew Breitbart was a wonderful, brillianty, funny, courageous and principled human being. His eternal soul - his immortal self - is not extinguished; he continues his journey. And his mission here - to expose "progressive" leftist lies and tyranny and thus de-fang them - will continue, and those on the side of the Constitution will continue to be inspired by Andrew's fighting spirit. He will not be forgotten and many are grieving with you.
And if his death involved foul play, he will be avenged.
As I wrote in another thread, anyone who would dismiss the possibility of an assassination out-of-hand in this case has no understanding of the forces who are opposing freedom and liberty in this fight.
Why not? After all, the Liberal-leaning MSM has already pronounced the cause of his death as 'natural causes' before the autopsy.
Precisely right. The government has been trashing the Constitution right along. When backing the The Government and remaining faithful to the Constitution become incompatible, the correct choice makes it thus: whoever holds fast to the Constitution is an enemy of the State.
Therefore, Obama and his minions could declare someone hostile to "The Government", because the Government has become as illegitimate as its Chief Executive's usurpations.
This is America.
Why do people need security details?
Don't leave out that at CPAC he said he had video, and was going to vett Obama using it. That direct threat of exposing the Usurper for what he is--and isn't--provides a very strong motive for foul play.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.