Can the President Kill Americans?

[Chef Ramsay]

By Judge Andrew Napolitano

Can the president kill you? The short answer is: Yes, but not legally. Yet, President Obama has established a secret process that involves officials from the Departments of Justice and Defense, the CIA, and the White House senior staff whereby candidates are proposed for execution, and the collective wisdom of the officials then recommends execution to the president, who then accepts or rejects the recommendation.

If the recommendation is to kill and the president rejects the recommendation, the CIA is directed to arrest the person. If the president accepts the recommendation to kill, then death is ordered. This is not unlike the procedure used in the reign of the monstrous British King Henry VIII, except that the king himself delegated the final say to his chancellor so that he could publicly disavow participation in the government murders.

Obama does not disavow them; he defends them. But the Constitution he swore to uphold makes clear that whenever the government wants the life, liberty or property of anyone, it must follow due process. Stated differently, it must either sue the person for his property or prosecute him for his life or liberty, and the law that forms the basis for the lawsuit or the prosecution must have existed before the person did whatever the government says he did that resulted in its pursuit of him. The whole reason for the requirement of due process was to prevent what Henry VIII did and Obama is doing from ever happening here.

It is happening here.

...

More...https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/04/andrew-p-napolitano/the-imperial-whim-of-death/

[panju1]

By Judge Andrew Napolitano

Can the president kill you? The short answer is: Yes, but not legally. Yet, President Obama has established a secret process that involves officials from the Departments of Justice and Defense, the CIA, and the White House senior staff whereby candidates are proposed for execution, and the collective wisdom of the officials then recommends execution to the president, who then accepts or rejects the recommendation.

If the recommendation is to kill and the president rejects the recommendation, the CIA is directed to arrest the person. If the president accepts the recommendation to kill, then death is ordered. This is not unlike the procedure used in the reign of the monstrous British King Henry VIII, except that the king himself delegated the final say to his chancellor so that he could publicly disavow participation in the government murders.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/04/andrew-p-napolitano/the-imperial-whim-of-death/

How is it illegal, if there is a set process involved?

[Gronthaing]

@Chef Ramsay hasn't it happened before? Wasn't exactly like this. But COINTELPRO included inciting violence against and assassinations of Americans by the FBI.

@panju1 there is a process. But more than illegal, it's unconstitutional. Killing can happen outside war zones. And you have no chance to defend yourself in court.

[Chef Ramsay]

By Judge Andrew Napolitano
\

How is it illegal, if there is a set process involved?

Because all Americans are guaranteed due process by the Bill of Rights but Obama has no need for that document and has strengthened/(usurped) his executive branch to do what it never was intended to do. There's no constitutional foundation that emanated from the Founders to standardize the killing of Americans based upon the exec's whim of doing so. BO came up with that for himself, even Georgie-porgie W Bush didn't run with that much overkill as bad as he was. Hillary or Jeb will up the ante on this for sure among many other things. <Rand

[Sithara007]

By Judge Andrew Napolitano

Can the president kill you? The short answer is: Yes, but not legally. Yet, President Obama has established a secret process that involves officials from the Departments of Justice and Defense, the CIA, and the White House senior staff whereby candidates are proposed for execution, and the collective wisdom of the officials then recommends execution to the president, who then accepts or rejects the recommendation.

If the recommendation is to kill and the president rejects the recommendation, the CIA is directed to arrest the person. If the president accepts the recommendation to kill, then death is ordered. This is not unlike the procedure used in the reign of the monstrous British King Henry VIII, except that the king himself delegated the final say to his chancellor so that he could publicly disavow participation in the government murders.

Obama does not disavow them; he defends them. But the Constitution he swore to uphold makes clear that whenever the government wants the life, liberty or property of anyone, it must follow due process. Stated differently, it must either sue the person for his property or prosecute him for his life or liberty, and the law that forms the basis for the lawsuit or the prosecution must have existed before the person did whatever the government says he did that resulted in its pursuit of him. The whole reason for the requirement of due process was to prevent what Henry VIII did and Obama is doing from ever happening here.

It is happening here.

...

More...https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/04/andrew-p-napolitano/the-imperial-whim-of-death/

The president is the most powerful person on the entire planet. So he can kill anyone he wants to kill and still not get prosecuted for it. The bill is just a piece of papers.

[twister]

Anybody can be killed when it comes to "National Security", if you think President is killing people for personal gains, you're mistaken. It is illegal but it's not easy to keep a country safe by following all the rules, especially when there is a chance that the criminal might use those rules to get away. It is then decided that it's better to remove those than to let them go to trials.

Remember the movie "Swordfish" __

Gabriel: You're not looking at the big picture Stan. Here's a scenario. You have the power to cure all the world's diseases but the price for this is that you must kill a single innocent child, could you kill that child Stanley?
Stanley: No.
Gabriel: You disappoint me, it's the greatest good.

It's easy for us to sit safely in our secluded homes and judge but when you face similar situations you'll then know that keeping a nation safe is difficult and harsh decisions have to be taken and sacrifices has to be made.

[TheButterZone]

A thought experiment:

A newborn baby is laying on a blanket in the Rose Garden. Any POTUS standing over that baby. "Civilian" law-abiding gun owners screened for sanity with openly holstered firearms facing POTUS. Secret Service agents hidden, with their sights trained on the law-abiding gun owners heads, but POTUS still clearly visible to them. POTUS pulls a large knife and slowly kneels down. Before POTUS is able to slaughter the baby, the gun owners draw their guns and just as they're about to fire upon POTUS, who do the Secret Service agents shoot in self-defense?

[waterpile]

By Judge Andrew Napolitano

Can the president kill you? The short answer is: Yes, but not legally. Yet, President Obama has established a secret process that involves officials from the Departments of Justice and Defense, the CIA, and the White House senior staff whereby candidates are proposed for execution, and the collective wisdom of the officials then recommends execution to the president, who then accepts or rejects the recommendation.

If the recommendation is to kill and the president rejects the recommendation, the CIA is directed to arrest the person. If the president accepts the recommendation to kill, then death is ordered. This is not unlike the procedure used in the reign of the monstrous British King Henry VIII, except that the king himself delegated the final say to his chancellor so that he could publicly disavow participation in the government murders.

Obama does not disavow them; he defends them. But the Constitution he swore to uphold makes clear that whenever the government wants the life, liberty or property of anyone, it must follow due process. Stated differently, it must either sue the person for his property or prosecute him for his life or liberty, and the law that forms the basis for the lawsuit or the prosecution must have existed before the person did whatever the government says he did that resulted in its pursuit of him. The whole reason for the requirement of due process was to prevent what Henry VIII did and Obama is doing from ever happening here.

It is happening here.

...

More...https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/04/andrew-p-napolitano/the-imperial-whim-of-death/

The president is the most powerful person on the entire planet. So he can kill anyone he wants to kill and still not get prosecuted for it. The bill is just a piece of papers.

The bill is only for average people, people who are in power can use this to their own advantage.

[Mike Christ]

Anybody can be killed when it comes to "National Security", if you think President is killing people for personal gains, you're mistaken. It is illegal but it's not easy to keep a country safe by following all the rules, especially when there is a chance that the criminal might use those rules to get away. It is then decided that it's better to remove those than to let them go to trials.

Remember the movie "Swordfish" __

Gabriel: You're not looking at the big picture Stan. Here's a scenario. You have the power to cure all the world's diseases but the price for this is that you must kill a single innocent child, could you kill that child Stanley?
Stanley: No.
Gabriel: You disappoint me, it's the greatest good.

It's easy for us to sit safely in our secluded homes and judge but when you face similar situations you'll then know that keeping a nation safe is difficult and harsh decisions have to be taken and sacrifices has to be made.

Shit sociopaths say

[TECSHARE]

http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2013/5/22/obama_admin_admits_for_first_time_it_killed_four_us_citizens_in_drone_strikes_outside_war_zones

[BitMos]

yes, but it ain't the president, it's an usurper but the people believe him... yes he can kill you... yes you believed in his hope and you trusted him. Only in God We trust (the believers, and I swear to you, Barack Hussein Obama 44 Potus ain't among US).

[Gronthaing]

Anybody can be killed when it comes to "National Security", if you think President is killing people for personal gains, you're mistaken. It is illegal but it's not easy to keep a country safe by following all the rules, especially when there is a chance that the criminal might use those rules to get away. It is then decided that it's better to remove those than to let them go to trials.

Remember the movie "Swordfish" __

Gabriel: You're not looking at the big picture Stan. Here's a scenario. You have the power to cure all the world's diseases but the price for this is that you must kill a single innocent child, could you kill that child Stanley?
Stanley: No.
Gabriel: You disappoint me, it's the greatest good.

It's easy for us to sit safely in our secluded homes and judge but when you face similar situations you'll then know that keeping a nation safe is difficult and harsh decisions have to be taken and sacrifices has to be made.

The president isn't doing it for personal gain. True. And things like this didn't start with him or recently. But the Americans killed weren't an immediate danger to the country. And neither were any of the others killed. They weren't even near a war zone. So safety of the country wasn't why they were killed. Why not just capture them and bring them to trial instead? Were they afraid to lose the cases?

[panju1]

The president isn't doing it for personal gain. True. And things like this didn't start with him or recently. But the Americans killed weren't an immediate danger to the country. And neither were any of the others killed. They weren't even near a war zone. So safety of the country wasn't why they were killed. Why not just capture them and bring them to trial instead? Were they afraid to lose the cases?

While the motive of the President usually isn't questioned, this seems to be a 'short cut' approach which is being implemented. Trials, judgement, sentencing can get messy.
If a person with lower scruples becomes the POTUS (it is not impossible), he might misuse his powers.

[TheButterZone]

If a person with lower scruples becomes the POTUS (it is not impossible), he might misuse his powers.

If? Impossible? You don't get the votes counted for you to win POTUS if you don't have the lowest scruples, if you're not the worst possible evil, running.

I have not lived in a time where there has been a single POTUS who hasn't misused his powers, to categorically evil ends.

[BADecker]

Listen for the part where Clinton was required by the Supreme Court to answer to a hotel maid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SvZ3g7ScpI

If you are dead, you can't go to the Supreme Court for any kind of ruling. But your relatives, whose property you are, can go to get their property back... or compensation.

[intelligencegroup]

First and foremost the users on this thread should understand that on many internet forums and chats that discuss politics and sensitive matters, there are government users posting under various accounts that "take the government side".

The question is not properly written. It should have been "How many americans have been killed by the US Government?". The case of a radical muslim sympathizer is put forward, but it makes me laugh that one single occurrence is discussed so much when in fact there are hundreds of thousands dead, through the classical "accident method".

Keep dreaming people...

[twister]

It's easy for us to sit safely in our secluded homes and judge but when you face similar situations you'll then know that keeping a nation safe is difficult and harsh decisions have to be taken and sacrifices has to be made.

Shit sociopaths say

Thank you.  

La-Z-Boy recliners are sure comfy.

The president isn't doing it for personal gain. True. And things like this didn't start with him or recently. But the Americans killed weren't an immediate danger to the country. And neither were any of the others killed. They weren't even near a war zone. So safety of the country wasn't why they were killed. Why not just capture them and bring them to trial instead? Were they afraid to lose the cases?

There are things that you and I don't know but governments do. Not talking any sides, not saying that killing innocent* people is justified but sometimes Nations are required to take actions which are necessary to keep others safe.

[Gronthaing]

@twister Yet we never hear their justifications for it. Not at the time. Not years after. Not decades after. What we eventually hear instead is how someone was murdered because he was inconvenient to those in power. For example COINTELPRO as I posted. How was the FBI protecting the nation then?

@intelligencegroup and there are other who discredit discussions by taking the most extreme position in favor. Like, hundreds of thousands killed in accidents by the us government? No one believes that.

[Chabacano]

Yes, he can, but no one will know that was him who killed someone.

[p.nusia]

maybe yes, but I think that no one will let on regarding this fact