Top Menu

Follow Taylor on Twitter

President Obama’s “Whining” Statement Attached to Signing NDAA 2013 [Video]

Photo by Pete Souza

OSAMA bin Laden is dead, but politicians continue to allow the blood thirsty terrorist to strangle our democratic republic from the grave.

President Obama signing the NDAA, which codifies indefinite detention into the American fabric, is a capitulation to the right and all that’s unholy about the “war on terror,” which now a Democratic president has joined to make indefinite, too.

Via Lawfare, who first suggested we should perhaps call Obama’s signing statement to the NDAA he signed a “whining” statement.

Several provisions in the bill also raise constitutional concerns. Section 1025 places limits on the military’s authority to transfer third country nationals currently held at the detention facility in Parwan, Afghanistan. That facility is located within the territory of a foreign sovereign in the midst of an armed conflict. Decisions regarding the disposition of detainees captured on foreign battlefields have traditionally been based upon the judgment of experienced military commanders and national security professionals without unwarranted interference by Members of Congress. Section 1025 threatens to upend that tradition, and could interfere with my ability as Commander in Chief to make time-sensitive determinations about the appropriate disposition of detainees in an active area of hostilities. Under certain circumstances, the section could violate constitutional separation of powers principles. If section 1025 operates in a manner that violates constitutional separation of powers principles, my Administration will implement it to avoid the constitutional conflict.

Sections 1022, 1027 and 1028 continue unwise funding restrictions that curtail options available to the executive branch. Section 1027 renews the bar against using appropriated funds for fiscal year 2012 to transfer Guantanamo detainees into the United States for any purpose. I continue to oppose this provision, which substitutes the Congress’s blanket political determination for careful and fact-based determinations, made by counterterrorism and law enforcement professionals, of when and where to prosecute Guantanamo detainees. For decades, Republican and Democratic administrations have successfully prosecuted hundreds of terrorists in Federal court. Those prosecutions are a legitimate, effective, and powerful tool in our efforts to protect the Nation, and in certain cases may be the only legally available process for trying detainees. Removing that tool from the executive branch undermines our national security. Moreover, this provision would, under certain circumstances, violate constitutional separation of powers principles.

Section 1028 fundamentally maintains the unwarranted restrictions on the executive branch’s authority to transfer detainees to a foreign country. This provision hinders the Executive’s ability to carry out its military, national security, and foreign relations activities and would, under certain circumstances, violate constitutional separation of powers principles. The executive branch must have the flexibility to act swiftly in conducting negotiations with foreign countries regarding the circumstances of detainee transfers. The Congress designed these sections, and has here renewed them once more, in order to foreclose my ability to shut down the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. I continue to believe that operating the facility weakens our national security by wasting resources, damaging our relationships with key allies, and strengthening our enemies. My Administration will interpret these provisions as consistent with existing and future determinations by the agencies of the Executive responsible for detainee transfers. And, in the event that these statutory restrictions operate in a manner that violates constitutional separation of powers principles, my Administration will implement them in a manner that avoids the constitutional conflict.

As for why I uploaded Senator Rand Paul’s rant against the NDAA, more from Benjamin Wittes at Lawfare, who (like myself) believes President Obama should have vetoed the NDAA:

Finally, in the grand tradition of big-sounding statements that do absolutely nothing, Section 1029 responds to Hedges-like fears of domestic detention in last year’s NDAA by stating that “Nothing in the Authorization for Use of Military Force . . . or the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 . . . shall be construed to deny the availability of the writ of habeas corpus or to deny any Constitutional rights in a court ordained or established by or under Article III of the Constitution to any person inside the United States who would be entitled to the availability of such writ or to such rights in the absence of such laws.” That’ll quell the controversy, I’m sure.

Thank Senator John McCain, who is responsible for serious protections for U.S. citizens being nixed, because he’s as ideologically driven a man as you’ll find on national security.

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 Responses to President Obama’s “Whining” Statement Attached to Signing NDAA 2013 [Video]

  1. DaGoat January 3, 2013 at 4:51 pm #

    “President Obama signing the NDAA, which codifies indefinite detention into the American fabric, is a capitulation to the right”

    it’s a capitulation to both the left and the right. Face it, the great majority of Democrats turned in their anti-war and pro-civil liberties cards the day Obama was elected.

  2. jinbaltimore January 4, 2013 at 4:11 am #

    Indeed. Am very glad I voted Stein at this point.

  3. Jane Austen January 4, 2013 at 7:01 am #

    I guess Americans are the only ones allowed trial by jury and all that other good stuff in our Constitution. Amazing that we don’t extend the same civil/human rights to other peoples. What hypocrisy and shame that this president and Congress chose to go this rout.

    • jjamele January 4, 2013 at 7:48 am #

      I had no idea that “Inalienable Rights” meant “Rights extended to Americans not deemed terrorists by the Executive Branch.” I’ll have to go back and change all my AP Government lecture notes now.

.... a writer is someone who takes the universal whore of language
and turns her into a virgin again.  ~ erica jong