FBI Special Counsel Mueller: ‘I Have to Check to See If Obama Has the Right to Kill Americans On U S Soil’

While we once again will hear how another “White Knight” comes before us in the form of Mueller to dig about the swamp, looking for some heads to claim, I suggest he is anything but that very special person. You can read elsewhere how he and Comey saved our Constitution at a hospital bedside. This is the real Mueller, another political hack. You see, Obama had a kill list. He had a peculiar taste for it.

It’s been well reported that Obama and his top minions have a so-called “kill list” of which he takes a particular interest. The question is where does it start and where does it stop? The issue of his killing Americans abroad brought a fire storm, and does he have the authority to kill Americans. Here. On U.S. soil?

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

“Due process and judicial process are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process,” Holder said.

But Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, wrote in Foreign Policy magazine on Wednesday that Holder’s remarks not only would be seen by the framers of the Constitution as “the very definition of authoritarian power,” but were met “not with outcry but muted applause.”

“Holder’s new definition of ‘due process’ was perfectly Orwellian,” Turley wrote. “What Holder is describing is a model of an imperial presidency that would have made Richard Nixon blush. …

“Where due process once resided, Holder offered only an assurance that the president would kill citizens with care. While that certainly relieved any concern that Obama would hunt citizens for sport, Holder offered no assurances on how this power would be used in the future beyond the now all-too-familiar ‘trust us’ approach to civil liberties of this administration,” he wrote.

Full story at Fox News back in 2012 by Catherine Herridge. Does the name Seth Rich come to mind for anyone else?

New FBI Director has agents visiting MLK monument

I could not resist a revisit of James Comey, the new FBI Director, when I read that he now has new agents visiting MLK’s monument. Two posts today. First a refresher on Comfey:

What you will not hear from the Obama-friendly media, and our somnolent members of Congress, is this: Not only was the Patriot Act expanded under the supervision of Comey, Mueller and Ashcroft, when Comey left the AG’s office in 2005 he went to work as the top lawyer for…wait for it…”Big Brother” himself – Lockheed Martin.

When most people hear Lockheed Martin they think military contracts. Well, welcome to 1984. “Big Brother” is another name for Lockheed Martin, and security and surveillance is their game. They’ve been working closely with the National Security Agency (AKA: NSA, as in No Such Agency) for many years.

So ask yourself: Why would the Obama regime appoint a new FBI Director who works for a prime contractor that sells NSA the technology to spy on Americans? Would PETA hire a fur coat distributor?

Oh, by the way, where’s John Ashcroft today? Why he’s on the Board of Directors of Blackwater USA, which now goes by the harmless sounding name – Academi – conjuring up images of ivy-covered buildings and lounging intellectuals.

So in the days ahead, when the media and politicians tell you that James B. Comey will stand up for your civil liberties as FBI Director (citing a hospital room performance over the Patriot Act), remember: If Comey didn’t support spying on Americans, why would he work for a leading company that sells the government the tools to spy on Americans?

Are the manufacturers of hunting rifles against hunting?

Comey and Ashcroft – Lockheed Martin and Blackwater: Defenders of our civil liberties?

Do you think that Comey will be one wit different than the former Director? Recall:

FBI Director: I have to check to see if Obama can kill citizens on U.S. soil

January 26, 2013

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.
Pressed by House lawmakers about a recent speech in which Holder described the legal justification for assassination, Mueller, who was attending a hearing on his agency’s budget, did not say without qualification that the three criteria could not be applied inside the U.S.
“I have to go back. Uh, I’m not certain whether that was addressed or not,” Mueller said when asked by Rep. Tom Graves, R-Ga., about a distinction between domestic and foreign targeting. Graves followed up asking whether “from a historical perspective,” the federal government has “the ability to kill a U.S. citizen on United States soil or just overseas.”
“I’m going to defer.

Here we have Mueller telling us its Drones away here in the United States. Connect the dots folks

Via Daily Caller:

New FBI Director James Comey will tell all the Bureau’s new agents and analysts to visit the monument to Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in Washington, D.C.

“I’m going to direct that all new agents and analysts also visit the Martin Luther King Memorial here in Washington,” said Comey, whose term runs for 10 years.

Keep reading…

American Citizen Indefinite Detention NDAA (S.1867) 1031

Many of us bloggers have been posting about the secret “Kill List” of Obama which includes the killing of U.S. citizens. But this is just the tip of the iceberg. Finally it is getting attention. You might want to check out first FBI Director “I have to check and see if Obama can kill Citizens on U.S. soil

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

 From August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama fights the preliminary injunction granted to American Citizens against unlawful imprisonment. But Obama is not through with us yet. They are fighting it big time, and the rationale gets even more creepy. The argument goes something like this, if we are thrown in jail, we can always appeal, even though it may take years to prove our innocence. Guilty until proven otherwise, typical Marxist justice.

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens:Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted “…the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”?

 

So not only did Obama’s attorney lie about his Marxist boss’s corrupt intentions;he actually claimed that the abuse of American citizens was somehow acceptable because those unconstitutionally imprisoned might ask that the charges against them be produced after ONLY a few years behind bars!

Script from Video: Senator Levin told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Specifically, the section that Obama asked to be reworded was Section 1031 of the NDAA FY2012, which says that “any person who has committed a belligerent act” could be held indefinitely.

“It was the administration that asked us to remove the very language which we had in the bill which passed the committee…we removed it at the request of the administration,” said Levin. “It was the administration which asked us to remove the very language the absence of which is now objected to.”

%d bloggers like this: