Posted on 05/09/2014 3:49:17 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Last year, Barack Obama picked former Acting Assistant Attorney General David Barron as his choice for a vacant seat on the First Circuit Court of Appeals. His brief time at the Justice Department, however, has opened Barron – and the Obama administration – up to some widespread, bipartisan criticism.
According to reports, Barron drafted a memo defending the deadly drone strike against American terror suspect Anwar al-Awlaki. As a result, his nomination is now being held up amid demands for the release of the memo, which has reportedly been cited as justification for the assassination of other American citizens.
The White House has been unresponsive to a court order to that effect; and in response, senators from both parties have promised to stall Barron’s confirmation vote until the administration complies.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz spoke out on the matter this week, citing his concern not only about the memo’s contents but the executive branch’s policy of withholding pertinent information from the American people.
“The Obama administration has been extremely resistant in providing information about its drone program, which continues with its refusal to disclose the body of David Barron’s government work,” Cruz said via a press release.
He contends there is a very direct correlation between Barron’s stint at the DOJ and his ability to serve on the appeals court panel.
Cruz asserted that confirming him would be a “grave mistake,” explaining Barron “shaped the government’s policies that are roiling the public today.”
Far from a merely partisan position, Cruz concluded opposition to the nominee should be fierce on both sides of the aisle.
“Any Democrat concerned about civil liberties should have profound concerns here,”...
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournalism.com ...
As do the rest of us.
It’d work out to be cost prohibitive in a lot of cases.
Obama says damn the costs, full speed ahead with the drones!
Well.. I guess we all gotta do what we gotta do like that. ;-)
Who doesn’t want to whack someone working with muzzy terrorists? Is someone saying this Allah Whackadoodle guy was innocent?
Vince Foster was killed by a drone.
The question is, will he whack the traitors at moveon.org for supporting terrorists? If not, why not?
My definition of Hillary is a crone, not a drone
Allah Whackdoodle today, Cliven Bundy tomorrow.
There are a ton of Americans who basically stand with Cruz fundamentally, on this and other issues. They may or may not be Republican.
Then there are Republicans, including many in power, who philosophically, fundamentally oppose Cruz. Republicans.
Is Cruz really a Republican? He's basically calling for reversal of everything Obama's done. Is that Republican?
I wish it was. But other Republicans who shield Obama or who are on board with the concept of Obama's policies, are ... Republicans.
What's Cruz? What am I? If Romney's even in the damned party, what is being a "Republican" even about?
I will stipulate that the only things that an Obama disciple knows about the Constitution are that a woman has a right to a Federally funded abortion and they have "freedom of speech". And last but not least, as long as they continue to receive their freebies they could not care less about the Constitution.
Something of Hillary’s has been silenced since Foster was killed, that’s for sure, according to Dick Morris.
“Any Democrat concerned about civil liberties should have profound concerns here,”...
The Democrats have no standards, except double, so the Democrats that should have profound concerns, will only have those profound concerns for towing the party line. The ends justify the means. Trying to find morality in the Democrats is like trying to find the melody in a Mariah Carey song.
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.