Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Longbow1969

This post was not about whether Breitbart was assassinated. It was about whether Breitbart could LEGALLY be assassinated, and argues that according to the laws in effect at this time only the executive branch (which, I note, is currently illegally headed by Obama) can determine who is an “enemy” and thus can be LEGALLY assassinated. Presumably the POTUS can also decide by what means the assassination is to occur.

Given those things, what would LEGALLY stop Obama from deciding that Breitbart, or you or me, is an “enemy” and they will be killed by heart attack-inducing frozen poison dart?

What in our country protects us from having Obama decide we’re an enemy and kill us through covert means?

That’s what this post is about. It is a chilling question that demands an answer. Preferably from the people who passed the laws.


157 posted on 03/04/2012 1:52:25 PM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: butterdezillion

Precisely.


160 posted on 03/04/2012 2:02:12 PM PST by null and void (Day 1138 of America's ObamaVacation from reality [Heroes aren't made, Frank, they're cornered...])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies ]

To: butterdezillion

I don’t know what in your post made me think this: if Andrew B. was assassinated, not only for the tapes he mentioned, could he have been assassinated to be a warning to the - others.

The Chicago Style - the Mob Style. Assassinate one as a threat to - others.


247 posted on 03/04/2012 6:55:28 PM PST by hummingbird (Why DID they call him Bat, Bat Masterson?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson