Really ridiculous post. Perhaps at least wait till the autopsy results are in before tossing out silly conspiracy theories?
You are missing the point.
The point isn't whether Breitbart was assassinated, the point is that he could have been, and it would be perfectly legal!
Think that one through, would you?
I think that ‘silly conspiracy theories” are just fine..they are a form of investigation prodding and vetting.
Twenty years ago we never would have thought about political assasinations everytime a politcal figure died suddenly. Times are strange now, and what was unthinkable 20-30 yrs ago....now is not so “weird”.
Obama planned for this contingency long ago. His supporters run the medical examiner’s office - the autopsy will be a fraud. The conspiracy is vast and deep. /tinfoil hat=off>
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.
His death will be ruled a heart attack and you’ll still see nutjobs say he was murdered.
Why not? After all, the Liberal-leaning MSM has already pronounced the cause of his death as 'natural causes' before the autopsy.