Peter King says President's Kill list is "Constitutional"

[Todd]

Is there anyway to get this douche out of Congress?




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6GQr8m5cOY

[jkr]

fire this traitor!

[Sola_Fide]

Peter King is one of those people who think the people should fear their government, not the other way around.

[Philhelm]

What a fuck stick.

[Lucille]

I loathe him. He's one of the worst police statists in CONgress, and that's really saying something. WTH is wrong with people in his district?

Obama defender Rep. Peter King
Why does one of the House's most radical right-wing extremists so often find common cause with the President?
http://www.salon.com/2012/06/10/obama_defender_rep_peter_king/



House Homeland Security Chairman Peter King (R-NY) on Sunday refused to confirm the existence of U.S. drone strikes in other countries, but later insisted that the unmanned flying machines were being used to “carry out the policies of righteousness and goodness” . . . .

“There’s evil people in the world. Drones aren’t evil, people are evil. We are a force of good and we are using those drones to carry out the policy of righteousness and goodness.”

Rep. King apparently sees the U.S. as the Justice League — a heroic “force of good” slaying the Evil Villains in pursuit of “righteousness and goodness” — so it’s unsurprising that he’s an enthusiastic supporter of Obama’s drone program, given that this is the Saturday morning cartoon mentality that drives it (yet again, here we find that the critic of Obama’s foreign policy conduct in a media debate is a progressive Democrat (Rep. Lynn Woolsey) while Obama’s stalwart defender is found on the far right).

This is anything but unusual. Previously, Rep. King lavished Obama with praise for the due-process-free assassination of U.S. citizen Anwar Awlaki (“The killing of al-Awlaki is a tremendous tribute to President Obama”). He gushed with admiration when President Obama issued an Executive Order codifying a system of indefinite detention for accused Terrorists (“I commend the Obama Administration for issuing this Executive Order . . . This is clearly another step in the right direction”). He swooned when the Obama White House overturned the decision of Attorney General Eric Holder to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a real civilian court and instead consigned him to a military commission (“a long-awaited step in the right direction . . . welcome news to the families of the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, who will finally see long-awaited justice”). He cheered when the Obama DOJ announced it was truncating long-standing Miranda protections (once a crown jewel of American liberalism) for accused Terrorists, a change King long demanded. He heralded Obama as a great leader when the head of Osama bin Laden was pummeled with bullets and his corpse then dumped in the ocean (“There are going to be political benefits to the president from this. He deserves it”).

Democrats are certainly right when they depict King as the embodiment of right-wing, neoconservative, Islamophobic radicalism. They should spend time wondering why he so often finds common cause with President Obama on the areas on which he most focuses. There are many things to say about bipartisanship in Washington: that it is tragically rare or that the GOP refuses to give Obama credit are most definitely not among them.

[Confederate]

I guess he hasn't read the 5th Amendment.


No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

[CaptUSA]

Maybe he's just making sure his name isn't placed on the list. Scoundrels will always try to curry favor with the tyrant.

[erowe1]

This is the problem with treating the Constitution like it has the final say. Who cares if it's constitutional? It's clearly wrong.

[erowe1]

I guess he hasn't read the 5th Amendment.

He has. He would just say that due process of law can include the process that leads Obama to put someone on the kill list.

Notice that nowhere in the Constitution does it say that it takes some act by the judicial branch to punish someone for a crime, and that it can't be done exclusively by the executive branch.

[CaptUSA]

He has. He would just say that due process of law can include the process that leads Obama to put someone on the kill list.Yeah, he'd say this includes cases arising from land or naval forces. Since it's spelled out in the language, he'd use that to cover his pathetic ass.

[Todd]

I guess he hasn't read the 5th Amendment.

Dont' you know the 5A is archaic? We are all progressives now.

[Anti Federalist]

This is terrorist talk.

You are all reported.

See Something Say Something.

[Matthew5]

Most people in Congress are supposedly smart people, many are/were lawyers, doctors, business owners, etc. Why not have every person that applies to run as a candidate for ANY federal position, take a test or survey on the Constitution? Then publicly post their answers or scores...heck, even put their score by their name on a ballot. Then, whenever they take an oath to uphold the Constitution, you'll know that they're capable of upholding that oath.

But then again, I suppose they're just a representative sample of the general populace. If people really understood the Constitution, they wouldn't elect these morons in the first place.

[Confederate]

Most people in Congress are supposedly smart people, many are/were lawyers, doctors, business owners, etc. Why not have every person that applies to run as a candidate for ANY federal position, take a test or survey on the Constitution? Then publicly post their answers or scores...heck, even put their score by their name on a ballot. Then, whenever they take an oath to uphold the Constitution, you'll know that they're capable of upholding that oath.

But then again, I suppose they're just a representative sample of the general populace. If people really understood the Constitution, they wouldn't elect these morons in the first place.

Who will write the test? Congress?

[Anti Federalist]

Slowly working their way up to us.

War on Us.

[Dr.3D]

This is terrorist talk.

You are all reported.

See Something Say Something.
Well, just make sure you spell our names correctly.

[jmdrake]

Maybe he's just making sure his name isn't placed on the list. Scoundrels will always try to curry favor with the tyrant.

The first question anyone should ask Peter King with regards to terrorism is "Representative King. Years ago you provided financial support to the Irish Republican Army. That organization was on a U.S. terrorist watchlist. Should the government be able to put you on a secret kill list or no fly list because of this?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/us/politics/09king.html?_r=0

http://markhumphrys.com/Bitmaps/plo.ira.jpg

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRX47p8llOFNbRHkeNrHuVY9Xhetjy51 ljc_bTeMqS94tGo5i92eE5nYHXf

[Lucille]

The Ascendence of Sociopaths in US Governance
http://www.caseyresearch.com/articles/ascendence-sociopaths-us-governance


In this article, I'm going to argue that the US government, in particular, is being overrun by the wrong kind of person. It's a trend that's been in motion for many years but has now reached a point of no return. In other words, a type of moral rot has become so prevalent that it's institutional in nature. There is not going to be, therefore, any serious change in the direction in which the US is headed until a genuine crisis topples the existing order. Until then, the trend will accelerate.

The reason is that a certain class of people – sociopaths – are now fully in control of major American institutions. Their beliefs and attitudes are insinuated throughout the economic, political, intellectual and psychological/spiritual fabric of the US.
[...]
You may be thinking that what happened in places like Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Mao's China, Pol Pot's Cambodia and scores of other countries in recent history could not, for some reason, happen in the US. Actually, there's no reason it won't at this point. All the institutions that made America exceptional – including a belief in capitalism, individualism, self-reliance and the restraints of the Constitution – are now only historical artifacts.

On the other hand, the distribution of sociopaths is completely uniform across both space and time. Per capita, there were no more evil people in Stalin's Russia, Hitler's Germany, Mao's China, Amin's Uganda, Ceausescu's Romania or Pol Pot's Cambodia than there are today in the US. All you need is favorable conditions for them to bloom, much as mushrooms do after a rainstorm.

Conditions for them in the US are becoming quite favorable.

[Anti Federalist]

The first question anyone should ask Peter King with regards to terrorism is "Representative King. Years ago you provided financial support to the Irish Republican Army. That organization was on a U.S. terrorist watchlist. Should the government be able to put you on a secret kill list or no fly list because of this?"

"Oh, I'm sorry, we incinerated your 16 year old son, Mr King. Well, he should have had a better father, right?"

[Matthew5]

Who will write the test? Congress?

Kindergarten teachers could write the test. I doubt they even have that level of understanding.

[jmdrake]

This is the problem with treating the Constitution like it has the final say. Who cares if it's constitutional? It's clearly wrong.


He has. He would just say that due process of law can include the process that leads Obama to put someone on the kill list.

Notice that nowhere in the Constitution does it say that it takes some act by the judicial branch to punish someone for a crime, and that it can't be done exclusively by the executive branch.


Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Due process of law does not allow the executive branch to do extra-judicial killings. There was no "presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury" for Al Awlawki or his son.

[Seraphim]

Peter King will redact his comment when he finds himself on that list - for some deranged, State witch hunt of a reason.

Sorry Mr King, by then, it will be too late.

[Anti Federalist]

Fucking hypocrite

[sailingaway]

Peter King is an evil man.

[Dr.3D]

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Due process of law does not allow the executive branch to do extra-judicial killings. There was no "presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury" for Al Awlawki or his son.
They seem to be working extra hard to maintain what I just bolded in your post.

[sailingaway]

They seem to be working extra hard to maintain what I just bolded in your post.

NDAA 2012 specifically says we are at war in the homeland to suspend the Constitution. Any supreme court worth its salt would laugh at the idea that Congress can LEGISLATE when to suspend the Constitution, but after the obamacare ruling I am increasingly depressed about the worth of the Supreme Court make up we have.

[cbrons]

he's also wining about not getting the graft bill through for sandy relief

[PreDeadMan]

I live in New York on Long Island and I can't stand that hack. The sad thing is he keeps on getting re-elected are people that stupid!? The guys last name suits him well for being an evil scumbag.

[Anti Federalist]

Cuz this fat fascist fuck is in the news again.

[Anti Federalist]

WTH is wrong with people in his district?

Nothing at all.

Well at least with the "process".

The people of his district want this, they want cops hut hutting around in tanks, they want people randomly searched, they want random house to house searches, they want "total information" surveillance.

I'm from the NJ/NY area, still have friends and family there, and I hear it with my own ears, these people don't give a fuck about rights, natural law or despotism.

They would gladly cheer the military parades of Stalin and the USSR.

They adore and worship the State and its power.

He's just giving them what they want.