Should President Obama (alongside Lindsay Graham and John McCain) be wearing an orange jumpsuit?
Welcome to the beautiful and surreal reality of life under American corporatism, under a Congress that churns out thousands and thousands of pages of (often contradictory) legislation a year.
If providing material assistance to al-Qaeda is illegal under the National Defense Authorization Act (2012), and Obama and Congress are sending $25 million of aid to al-Qaeda-affiliated Syrian opposition, aren’t Congress and President Obama violating their own law? Should Obama (or at least the Justice Department) not be using “all necessary and appropriate force” including “the power to indefinitely detain” to prevent Obama and Congress from assisting al-Qaeda? Did anyone in Congress or the Obama administration even bother to read the law that they were signing? Do Federal laws no longer apply to lawmakers?
The only question left from this abrupt and absurd turnaround — from funding bin Laden’s mujaheddin thirty years ago, to ten years ago declaring war on al-Qaeda, to today sending them material assistance — would appear to be whether or not Obama will pull a 1984 and claim that “we have always been at war with Eurasia“.
- NDAA banned: Indefinite detention of Americans ‘unconstitutional’
- How Congress is Signing Its Own Arrest Warrants in the NDAA Citizen Arrest Bill
- Obama’s NDAA Signing Statement is Just Smoke & Mirrors
- Congress Sends Student Loan and Transportation Package to Obama
- Bipartisan Congress Rebuffs Obama on Libya Mission
- Obama Embraces Signing Statements After Knocking Bush for Using Them
- Happy New Year: Obama Signs NDAA, Indefinite Detention Now Law of the Land
- Nightly News: Obama Signs Draconian NDAA Citizen Detention Bill
- Obama’s NDAA Signing Statement Is Meaningless
- Obama uses NDAA to halt Iranian assets
- Congress Declares ‘Offensive’ War on the Internet in NDAA
- Obama says he doesn’t even need NDAA to indefinitely detain Americans
- Judge Blocks Portion of NDAA