Today’s Qs for O’s WH — 9/30/2011
EmailTAPPER: You said that al-Awlaki was “demonstrably and provably involved” in operations. Do you plan on demonstrating or proving –
CARNEY: I — Jake, you know, I should step back. I — he is clearly — I mean, “provably” may be a legal term. I think it has been well established, and it has certainly been the position of this administration and the previous administration, that he is a leader in — was a leader in AQAP; that AQAP was a definite threat, was operational, planned and carried out terrorist attacks that, fortunately, did not succeed but were extremely serious, including the ones specifically that I mentioned in terms of the would-be Christmas Day bombing in 2009 and the attempt to bomb numerous cargo planes headed for the United States; and that he was obviously also an active recruiter of al-Qaida terrorists. So I don’t think anybody in the field would dispute any of those assertions.
TAPPER: You don’t think anybody else in the government would dispute them.
CARNEY: I think any — well, I wouldn’t know of any credible terrorist expert who dispute the fact that he was a leader in al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula and that he was operationally involved in terrorist attacks against American interests and citizens.
TAPPER: Do you plan on bringing before the public any proof of these charges?
CARNEY: Again, this is — the question is — makes us – you know, has embedded within it assumptions about the circumstances of his death that I’m just not going to address.
TAPPER: How on earth is it — what is — I really don’t understand. How — he’s dead.
CARNEY: You –
TAPPER: You are asserting that he had operational control of the cargo plot and the Abdulmutallab plot. He’s now dead.
CARNEY: Mm-hmm.
TAPPER: Can you tell us or the American people — or has a judge been shown — ?
CARNEY: Well, again, Jake, I’m just –
TAPPER: How did –
CARNEY: I’m not going to go any further than what I’ve said about the circumstances of his death and the case against them, which, again, you’re linking. And I think that –
TAPPER: No, you said that he’s responsible for these things. I’m –
CARNEY: Jake — yes. But again –
TAPPER: Is there going to be any evidence presented?
CARNEY: You know, I don’t have anything for you on that.
TAPPER: Do you not see at all — does the administration not see at all how a president asserting that he has the right to kill an American citizen without due process and that he’s not going to even explain why he thinks he has that right is troublesome to some people?
CARNEY: I wasn’t aware of any of those things that you said actually happening. And again, I’m not going to address the circumstances of al-Awlaki’s death. I think it’s — again, it is an important fact that this terrorist, who was actively plotting – had plotted in the past and was actively plotting to attack Americans and American interests is dead. But I’m not going to, from any angle, discuss the circumstances of his death.
TAPPER: Do you know that the Center for Constitutional Rights and the ACLU tried to get permission to represent al-Awlaki on — that his father had asked them to do that, but they needed to get permission from the Treasury Department so that they could challenge his being on this targeted killing list. And the administration, the Obama administration, refused to let them represent — to not even – he couldn’t even have the ACLU representing him.
CARNEY: Well, I think I would send those questions, or take those questions, to Treasury or Justice. I don’t — I don’t have anything on that for you.
TAPPER: What do you think constitutional law professor Barack Obama would think of this?
CARNEY: I think he spoke about it today.
-Jake Tapper
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012 
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
“…it has certainly been the position of this administration and the previous administration…”
But, but Jay. Don’t you know that Bush lied and people died?
Posted by: Oliver Shagnasty | September 30, 2011, 3:55 pm 3:55 pm
Mr. Tapper,
Thank you for honoring your role as journalist and questioning this administration on its Constitutional authority to target and kill U.S. citizens without affording them due process of law.
Thank you!
Posted by: David Rickard | September 30, 2011, 5:02 pm 5:02 pm
“this is the guy who was at the forefront of ordering the Christmas Day bomber to carry out his plans. They had put bombs in cartridges, printer cartridges that were set to go off in U.S. cargo planes and had it not been for outstanding intelligence work and cooperation with some of our partners that could have been a catastrophe. This was a guy who was operationally involved in trying to kill Americans and the fact that he is no longer around to initiate the kind of propaganda that also was recruiting people all around the world to that murderous cause” . . . Pres. Obama
Posted by: Fish | September 30, 2011, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm
Obama really needs to dump this guy and get somebody who can clearly state and support a position.This was a no-brainer-are they going to screw this up too?
Posted by: Nephron | September 30, 2011, 7:15 pm 7:15 pm
I’m sooo proud of Jake!!!
Posted by: Dianne | September 30, 2011, 10:37 pm 10:37 pm
After bin laden these idiots were falling over themselves to leak details of the raid. A couple of weeks later we lost a helicopter in a similar exercise. Maybe they will keep their mouths shut this time.
Posted by: foggy | October 1, 2011, 12:57 am 12:57 am
Be careful Jake….
Somebody just might mistake you for a journalist.
—–
Obama: “Waterboarding – bad.
Assassination – good.”
Posted by: cflyjuice | October 1, 2011, 7:54 am 7:54 am
PS
Obama says that waterboarding is a violation of a foreign nationals civil rights under the US Constitution. Assassination of an American citizen without due process… Not so much.
Posted by: cflyjuice | October 1, 2011, 9:18 am 9:18 am
What is the matter with these so-called americans that pass for reporters these days. We all have gone to the obligatory holliwood movies where the poster of some outlaw with the words “Wanted Dead or Alive” appears. Our US marshal’s have always been empowered to use deadly force against wanted fugitives. The decision to actually pull the trigger has always been left to the officer on the spot with the understanding that capture and arrest are preferable when circumstances permit. The famous gunfight at the OK corral and many other episodes testify to the outcome. The laws that governed this sort of legalized mayhem on the frontier are still very much active and on the books. Thus what Obama is doing to the terrorists is very much in the tradition of american frontier justice.
Posted by: hacimo | October 1, 2011, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm
LOL! LOL! LOL! Obama and his administration are caught up in their own insanity of billion dollar circus trials for murdering terrorists in NYC, and reading the underwear bomber his right to be silent right after he was taken off the plan, and their holier than though attitude. LOL! George Bush authorized water boarding 3 murdering terrorists to get information to save tens of thousands, maybe millions of innocent lives. Obama doesn’t bother to capture and interrogate them he just blows the smithereens out of them and then picks ups the smear that’s left for genetic identification. LOL! However, face it. This murdering terrorists was waging war against the U.S. He was an enemy combatant. If he wanted his day in court he had all the opportunity in the world to turn himself in and proclaim his innocence. He didn’t. Now he’s dead. Its not the first time a President has ordered the killing of American citizens who took up arms against their country. (see the Civil War). Lincoln didn’t have his general’s read anybody their rights before they went into battle. For real people this case isn’t an issue. For Obama and the inanity of his extreme left wing ideology and supporters it is. Good luck to them tying themselves up in knots trying to explain the clear repudiation of their own insanity!
Posted by: valwayne | October 1, 2011, 1:18 pm 1:18 pm
It’s a scary precedent indeed. There has been a lot of emphasis on al-Awlaki’s incendiary sermons as a justification. For that matter, there’s a Black Liberation theologian whose sermons were highlighted and broadcasted 24/7 several years ago. Apparently, diatribes against the US foreign policy can get a person killed nowadays.
I don’t believe that al-Awlaki was just an innocent, targeted Muslim cleric or that he didn’t have suspect associations and activities. But we’re supposed to have a court system in place to determine the guilt of specific actions, rather than declare guilt without charges and with minimal explanations. This is a reversal of Anglo-Saxon based law from nearly a thousand years ago that rejects the presumption of guilt, and allows a trial to establish eiher guilt or innocence.
I don’t think repeated accusations and insistence of his guilt can deny that this extra-judicial assassination, the killing of an American citizen without any due process, can quell the fear of the obvious — that our rights as American citizens have become increasingly meaningless. We’re never going to know truly why he was assassinated, since it’s conveniently denied under a veneer of state secrets. Need I elaborate on which countries and governments, past and present, who invoke the privilege state secrets?
Again, it’s a chilling justification for his killing that a significant portion of it concerns incendiary rhetoric and the circumstantial. If the state can determine a citizen’s life should be eliminated without established facts and evidence, it can be done to any one of us. If it’s determined that communication expressed in a certain manner is a criminal offense, then any of us can be a designated threat.
Posted by: jane r. | October 1, 2011, 1:23 pm 1:23 pm
Good for you, Mr. Tapper! If we give up on trying to be a nation of law, then we will descend into chaos.
Keep fighting!
Posted by: J in NC | October 3, 2011, 12:02 am 12:02 am
Second try: How long will it be before a citizen is openly murdered within US borders and with the same level of “justification”. Probably someone with a funny name and brown skin, i.e. not a “real American”.
First they came for Jose Padilla. Then they came for Bradley Manning…
Posted by: Landbeyond | October 3, 2011, 1:06 am 1:06 am
Jake Tapper is an American hero.
Posted by: R Mankoff | October 3, 2011, 5:03 am 5:03 am
Interesting……Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate questioning the authority of our government to target (and kill) American citizens without due process.
Posted by: Diana | October 3, 2011, 11:33 am 11:33 am
Thank you, Jake Tapper, for doing the work of a true journalist. You really nailed that weasel.
Posted by: Diana Vreeland | October 3, 2011, 6:17 pm 6:17 pm
Considering the logic that some people feel is sufficient reason to MURDER somebody, namely that because our government believed him to be a target. Until evidence is actually forthcoming, all that can possibly be stated LEGALLY is that our government officials have made numerous ASSERTIONS without actually qualifying them with evidence. For all we know Awlaki was just a noisy individual guilty of INCITEMENT at most. The ONUS is on those asserting! As an American citizen, he was DUE not a murderous death, but DUE PROCESS. The ACLU wanted to take on his case, but was denied. It is clear that our government officials, namely the President of the United States, wanted him DEAD. Period. It matters not, at this point, WHY when the why has been asserted without proof. Should sufficient proof be made available, it will still not un-open Pandora’s Box. Hail to the Chief anyone? I agree with other sentiments, Tapper is absolutely right to take a skeptical approach and question seriously our elected officials. This entire ordeal is extremely disturbing.
Posted by: Anonymous | October 4, 2011, 8:21 pm 8:21 pm