House Democrat leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California is under fire from across the political spectrum after admitting in an interview, among a host of other controversial positions, that she was not opposed to President Obama’s secret executions of U.S. citizens without a trial or even charges. She also claimed that, depending on the timing and situation, it was acceptable for the executive branch to simply “disappear” Americans — a wildly unconstitutional notion that even most Third World dictators would never dare support publicly.
Following a series of similar widely ridiculed so-called “sting” operations, the Federal Bureau of Investigation announced last week that it had foiled yet another “terror plot” that, like virtually every supposed “terrorist” case in recent years, was created and managed from start to finish by the FBI itself. This time, the dupe was a 28-year-old California man, Matthew Aaron Llaneza, with a documented history of mental illness, who apparently believed his government handlers were helping him wage “jihad.” Critics, however, say the whole scheme smacks of entrapment and a waste of taxpayer money.
Inside a federal courtroom packed to beyond capacity, lawyers for President Obama argued that their boss has the right to deploy the U.S. armed forces to apprehend and indefinitely detain American citizens that he alone suspects of somehow supporting groups threatening national security.
As reported by the New York Times, a lawsuit filed in Britain by the family of an innocent victim of a U.S. drone strike may be giving allies a reason to reconsider their participation in the deadly program.