The primary law that matters in the US -- our Constitution.

Ex-Obama DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson:
Trump had 'ample constitutional authority' to
take out Soleimani

https://www.foxnews.com/media/former-obama-dhs-secretary-trump-had-ample-constitutional-authority-to-take-out-soleimani

The office of legal council is not the Supreme Court that has the final say as to what a US President does is legal or not.  It is just a department that provides legal advice or opinions a US President can use as guidance determining whether what he or she is planning would be considered illegal.  Hence, to hear a former Obama government official say the killing of Soleimani was legal is simply his opinion, and no way a matter of fact.

Let's not forget that it was the Office of Legal Council that signed off the infamous and universally hated "torture memos" to the CIA under the Bush Administration.  Seeing how that department would willingly find a way to justify torture, tells everyone their capacity for human rights.

However, given your apologist attitude to anything evil America does, I would not be surprised to find that you are a defender of the CIA's torture program as well.

Once more, that's not a requirement.  It's so easy to pretend there was no imminent threat after he's dead because the threat was eliminated.

An armed person in a church killed a shotgun-wielding shooter, but not before two others were killed.  This event will not be included in the list of mass shootings for one reason:  the mass shooting was prevented.

Same thing with Soleimani.  He was taken out before another attack.  You seem to ignore the general's history and the fact that INTEL on his plans were acquired this year.  Obviously our INTEL on him was damn good, since we knew where and when we could get him.

Unless you have evidence that refutes the stated threat existed, you're just whining out of your ass.

Evidence has come out and continues to come out that there was no imminent threat to American assets to justify the killing of Soleimani.  You selectively refuse to acknowledge that fact and focus attention that he is historically a bad guy and that is good enough of a reason to take his life.

Moreover, if you think killing Soleimani will somehow prevent any future hostility to Americans stationed and bring peace to the region, you are the one who must be delirious.  You can bet the Middle East has become a far more dangerous place for Americans now more than ever.

The office of legal council is not the Supreme Court that has the final say as to what a US President does is legal or not.  It is just a department that provides legal advice or opinions a US President can use as guidance determining whether what he or she is planning would be considered illegal.  Hence, to hear a former Obama government official say the killing of Soleimani was legal is simply his opinion, and no way a matter of fact.

Let's not forget that it was the Office of Legal Council that signed off the infamous and universally hated "torture memos" to the CIA under the Bush Administration.  Seeing how that department would willingly find a way to justify torture, tells everyone their capacity for human rights.

However, given your apologist attitude to anything evil America does, I would not be surprised to find that you are a defender of the CIA's torture program as well.

Funny how you omitted "illegal" from your list of adjectives describing the "torture memos".  More opinions, but none of them legally binding on the President.

The Supreme Court does not make findings of legality on the President's actions unless someone challenges it.  So, did Congress challenge Obama's actions?  Nope.  Can't now say Trump is wrong if Pelosi said Obama was acting legally.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bronsonstocking/2020/01/09/flashback-pelosi-said-obama-did-not-need-authorization-to-attack-libya-n2559285

You keep trying to make the case that Trump broke the law by taking Soleimani out.  So far, you've offered no evidence that your opinion is true.  You're only argument is that nobody has said it's legal that YOU think is authoritative.

Lawyers will tell you that anything that is not explicitly illegal is legal.  We don't need the Supreme Court to say what Trump did was LEGAL when there's no law -- and no rational person in authority -- saying it was ILLEGAL.

Evidence has come out and continues to come out that there was no imminent threat to American assets to justify the killing of Soleimani.  You selectively refuse to acknowledge that fact and focus attention that he is historically a bad guy and that is good enough of a reason to take his life.

Moreover, if you think killing Soleimani will somehow prevent any future hostility to Americans stationed and bring peace to the region, you are the one who must be delirious.  You can bet the Middle East has become a far more dangerous place for Americans now more than ever.

That's not a "fact".  It's an opinion.  The Intelligence Community says different.  They have the "facts."

What "evidence" are you referring to?  Congress-critters mad because the INTEL briefers weren't supposed to debate the decision with elected officials?  Not their function.

That's not a "fact".  It's an opinion.  The Intelligence Community says different.  They have the "facts."

What "evidence" are you referring to?  Congress-critters mad because the INTEL briefers weren't supposed to debate the decision with elected officials?  Not their function.

That is the point.  Where are these FACTS?

Many Congressmen as well as the Secretary of Defense this morning said that they did not get all of the FACTS in regards to the "imminent threat" claim, even after their supposed briefing on the matter.

That is the point.  Where are these FACTS?

Many Congressmen as well as the Secretary of Defense this morning said that they did not get all of the FACTS in regards to the "imminent threat" claim, even after their supposed briefing on the matter.

So, your entire "Evidence has come out and continues to come out" is a LACK of evidence?

Gotcha.

So, your entire "Evidence has come out and continues to come out" is a LACK of evidence?

Gotcha.

His actual quote was:
“Evidence has come out and continues to come out that there was no imminent threat to American assets to justify the killing of Soleimani.”

You are Paraphrasing just like the MSM. At least quote to the period of the sentence.

Stop your usual shell game (distract/divert and re-direct followed by snide remark) and answer the guys question directly.

I can hear you now.
The facts are this guy was evil.......killed Americans.....

So when do we drone the Al Shabbab guys and Hezbollah guys and Yemen guys and all those other guys?

This was purely political to relations with Iran. IMO.
I’m not arguing with the decision but I think it was a purely political move.
Might be a genius move or an idiot move but political none the less.

But at least answer Kuleana’s direct question directly.

Trump Bump Presidents Approval Rating Skyrockets After Solemani Strike

https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-bump-presidents-approval-rating-skyrockets-after-soleimani-strike

Was the drone strike done for the reasons given or something more nefarious like approval rating or a genius move looking forward to election night? Argument at 3 2 1 ......

Trump Bump Presidents Approval Rating Skyrockets After Solemani Strike

https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-bump-presidents-approval-rating-skyrockets-after-soleimani-strike

Was the drone strike done for the reasons given or something more nefarious like approval rating or a genius move looking forward to election night? Argument at 3 2 1 ......

According to Sen. Pocahontas Warren, the timing is super important.  it PROVES Trump used the termination of Soleimani and the tensions with Iran as a DISTRACTION FROM IMPEACHMENT -- nothing more, nothing less.

There are many in the press and in the DC beltway making the same comment.  Of course, that requires us to believe Trump really thinks impeachment is bad for him.  His poll numbers are as high now as they were when he was inaugurated -- the peak of his poll numbers at the time.  Also, most people now answer the poll on who will win in 2020 with Trump vs "whoever the DNC nominates."

The more the Dems try to attack Trump, the more the American people get pissed at them for (1) not doing their real jobs we elected and are paying them for, and (2) the failed attempts one after another to obstruct Trump. 

The War Powers resolution was a "Concurrent Resolution," which is the type used for things like supporting Soap Box Derby Day and

"Concurrent Resolution

          a resolution adopted by both houses of a legislative assembly that does not require the signature of the chief executive and that does not have the force of law."

This move was meant to, once again, try to sling mud at Trump -- nothing more, nothing less.  And this time it was while the Commander in Chief was busy working to defend the nation against a terroristic regime.

If that doesn't drive the point home that Democrats are only interested in power for their party, not the good of the entire nation, I don't know what will.

Barr says DOJ was consulted before Soleimani strike as Trump goes on defensive

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/barr-doj-consulted-soleimani-strike-trump-defensive

Barr says DOJ was consulted before Soleimani strike as Trump goes on defensive

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/barr-doj-consulted-soleimani-strike-trump-defensive

Pence also called pelosi, but she said she will call him back later

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Barr says DOJ was consulted before Soleimani strike as Trump goes on defensive

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/barr-doj-consulted-soleimani-strike-trump-defensive

Trump gave the green light to take out Soleimani at the earliest opportunity in JUNE.  I said JUNE!!

Kind of kills the accusation that the decision was impeachment-related, huh?

Pelosi was commenting, "Why now?"  I hate these people who create fake narratives based on no facts.

Trump gave the green light to take out Soleimani at the earliest opportunity in JUNE.  I said JUNE!!

Kind of kills the accusation that the decision was impeachment-related, huh?

Pelosi was commenting, "Why now?"  I hate these people who create fake narratives based on no facts.

4D chess. The info about June wasn't given until later after the DNC made the move.  Now they look stupid.  Well more stupid if possible. 

4D chess. The info about June wasn't given until later after the DNC made the move.  Now they look stupid.  Well more stupid if possible.

I find that Trump is a genius in the timing of his statements and in how much info he gives out at any particular moment.

He's been calling for a full trial with Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, Adam Schiff, the non-existent Whistle Blower, Schiff's Congressional staff, Nancy Pelosi and anyone else who might have knowledge of the genesis of this impeachment hoax.

This week, he tweeted out that he is now leaning toward accepting the advice almost everyone else has offered:  get an acquittal as soon in the trial as possible, so as to not give the hoax any credibility at all.

He might REALLY be leaning toward a quick end, OR he might be demonstrating a reversal of his position just to get Pelosi to hurry up and send the articles.  Once the opening statements are over, if there's no vote to dismiss, then his team can call anyone they want to testify since McConnell is in charge of the majority and wants Trump to have a fair trial.

It'll be interesting to see if he traps the Dems into publicly airing their corruption.

I find that Trump is a genius in the timing of his statements and in how much info he gives out at any particular moment.

He's been calling for a full trial with Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, Adam Schiff, the non-existent Whistle Blower, Schiff's Congressional staff, Nancy Pelosi and anyone else who might have knowledge of the genesis of this impeachment hoax.

This week, he tweeted out that he is now leaning toward accepting the advice almost everyone else has offered:  get an acquittal as soon in the trial as possible, so as to not give the hoax any credibility at all.

He might REALLY be leaning toward a quick end, OR he might be demonstrating a reversal of his position just to get Pelosi to hurry up and send the articles.  Once the opening statements are over, if there's no vote to dismiss, then his team can call anyone they want to testify since McConnell is in charge of the majority and wants Trump to have a fair trial.

It'll be interesting to see if he traps the Dems into publicly airing their corruption.

Pelosi fell into the trap.  I would say she will not hand the impeachment docs to the senate.  Because now everyone's dirty laundry will be in the open.  And since there is no set standard of when she has to hand it over, she can just leave it on her desk for all eternity.  The DNC run fake news already said that trump was impeached (we know he isn't yet). So that's all the DNC wanted to get votes and to keep TDS sufferers on their side.

Trump wins again.

I find it hilarious that the fakestream media is still trying to pull the "Soleimani was a gut boi" and especially that "trump brought us to the brink of war"
the US troops on that base were either flown off the base or in bunkers TWO AND A HALF hours before the attack began because they were warned by the Iraqis
not two and a half hours warning, but more like 4-5 hours warning at least to get everyone safe
then the Iraqis sent "we're done, its all good" messages to the US VIA THREE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES
that sure doesn't sound like THE BRINK OF WAR! to me...

Trump gave the green light to take out Soleimani at the earliest opportunity in JUNE.  I said JUNE!!

Kind of kills the accusation that the decision was impeachment-related, huh?

Pelosi was commenting, "Why now?"  I hate these people who create fake narratives based on no facts.

You want facts?  Here they are.

Please listen to REPUBLICAN retired army Lt. Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, who served as former Secretary of State Colin Powell's Chief-of-Staff, to hear his take on the assassination of Soleimani, the American Empire, as well as his contention that the US currently is a country that has made imperial war its sole business.



Enjoy!     

You want facts?  Here they are.

Please listen to REPUBLICAN retired army Lt. Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, who served as former Secretary of State Colin Powell's Chief-of-Staff, to hear his take on the assassination of Soleimani, the American Empire, as well as his contention that the US currently is a country that has made imperial war its sole business.



Enjoy!     

Pure opinion.

Why do you believe party affiliation in any way dictates one's opinions?  Your group-think, tribalistic mindset is typical.  It's how the Liberals in education and media have been programming you.

You want me to take anything an "anchor" for a YT channel called Democracy Now! wearing a leather biker jacket seriously?   

This video has nothing to do with the FACTS.  He's using emotional appeals. 

Again .... one man's opinion who has no access to the information the President has.

Pure opinion.

Why do you believe party affiliation in any way dictates one's opinions?  Your group-think, tribalistic mindset is typical.  It's how the Liberals in education and media have been programming you.

You want me to take anything an "anchor" for a YT channel called Democracy Now! wearing a leather biker jacket seriously?   

This video has nothing to do with the FACTS.  He's using emotional appeals. 

Again .... one man's opinion who has no access to the information the President has.

Your transparent attempt to discredit the information shared in the above link is YOUR OPINION.

Once more, former Lt. Colonel Wilkerson's ASSESSMENT on this situation has more CREDIBILITY and probably better access to the FACTS than YOU or ANYONE ELSE on this forum does.

If anything, your fanatical devotion to the imperial wars of the US just proves what Wilkerson was describing, there unfortunately exists an element in America who believes in nothing but endless wars.

Your transparent attempt to discredit the information shared in the above link is YOUR OPINION.

Once more, former Lt. Colonel Wilkerson's ASSESSMENT on this situation has more CREDIBILITY and probably better access to the FACTS than YOU or ANYONE ELSE on this forum does.

If anything, your fanatical devotion to the imperial wars of the US just proves what Wilkerson was describing, there unfortunately exists an element in America who believes in nothing but endless wars.

My opinion? - nope.

My analysis is based on sound reasoning -- that the individual you think is talking "facts" about the Trump administration is actually offering an OPINION as well.  He has no inside information.  After he retired, he no longer had a need to know regarding any classified intelligence.

I'm a former Air Force officer and DoD contractor.  We IT professionals have access to EVERYTHING, because we need to.  I've been in facilities most people don't know exist.

Not everyone was born and raised on this rock.  Some of us were actually in the middle of the things you only read about -- or in your case, imagine to have happened.