@emptywheel If Ad. believes BOTH AUMF *&* a hypoth. MON for CIA action justified Awlaki action, is it the case there is one justification >>
@MikeDrewWhat To clarify: MON not hypothetical, Admin made THAT clear in FOIA fight. Woodward & others reported it covered targeted killing
-
-
@emptywheel Your Jan 2 post makes it still sound hypothetical; was just going off of that.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@emptywheel ...But so I'm clear, how did the Admin make that clear?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@emptywheel To clarify: "hypo" not meant to q whether MONs exist, incl. 9/17/11 one. Just to refer to uncertainty over use(s) - and the pos> -
@MikeDrewWhat@emptywheel ...9/17/*01*, I meant.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@emptywheel > pos. existence of more than one that could be being used this way. Indeterminacy of specific docs & their uses.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@emptywheel Again, reason I used "hypo" just comes from wording of even your most recent posts: so many words like "hint," "hinting," >> -
@MikeDrewWhat So if they used C-i-C, that may be it, which makes it worse. (Awlaki killing may not have met terms of known OLC memo) -
@emptywheel I think we're on same page. If they can plausibly string along AUMF theory, don't see reason to open CnC Co'Ws. But that raises>
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@emptywheel >"suggesting," referring to the *existence* of "more than one targeted killing memo." Just gave me the wrong impression, is all. -
@MikeDrewWhat Ah, fair point. First, they must have ONE exp for how they killed Awlaki that DiFi, at least, thinks is credible.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.