.@emptywheel What's your view on to this query? https://twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/481226850845204480 … @kevinjonheller hasn't addressed it in his response.
-
-
Replying to @rgoodlaw
@rgoodlaw Not sure precisely what you're asking? In any case for CIA seems bound by Finding, which was not entirely briefed@kevinjonheller1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel His interp of "armed forces" proves too much. If exclusively mil. would mean couldn't turn detention over to civilian control.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel I'm not disputing the Finding point. I'm disputing textualist interpretation of AUMF that says it authorizes only military.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel You and Kevin may be using Finding in diff't ways. Regardless ... Do you agree with him that AUMF authorizes military only?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel But you wrote not that he ignored AUMF, but he considered it "legal gravy" which means also authorized by AUMF, no?4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
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.