White House Counsel Kathy Ruemmler Vows Not to Let the White House Be Defeated by Actual Citizens

In an article describing how–in the guise of “flexibility”–the White House has continued the seeming relentless grab for unchecked executive power, White House Counsel Kathy Ruemmler offers a terribly cynical explanation for the Administration’s asinine levels of secrecy regarding its drone strikes.

But in an interview, White House Counsel Kathy Ruemmler acknowledged Mr. Obama has developed a broader view of executive power since he was a senator. In explaining the shift, she cited the nature of the office.

“Many issues that he deals with are just on him, where the Congress doesn’t bear the burden in the same way,” she said. “Until one experiences that first hand, it is difficult to appreciate fully how you need flexibility in a lot of circumstances.”

[snip]

Ms. Ruemmler said Mr. Obama tries to publicly explain his use of executive power, but says certain counterterrorism programs like the drone campaign are exceptions. Opening them to public scrutiny would be “self-defeating,” she said.

The WSJ doesn’t explain what she meant when invoking “self-defeat.” But her stance was described in a Daniel Klaidman article on the Administration’s decision, at a meeting in the Situation Room last November, to release more information about the targeted killing of Anwar al-Awlaki.

Another senior official expressing caution about the plan was Kathryn Ruemmler, the White House counsel. She cautioned that the disclosures could weaken the government’s stance in pending litigation. The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration under the Freedom of Information Act seeking the release of the Justice Department legal opinion in the Awlaki case. (The department has declined to provide the documents requested.)

That is, Ruemmler’s not making an argument about the efficacy of the drone strikes themselves; al Qaeda already knows who’s responsible for the arms raining down on their heads.

Rather, Ruemmler doesn’t want to be “defeated” by journalists, civil liberties organizations, and ordinary citizens seeking to at least understand, if not limit, executive power.

Kathy Ruemmler’s not waging her counterterrorism war against al Qaeda when she warns of self-defeat. She’s waging her counterterrorism war against us.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

6 Responses to White House Counsel Kathy Ruemmler Vows Not to Let the White House Be Defeated by Actual Citizens

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz @Honeygirl_Music Hey, it's not me, but Scotty gonna have to talk Liz into showing up. She runs this show here. I am just a passenger....
4hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @nickmanes1 Yep, something like that. Back to my turnout point. @vandebum
5hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @nickmanes1 And unless my #s are fucked, more people voted today than in 2011 mayoral. @vandebum @VanAndelArena
5hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @nickmanes1 Sort of what I'm saying: turnout sucked, actual win total for Bliss not far behind Heartwell '11 @vandebum @VanAndelArena
5hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @nickmanes1 My VERY rough numbers based on GRP's numbers is 21,000 (Bliss' 36% margin = 7,000) @vandebum @VanAndelArena
5hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @vandebum Technically, didn't more people vote than capacity of @VanAndelArena (tho not by all that much)?
5hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @nickmanes1 Did you at least have Gita Pita to reward yourself?
5hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel I hope someone will correct my numbers, but Heartwell won, in November 2011, w/14,131 votes. Bliss won today, in August primary, w/~13,200?
5hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @sbagen Mayoral election in 2011 (in November) had fewer than 18,000 votes cast.
5hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @sbagen So 23,300 people said they wanted this election, 21,000 than that participated in it.
5hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel .@sbagen The term limits referendum last Nov which created this election (even year, regular election day) had fewer than 50,000 voters.
5hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @sbagen It was a primary qua general tho. Hard to argue 66% in primary doesn't merit general win.
6hreplyretweetfavorite