Mali

The Targeted Killing Memos Shared with NYT, But Not Senate Intelligence Committee

According to the National Journal, one of the memos the Administration refuses to share with the intelligence committees authorizes the use of force in Algeria and, perhaps also in the same memo, with Mali.

Despite President Obama’s pledge in his State of the Union address to make the drone program “even more transparent to the American people and to the world,” his administration continues to resist efforts by Congress, even from fellow Democrats, to obtain the full range of classified legal memos justifying “targeted killing.”

A key reason for that reticence, according to two sources who have read the memos or are aware of their contents, is that the documents contain secret protocols with foreign governments,

[snip]

Others may have been signed with the leaders of Algeria and Mali, the legal expert said. Given the widespread unpopularity of the drone program, the disclosure of these agreements could prove extremely embarrassing both for the United States and partner governments.

The Senate Intelligence Committee can’t learn the details of what the government is up to, the Administration says, because even sharing information (much less publicizing details) about our agreements with governments like Algeria would be embarrassing for all parties involved.

So who are the former and current government officials and senior administration officials leaking information to the NYT about new efforts — including the use of unarmed drones — to target the Algerian militant Mokhtar Belmokhtar in Algeria and Mali?

The NYT reports that earlier concerns about conducting operations not covered by the 2001 AUMF have recently been allayed.

The idea of taking stronger action in the region has been supported in recent months by Michael Sheehan, the senior counterterrorism official at the Pentagon, and Daniel Benjamin, who until December was the senior State Department counterterrorism official. In the past, State Department lawyers have questioned whether the military action approved by Congress against Al Qaeda after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks authorized efforts to target extremists who were not clearly linked to the group. But according to some officials, those legal arguments  have recently been overcome.

“Those legal arguments have recently been overcome.” By the adoption of new OLC advice the Administration won’t share with Congress?

Continue reading

Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel Especially true since bin Laden party investigation said top DOD officials couldn't get in trouble. https://t.co/pt9oDPtPeU
13mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Important point in @PGEddington piece on politicization on ISIL intel: DOD IG can't be trusted on investigation. https://t.co/t1zHUgr1Ro
14mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @RMFifthCircuit Less fill and more law safer, but I bet he lays it out with plenty of fill to explain to the public what he is doing.
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @bnlfan_thunder @BenVolin Different judges do it differently. Most common, by my experience, is both parties, then breakouts, then together.
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @bnlfan_thunder @BenVolin ABSOLUTELY!
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @bnlfan_thunder @BenVolin I am sure you are well intentioned, but you are wrong. FWIW, I do this for a living, and have for a long time.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @ProFootballTalk: Mike Shanahan declares Kirk Cousins a “top 10 quarterback,” and obviously just enjoys watching the world burn http://t…
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @bnlfan_thunder @BenVolin Uh, this is an arbitration, NOT a mediation. The semantics matter. Saying parties never together in arbs is silly.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz .@BenVolin Sure they can. Its whatever+however court decides to conduct it. But parties can be+often are, in the same room. Just wasn't here
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @RMFifthCircuit: The whole rapid fire coverage of Deflategate impossible under old system... Just musing. https://t.co/h9d49pc9CL
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @WerlySportsLaw @RMFifthCircuit @Prof_Holland @WALLACHLEGAL @IanPGunn @amilst44 We still have very limited/no crim efile. Civil presumptive
2hreplyretweetfavorite
August 2015
S M T W T F S
« Jul    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031