Wyden supports Obama CIA pick after drone-kill docs supplied
PORTLAND, Ore. – After requesting it for two years, U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., has finally received the Obama administration's full legal analysis on why it thinks it can target and kill Americans suspected of terrorism. After it was supplied, he now publicly supports President Obama's pick to lead the CIA.
He, along with other senators on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, voted Tuesday in Washington, D.C. to advance John Brennan to a full Senate vote.
"We are pleased that we now have the access that we have long sought and need to conduct the vigilant oversight with which the committee has been charged," Wyden said in a joint press release with Sens. Mark Udall, D-Colo., and Susan Collins, R-Maine.
All three senators sit on the Senate's intelligence committee.
The controversy stems from the killing of three American citizens in Yemen. Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan were killed in a drone strike in September 2011. The Obama administration alleged al-Awlaki had plotted attacks against the United States. Two weeks later, al-Awlaki's 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman, was also killed in a strike.
It was eventually reported that the U.S. Department of Justice had provided the White House with legal opinions that it said justified the killing of al-Awlaki even though he was never captured, officially charged with a crime or tried in a court of law.
Wyden battled the administration for two years and sent open letters to Attorney General Eric Holder and Brennan, a top assistant to the president on counterterrorism, asking for the opinions but received no official response.
It was not until 11 senators, led by Wyden, wrote an open letter to President Obama asking for the opinions two days before Brennan’s confirmation hearing in early February that Wyden got an official response.
Obama called the senator the night before Brennan's hearing and told Wyden he would direct the Justice Department to release the opinions. Reportedly, however, the Justice Department did not immediately provide all of the requested documents. That delay was one of the factors that pushed back the intelligence committee's vote until today.
Sens. Wyden, Udall and Collins said in the news release they believe the next step should be to "bring the American people into this debate and for Congress to consider ways to ensure that the President's sweeping authorities are subject to appropriate limitations, oversight, and safeguards."
There was no one immediately available Tuesday from the Obama administration to discuss any plans it has to involve the American public in the debate.
The legal analysis remains officially classified.
For Wyden, a key factor in wanting the legal opinions has been to apply congressional oversight and had called the administration's refusal to release the opinions to authorized members of Congress, such as himself, "unacceptable."
Wyden has said there "can undoubtedly be some circumstances" where the president may have the authority to kill American citizens abroad who are suspected of terrorism; however, he argued there could be no way the appropriate congressional oversight could take place unless the administration made its legal rationale available to the intelligence committee.
Wyden has also questioned the administration on whether it believes it has the authority to conduct drone strikes on U.S. soil. Separately, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, has also questioned administration officials on that issue and received a letter from Brennan on Tuesday stating that the CIA is not authorized to conduct such operations.
But Paul also said a letter he received from Holder doesn't rule out the possibility of the administration using drone strikes within the United States.
"The U.S. Attorney General's refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening - it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans," Paul said.
In their press release, the senators thanked Paul for his efforts and said Brennan "will be (a) principled and effective leader" for the CIA and they "look forward to working with him in his new capacity."
However, some Senate Republicans, including John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, have threatened to block Brennan's full confirmation insisting they need better explanations on Brennan's views on torture and more details about what happened in the attack in Benghazi, Libya last September that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.
This version now references AG Holder's letter to Sen. Paul.
KATU.com reporting on this topic: Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden's push for this rationale:
Anyway the wind blows... Wyden should disagree with the administration so he could get a free ride on airforce one.
@LOLGOP Ahhh...I know Ron Wyden. Ron Wyden is an opportunist. Ron Wyden is NOT even close to a liberal & wld compromise all his positions.
Can't wait for the first collateral damage law suit against our totalitarian government. Or is there extra-Constitutional fine print on the "legal analysis" that prevents legal action by innocent bystanders ?
Wyden has also questioned the administration on whether it believes it has the authority to conduct drone strikes on U.S. soil. Separately, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, has also questioned administration officials on that issue and received a letter from Brennan on Tuesday stating that the CIA is not authorized to conduct such operations.
But Paul also said a letter he received from Holder doesn't rule out the possibility of the administration using drone strikes within the United States.
"The U.S. Attorney General's refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening - it is an affront the Constitutional due process rights of all Americans," Paul said.
Be very careful who you associate yourselves with. That drone above you may have your name on it, curtesy of the POTUS.
Whats three years amongst friends?
I think Wyden is starting to make the left turn. This and trying to make more wilderness areas in Oregon.
What happened to his stupid bow tie?
@axpman Different guy you are thinking of dumb this guy is dumber.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109686/
And why no mention of Holders letter to Senator Rand Paul?
âIt is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.â
 If Bush's Attorney general had made this comment the press would be all over him and rightly so. He's basically saying that the President can authorize a hit on an American citizen inside our country without due process. What the heck people, what is happening to this country?
@Scotty9 This is what the dems asked for, and this is what we get. Obama has, and is giving himself the power, with the dems approval and blessing. He is in the process of trying to get the house back to full democratic power so he can have full control for the last two years of his presidentcy, and can change America into "his utopia". He stated exactly that at his inauguration.
@Scotty9 Reference to Holder letter has been added. Thanks.
This will forever mar Obama. As it should. He has no right to kill Americans because of a suspicion. Al-awlaki was no sweetheart - but he was a citizen, and citIzenship means something. There is due process. As for the the teen killed in the strike, he joins the fate too many kids in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I disagree. He was waging war against us. If an american soldier was to meet another american on a battlefield who was fighting for an opposing army; he could justifiably kill that person. No difference here. He was a mercenary and was killed as an enemy combatant. The enemy has chosen to battle us outside the borders of a normal battlefield. They should be tracked and eliminated anywhere they might be in the world. As combatants they do not enjoy the privilege of due process.
@wvboy If al-Aalaki had been caught with a gun in his hand aimed at another person, then I would agree. But, he wasn't. He was targeted for assassination because of his political views and suspicion that he was planning terrorist acts. We have a process for dealing with citizens who are so suspected. We need to stick to that process.
We are not going to agree on this one dude.
So Wyden can be bought, all it takes is a little piece of paper which says "We checked, it's ok, just trust us." Wyden has standards... I guess.
@JTesla Thirty years ago I was working selling those framed pictures of animals etc on I think on  hawthorne He did not buy a picture. For a measley 10 bucks he could of bought my vote for life
"Wyden has said there "can undoubtedly be some circumstances" where the president may have the authority to kill American citizens abroad who are suspected of terrorism; . . ."
It is NOT ok for the President (or anyone for that matter) to kill someone who is suspected of terrorism but has yet to stand trial. To do so is a clear violation of the Constitution - which, by the way, the President swore to uphold and defend. We, the people, should not allow this arbitrary killing of suspects to continue.
@theprodigal Little too late now...
He has a funny face
So he has no problem with the president killing Americans without benefit of trial?
I always thought he looked like Bill Nye the Science Guy
This comment has been deleted
@Bunko Yamamoto You're pretty feisty today with your new moniker/avatar!