For John, BLUF: Right topic, wrong approach. Nothing to see here; just move along.
In a way, the headline for this article from The Atlantic, by Conor Friedersdorf, is a joke, a parody—"Tyrant-Proof the White House—Before It's Too Late". The sub-headline is "Bush and Obama ran roughshod over Madisonian checks and balances, but there's still time to restore them."
Here is how the article starts:
An op-ed in Tuesday’s New York Times points out that, thanks to precedents set by President Obama, “whoever prevails in November will inherit a sweeping power to use lethal force against suspected terrorists and militants, including Americans.”That is a silly question. The question is should any President have that power? Should Ms Hillary Clinton have that power. The Hillary Clinton, who as Secretary of State, led us into the Libya quagmire? Of course not.
Let me put things more starkly: Under current precedent, the commander in chief can give a secret order to kill an American citizen with a drone strike without charges or trial.
Should Donald Trump have that power?
I can see the Left Wing media, which doesn't understand its own role in making Mr Trump the leading Republican Candidate, thinking it could make hay by using The Donald's name, but it diminishes the importance of the topic.
We need a humbler, more respectful Media. And, we need a humbler, more respectful President. We need greater involvement of the US Congress. We need more transparency.♠
Hat tip to the InstaPundit.
Regards — Cliff
♠ Remember when President Obama promised to have the most transparent administration in history? My advice is to not buy a used car from this man.