Skip to content

Tag Archives: Mother Jones

A Brief Word In Response to Jack

By and
Wednesday, February 6, 2013 at 8:43 AM

We don’t disagree with Jack that the filling in of details in the White Paper is important—and didn’t mean to suggest otherwise. But the importance Jack assigns to this aspect of the White Paper is decidedly not what has made it headline news for just about every major news organization in the country. If that were . . .
Read more »

Senate NDAA Amendments Update

By
Tuesday, December 4, 2012 at 9:41 PM

As readers know, last Thursday the Senate approved Senator Feinstein’s amendment to the NDAA, regarding the domestic detention of citizens and lawful permanent residents. That wasn’t all.  Now, after further debating and voting, the Senate’s updated bill also conditions the availability of certain funds for the Executive Office of the President on prior congressional notification regarding . . .
Read more »

The Administration’s SAP

By
Friday, November 18, 2011 at 8:01 AM

Finally, the administration has spoken clearly, directly, and with direct references to consequences–a veto–about the detainee provisions of the NDAA. The White House’s Statement of Administration Policy on the Senate version of the DNA has none of the problems of its earlier statement about the House version of the bill. It distinguishes between big problems . . .
Read more »

Veto Threats and the NDAA

By
Thursday, November 17, 2011 at 12:53 PM

I was just reading a piece by Adam Serwer (Mother Jones) regarding the NDAA detainee provisions, and came across this pithy line from Ben: “If Congress is going to take the president seriously, it has to believe the president is prepared to use the National Defense Authorization Act as toilet paper,” says Ben Wittes, a senior fellow . . .
Read more »

David Cole Responds

By
Friday, December 17, 2010 at 3:04 PM

David Cole sent in the following response to my post of the other day on his earlier New Republic article: My piece took issue with the claim so often made by all sides of the debate that Obama has continued Bush’s policies. Interestingly, you focus only on the left’s critique, and where that comes from, but . . .
Read more »

Reiterating My Question for Jeffrey Goldberg

By
Thursday, December 2, 2010 at 7:50 AM

Two weeks ago, I posted a question for Atlantic blogger Jeffrey Goldberg in light of some remarks he made to Nick Baumann of Mother Jones objecting to the targeting of Anwar Al Aulaqi. Goldberg had expressed admiration for the pure civil libertarian view of the matter, but like most people who express this view, he . . .
Read more »

Kenneth Anderson on Baumann v. Wittes

By
Wednesday, December 1, 2010 at 5:09 PM

Over at Mother Jones, Nick Baumann offers a thoughtful response to my post yesterday, which in turn responded to his earlier post on Al Aulaqi. I don’t mean to respond further, since I think the exchange as it is nicely illuminates the points of dispute between us. But I did want to share the following thoughts sent . . .
Read more »

A Response to Nick Baumann

By
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 at 7:40 PM

Over at Mother Jones, Nick Baumann accuses me of arguing against straw terrorists. Quoting a Lawfare post from a little while back in which I posited that the alternative to reserving the option of lethal force against Anwar Al Aulaqi is paralysis in the face of the threat he poses, Baumann writes, This is a straw . . .
Read more »

A Question for Jeffrey Goldberg

By
Wednesday, November 17, 2010 at 5:59 PM

I have a lot of regard for Jeffrey Goldberg, and partly for that reason, I’m a little taken aback by these comments made to Mother Jones concerning Anwar Al-Aulaqi. Goldberg has been on overdrive recently about new airport security rules, and he seems to see some connection between those rules and the Aulaqi case. As . . .
Read more »