Graham: ‘The Inherent Authority Argument…Seems To Have No Boundaries’

[rodeodance]

Great to hear this from a Republican.

http://thinkprogress.org/?tag=Congress

Lindsey Graham: ‘The Inherent Authority Argument…Seems To Have No Boundaries’

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) explains the danger of the administration’s legal position:

"All I’m saying is the inherent authority argument in its application to me seems to have no boundaries when it comes to executive decisions in a time of war, it deals the Congress and courts out, Mr. Attorney General."

The problem isn’t that the administration is monitoring communications with al Qaeda. That is not only appropriate, it’s essential. The problem is that the legal underpinnings of this particular program, if accepted, would allow for unchecked executive authority.

No president should have unchecked authority, especially not this one.

edited to include quotation marks -I wish this board would do RTF.

[Demit]

1. Though I wish Graham had said all that, esp. the last sentence, the quote

is really only the first graf. The last two grafs are the poster's thoughts. Could you put quotes around what Graham said, to clarify? Thanks.

[xchrom]

2. he's just trying to sound like he's doing his job.

lindsey graham is a {bush}repuke to the bone.

[liberal N proud]

3. Sounds to me his talking out of both sides of his mouth

"That is not only appropriate, it’s essential"
"No president should have unchecked authority, especially not this one."

Which side is he on?

[flordehinojos]

4. and if, "no president should have unchecked authority, especially not this

one", why did he vote to confirm sCalito? No... Lindsay Graham is floating on a barrel of beer.

[bemildred]

5. There is not and never has been any "inherent authority".

That is the whole point of having a Constitution, to get rid of all that "Divine Right" horseshit. The people are sovereign, and all power derives from them through the Constitution, period. Anything less is a reversion to despotism.