• Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 天前

        This is pretty much why the Supreme Court ruled that a president’s actions cannot be considered illegal, when performed in the name of their official capacity as president. They didn’t just give Trump the authority to violate the law…they retroactively gave it to every other president that has committed atrocities during their time in office.

        In a twisted sort of way, they were affirming what’s already considered established precedent.

    • absentbird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 天前

      I thought Obama had congressional approval for all his military actions.

      That’s not just killing people, it’s part of the job of being president: executing the will of the republic. What Trump is doing is very different.

      • Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 天前

        Obama was really just piggy-backing on previous “approvals”. He was also conducting drone strikes wherever he felt like…in or out of active war scenarios. It was also all based on shadowy intelligence, and done without any due process for those he killed. All in the name of the Republic…just like how Trump is claiming his actions are.

        So…not much different.

        • absentbird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 天前

          Congress approved military strikes in the entire middle east region under Bush. Even if the strikes weren’t in active war zones, they were approved uses of military force. Trump has no such authority for his strikes on boats in the Pacific and Caribbean.

          I agree that the authorizations granted under Bush were bullshit and tantamount to war crimes, but the actions of the president is starkly different.