Yes, it might actually happen. Politico is reporting on the close ties between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. In it, the two Cabinet members basically seem to ignore the President to launch a more grown-up foreign and military policy. But one part is particularly interesting:
Gates, who has long signaled an eagerness to retire, just launched what appears to be his final initiative, a tough push to scale back the Pentagon’s gargantuan bureaucracy. Clinton, with her hawkish image and ties to Gates and to military brass, would be his most logical successor — and some of her most senior allies have begun quietly to float the notion.
KSM to Go Free in White House Legal Error? Dylan Ruegger Ottawa Sun American civil and defense attorneys are bristling at the legal back-and-forth between the White House and the Justice Department. For the last month it has been widely reported that the Obama Administration was considering trying al Qaeda suspects tied to the September 11, 2001 attacks in military court. This would be a reversal of their earlier push to try the defendants in a New York City court.
While this move has been applauded by members of both the Republican and Democratic establishments, it has not gone over well with legal experts at both the Pentagon and in the Justice Department. According to one senior attorney speaking on terms of anonymity, the change in legal settings could set off a chain reaction leading to a mistrial.
According to American law, most changes of legal venues occur only after it has been determined that a suspect cannot receive a fair trial. If these suspects were American citizens, a change to another court would have been a simple matter. However, due to the legal changes regarding terrorist detainees put in place by the Obama Administration, this is not as simple.
"You have the al Qaeda suspects being presumed innocent until proven guilty," said one Justice Departmentattorney's aide, "If the trials are moved to Guantanamo Bay, the suspects' lawyers can legally challenge that the federal government changed the venue only to increase the chance of a guilty verdict."
If this is indeed the case, the Obama Adminstration would also be legally unable to return the trials to the original destination. Under these circumstances it is possible, but still not likely, that a circuit court could determine that the attempted changes constituted a miscarriage of justice and that the suspects would have to be set free.
While this situation is unlikely, it is still unsettling for many in the legal community, especially those who have been tracking al Qaeda.
"The chance of them being set free is maybe five percent." said our source at the Pentagon, "But five percent is still five percent too high."
Obama Administration officials have defending this course of action, claiming that the continuity of American justice during wartime was an utmost concern. Attorney General Eric Holder's office simply told one FOXNews affiliate simply, "Justice will be served."
B-2 Plans for Sale? Richard Hogarty Boston Reviewer June 1, 2009
Record deficits and a crashing economy appear to be taking a toll on the young Barack Obama Administration. The Administration has been talking about hiking income taxes and perhaps instituting a VAT tax.
China is also concerned with the mounting deficits in the United States budget. China is the single biggest holder of US Treasury Bonds and is one of Washington's biggest trading partners. The People's Republic has had a burgeoning economy, but is increasingly wary of the falling US dollar.
While the exact amount of Chinese ownership of US treasuries is unknown, it is estimated to add up to over a trillion dollars. If China were to call in US guarantees on these bonds, economists fear it could lead to an economic collapse larger than the Great Depression.
China has recently expanded its defense budget, ostensibly to keep up with its economic growth. China is reportedly working on its own version of a stealth bomber (the US has the only functioning model) but is lagged by technological defects.
On April 1st, President Obama spoke to Chinese Premier Hu Jintao during the G20 Summit. During this meeting, Mr. Hu expressed interest in writing off some of the US debt in exchange for military technology. The President has since referred the matter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
The Defense Department is reportedly furious with the President's proposal to sell blueprints of the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber to the People's Republic. Gates has flatly rejected the President's plan, but has since been asked to step down if he will not facilitate the process.
According to the deal, the United States would sell the plans for the B-2, along with radar-absorbing paints and metals in exchange for $50 billion in debt relief. The B-2 cost the US government $23 billion to develop the bomber in the 1980s.
According to the Administration, this proposal will help the United States resolve its debt issues. They point out their belief that the B-2 bomber is "strategically obsolete", according to a source in the White House Press Office. In addition, the source claims that the Chinese would be unable to create their own functioning stealth bomber fleet for "at least eight years."
American allies Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea are very wary of the proposal. Koo Syi, a geopolitical analyst from South Korea, points out that this technology could be passed to China's allies. This was the case when Chinese nuclear technology was transferred to Pakistan and North Korea. According to Koo, Obama has rendered US allies' opinions as "irrelevant."
While this proposal is controversial, it is not being presented to Congress, where it could meet with stern opposition. Instead, the State Department has been informed to assist the Defense Department with the transfer of materials.
Remember to bookmark our site! Consider advertising on our site! Also, if you need to search anything on Google, please use the bar below:
Conservative News and Reporting "News for the Rest of Us" Michele Chang
NOTE: This article is, in fact, a satire piece. While you're here, read other articles, like Obama going on the quarter, how he's genetically superior, and how he took down Blago. And you can also check out Joe's Babe of the Week, which comes out every Friday. And become a fan and return and tell your friends. Word up.
NOTE: This article did not appear in, or was sanctioned in any way by the National Law Journal.
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is extremely frustrated with orders that the White House is contemplating. According to sources at the Pentagon, including all branches of the armed forces, the Obama Administration may break with a centuries-old tradition.
A spokesman for General James Cartwright, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, states that the Obama Administration wants to have soldiers and officers pledge a loyalty oath directly to the office of the President, and no longer to the Constitution.
"The oath to the Constitution is as old as the document itself." the spokesman said, "At no time in American history, not even in the Civil War, did the oath change or the subject of the oath differ. It has always been to the Constitution."
The back-and-forth between the White House and the Defense Department was expected as President George W. Bush left office. President Obama has already signed orders to close Guantanamo and to pull combat troops from Iraq. But, this, say many at the Defense Department, goes too far.
"Technically, we can't talk about it before it becomes official policy." the spokesman continued. "However, the Defense Department, including the Secretary, will not take this laying down. Expect a fight from the bureaucracy and the brass."
Sources at the White House had a different point of view. In a circular distributed by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, the rationale for the change was made more clear.
"The President feels that the military has been too indoctrinated by the old harbingers of hate: nationalism, racism, and classism. By removing an oath to the American society, the soldiers are less likely to commit atrocities like those at Abu Ghraib."
"We expect a lot of flak over this," the classified memo continues. "But those that would be most against it are those looking either for attention or control."
The time frame for the changes are unknown. However, it is more likely that the changes will be made around the July 4th holiday, in order to dampen any potential backlash. The difference in the oath will actually only be slight. The main differences will be the new phrasing. It is expected that the oath to the Constitution will be entirely phased out within two years.
There's been a lot of talk about who Barack Obama will choose to become his next Secretary of State. It may be a good idea for him to concentrate on his Secretary of Defense, too. Obama has talked about bipartisanship a great deal during the campaign, so this is his chance to demonstrate it.
Robert Gates has been a non-partisan, steady hand at the Pentagon since the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld. He has overseen the surge strategy that is decimating al Qaeda in Iraq and has been a very pragmatic secretary.
There are other candidates for the job, to be sure. However, it is up to Obama to blend both competency and bipartisanship. If Gates or someone similar is not named, then Obama's campaign promises are nil.
