Serves me right for not reading my White House briefing transcript until this morning, but here’s Robert Gibbs yesterday talking about what looked on Friday to be a forthcoming executive order authorizing preventive detentions:
I think the President addressed the notion and the very tough issue that the administration is likely to face, and that is that we are going to have detainees that will be hard to prosecute and too dangerous to release. And while the administration is considering a series of options, a range of options, none relies on legal theories that we have the inherent authority to detain people. And this will not be pursued in that manner.
You don’t get the sharp, declarative sentence "We will not put forward an executive order on preventive detention," but this comes fairly close. I suppose the White House could issue an executive order claiming authority for preventive detentions that doesn’t rely on inherent presidential authority — Daphne, can you help me out here? — but in the full context of the presser Gibbs seems to be trying to shy away from the executive-order option, which is commensurate with other stuff I’m hearing from the administration.
Crossposted to The Streak.



1 Comment
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
I’d sure LIKE to believe that the story about the executive order was a trial balloon floated by the administration to see if there was an “easy way out”, and that the overwhelming response (EVERYONE I know contacted the White House to make their opposition clear)clarified their options.
If that was the case, hey, no harm, no foul. They needed to get a sense of the level of outrage, and they got it. Great. If, on the other hand, it’s just a case of them working towards a methodology that would allow for indefinite detention, one would certainly hope that they will in short order come to understand the costs to their credibility and integrity…
mikey