Newt made clear his position on whether or not to give the kill order on an American Citizen who is an overseas terrorist waging war with America, and that position is ‘absolutely’.
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
Nice to see Newt smack that smug little smile right off his face.
It was pretty much Down Twinkles for Scott Pelley!!
What is a “Down Twinkle”?!? I “liked” your statement, but only because it’s really early, I haven’t had coffee, and you said “Down Twinkles” LOL!
Down Twinkle is part of the official parliamentary procedure of the OWS general assemblies. Seriously.
Unapologetic – A quality we desperately need in a president – as opposed to apologetic.
Unapologetic in taking away our Liberty and destroying the Constitution. I want a President that is unapologetic in defending the CONSTITUTION!
RON PAUL 2012!
Newt…after my vote again…
You know years ago I thought Newt was one hell of a smart guy… He suffered a lot of bad karma since then, much self inflicted, but the guy has managed to rehabilitate himself pretty darn well …
These debates do prove that Newt IS a very intelligent thinker..
Intellectually he is by far the class of the field..
Why these idiot journalist, or whatever they Think they are, continue to challenge Newt’s intelligence is a mystery..
I just hope they keep it up because Newt, time after time, makes the journo’s look like the dumb asses they are..
Yep, have to agree with that. Despite some of his flaws, he does strike me as intelligent to get the job done.
smack down…scott…rule of law applies to citizens….if a citizen chooses to side with the enemy he forfeits the rights of a citizen… simple.
Scott thought he knew better until Newt schooled him about what the rule of law was about.
Yes, see Scott thought the Constitution still mattered, you know, right to trial by a jury of peers. Scott still thought that mattered, but obviously not. A panel can obviously ge together, decide you are a terrorist, oh and you get no say, no defense, no representation, they just decide and then they kill you.
Very well done.
And here I thought moderators weren’t part of the debate – someone should talk to Scott and remind him of that.
Especially when the ignorant moron confronts the master of Debate… Fool thought he could get one up on Newt… he sadly realized the error of his way after being made to look like a complete, and utter idiot. ROFL Way to go NEWT!
This debate format does not work well for our candidates. They should be in a forum where they can debate each other – not at the mercy (and timing) of a”gotcha” media! Unfortunately, in these instances, like tonight, the moderator overstepped his duties and was himself debating Newt and even uttered a “No” when the latter was providing an answer to the question. It is about time that our candidates boycott those types of debates! They’ll do themselves a huge favor by doing so!
You’ve got it together Cindy.
He’s too arrogant to even think that he was cut down by Newt.
Well said Newt, you’d think these moderators would have learned by now that you don’t square off with Newt when you’re holding empty pistols.
empty pistols? more like water guns 😉
But still empty. 🙂
I think that Newt is angling for a VP position with Perry. He came to Perry’s defense with amazing speed when the moderator went to Newt right after Perry’s answer about foreign aid resetting to $0…..He Zinged right out with affirmation of Perry’s idea.
You saw a little later on when Perry was talking about something related to a budgeting idea, he said something like “…and Newt’s gonna talk more about that later on”. It’s almost like he and Newt tag teamed, and Perry sorta spilled the beans. (a little)
That’s OK by me. I’d be happy with a Perry-Newt alliance for the Primary….especilly if Newt feeds Perry talking points.
If Newt’s going to get anywhere, he can’t do it by himself (because of baggage), and Perry (apparently) can’t talk out loud without some coaching.
Until Sarah jumps in (still dreaming) I guess these two will do for tonight.
Newt’s heart went out to Perry a few days ago!! I am pleased that Newt came to his defense and especially did not take the bait on talking ill about Mitt. Newt is focused on who the opponent really is!
That was great when scott pee lee wanted to bait Newt into slamming Mitt and Newt’s simple “No”. He went on to say that he is with all the candidates and they all have the same goal and would be far better in the White House than it’s present occupant.
Very astute, Cindy. I really really want a Perry/Newt ticket. These two seem to have good American values, and do not act like they are in a dog fight. I also add The Devine Sarah as Sec State. One, I think Perry has the right ideas, and aims, and two, Newt has the DC smarts to get most of it thru. I can just imagine Sarah with the French President! At least that is 2 of us, C.
I think they do complement each other well and they have to be thinking strategery at the end of the day, which is putting the most distance between them and Romney.
I love Cain but Perry has proven leadership abilities that are crucial to a candidate president where this time around, experience matters a LOT!!
Newt definitely hasn’t been dog fighting. However, in the previous debates Perry was continually answering questions with mostly weak attacks on Mitt which clearly is dog fighting on Perry’s part.
No, I think you’re wrong, poright… Newt will stick up for all of the nominees. He is sick and tired of the fool lamestream media trying to make them look like idiots. To the Abyss with the moderators and the effin’ fools for allowing these left wing media CLOWNS to host these treacherous-styled debates. Fools, all of them.
I agree with you that Newt is defending the other competitors, but something Rick Perry said made me think he and Newt did some coordinating for tonight. He said something (I can’t remember exactly) about an idea that Newt was going to expand on. If they’re talking with each other, I think that is good.
I think we all need to be talking with each other so we put forward the best reaction/recovery plan for the next 4 years. Maybe in other elections, you could keep your plans to yourself, but we’re in ‘Save the Republic’ mode!
Glenn Beck has already written off a political solution (and maybe he’s right) but we must try.
I’d like to see a little (and I do mean little) bit of Ron Paul’s ideas on monetary policy and free markets mixed with LOTS of Rick Santorum’s moral clarity and consistency, Rick Perry’s state’s right gumshen, Bachmann’s anti-Obamacare tenacity, and Newt’s rational decorum. (We could throw in a white sideburn each from Romney and Huntsman for that Viagra client look, and Herman Cain’s hat–which is pretty much all he is)
I guess I just really want Sarah to run.
I laughed at your: (We could throw in a white sideburn each from Romney and Huntsman for that Viagra client look). That made me laugh!!
And yes, I would so very much appreciate if Sarah could reconsider!!
Most of what you say is ok, but Perry’s record on illegals and individual’s rights need a lot of mea culpa before I would comfortably support him.
Oh please, Perry is no more Presidential material than your average politician…he can hardy address a question without que cards, stutters and stamers like a novice in the arena, lets support a candidate who can get Obama out of office. Newt and Mitt are the only two who have a chance. I prefer Mitt but would proudly vote one or the other. Newts early political career leaves me with some questions, I do not mean his personal life, which the media has lied about. what baggae do you speak of?
Perry on several occasions has proved he is in no way ready for that 2am phone call….oops is not an option.
Mitt is not very trustworthy, too much flip flop in the past, I don’t trust him.
11 years as governor in Texas getting 2 am 3 am 4 am 5 am phone calls 25 hours a day 8 days a week says you don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
I agree. He’s a LICC.
I can’t even see that baggage anymore.
I guess if he gets the nomination, I will vote for Perry as being the lesser of 2 evils, as he is no different on illegals than king barak I. I hope it is a Cain-Newt ticket as Cain is by far the better choice. The other Negative in Perry’s column is his propensity to step all over individual’s right to choose for themselves!
Yeah only follow the Constitution where you see fit… does anyone else see the potential dangers of this??
Any time the Constitution and role of law is respected and followed, I will cheer and support it. And anytime it is not… I will condemn it. No matter their political side. G was right about the Constitution and rule of law. I then cheer his stance. Our Constitution and rule of law is what made this country the envy of the world… undermine either, and you’re undermining the country.
Article III Section 3:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
If we examine the text here we will find al-Awlaki’s “missteps”, he joined with an entity (Al-Qaeda) who is waging war against the US, by acting as a recruiter for this entity, openly and without reservation, he is adhering to them as well as aiding them. He has made public statements to this effect, particularly via the Internet declaring his intentions, and his status as an “enemy combatant”, making himself a legitimate target.
Well, now go find the clause for what constitutes a “conviction.”
This section 3 you pasted above defines Treason. Now Al-Awlaki did commit treason, but never got convicted. The only authority in America with the power to convict a citizen is the Judicial system, in an “open court.” (as mentioned in Article 3 again).
So, for a President to write up a law overnight and cite an undisclosed “top secret” evidence, that no Jury ever analyzed and judged on, to assassinate a citizen of America is down right unconstitutional. The President is elected to uphold the constitution, not piss on it when he sees fit.
Unlawful enemy combatants being executed without “open court” is not a new development. I urge you to fully research U.S. history.
Unlawful enemy combatants (spies, saboteurs, terrorists) have been imprisoned and executed since the Revolutionary War to the present day. Out of uniform enemy combatants have always shared this fate, whether it be the Confederate Captain plotting to burn New York City, the plot to spread yellow fever in NYC and Philadelphia, poison NYC’s drinking water, or the conspirators in the Lincoln assassination during the Civil War. This designation was also used against Ku Klux Klan members, and German saboteurs who washed ashore during WWII, one of whom was a U.S. citizen.
Well you see al-Awlaki, a dual citizen of the US and Yemen, fled the US then while in Yemen began working as a recruiter for Al Qaeda (an entity that is openly waging a self declared war against the US). So at the time he committed Treason he was outside the Jurisdiction of our Cilvilian Judicial System, and because he has openly declared his alliegance to Al Qaeda and committed himself to waging Jihad (Holy War) against the US, technically under US law he has forfieted his US citizenship. So technically he was not in fact a US citizen once he declared his alliegance to Al Qaeda.
By the way the law was passed by Congress in 2001, it is called the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Terrorists and it grants authority for the targeted killing of members of Al Qaeda. The use of targeted killing is also supported by International Laws of War and the Protocols of the Geneva Convention.
The President’s “job” under the Constitution is to execute the laws of the United States, which he did. Even as much as I despise President “zero” he did execute the law.
Ahh, to bad you have a pesky fifth amendment that you have to figure out how to rape before you can apply the charge of treason against a citizen with out a declaration from a grand jury.
You would sound far more credible if you actually did a bit more research into our laws before spouting off, about “raping” them.
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,
Yeah, takes so much research to understand that portion of the 5th amendment.
You know the first sign that there is something wrong here is that its OBAMAO.
Secondly he argued for his “right” to assassinate as a state secret privilege.
This logic that you stand behind is what led to Americans being asleep at the wheel through the clinton years when we allowed Ruby Ridge to happen with out any kind of outcry.
Article 1 Section 8;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
I would then direct your attention to something called the Authorization for the Use of Military Force against Terrorists, it was passed overwhelmingly by Congress in 2001 and authorizes the targeted killing of members of Al Qaeda.
Also, because of al Awlaki’s status as a dual citizen, the moment he pledged himself to Al Qaeda (an entity at war with the US) and committed himself to aiding them in that war, his US citizenship (by our laws) was forfeit.
Don’t know where you were at during Ruby Ridge and its aftermath but we put up quite a bit of outcry here, and made our feelings known in support of Randy Weaver and against the gross misuse of Federal Authority as well as the trumped up weapons charges against him.
Right on G! A truth that is long overdue. He raised several notches with that one! Thanks G. for standing up for the TRUE rule of law. Change of subject: this is a moderator??!! Isn’t his behavior like a boxing referee jumping into the fray and taking on one of the boxers?! He clearly is not able to control himself so he can perform his duties so he should be fired from that privilege…
Did you here that “moderator” say “no” during Newt’s answer? What a dolt!
Those fools who think they can get one up on Newt Gingrich in a debate are truly smoking something not found over the counter. Imbecilic moderators like this one serve one purpose…to be made to look like fools in eyes of truth. Damn, I have to watch that again.. that was pretty darn good. ROFL
“Rude leftist moderator gets owned!” That should be the title of this clip on YouTube…lol. P.S. Do you think Pres. Obama would ever get interrrupted like that by a moderator at a debate
There ain’t no such thing as fighting for fun.
Take em to school professor Newt!!
Newt continues to distance himself from the rest of the pack. We should all be proud that our next president is a guy who won’t take sh*t from terrorists or anyone who hates America.
On a higher note: Why do our candidates subject themselves to debate not only the Republicans in a primary but debate the moderators? What is the role of the moderator? I really am disgusted that the Republican party just hands over the reins to the MSM and Democrat pary.
I agree. If it happened to me, I would be even more forceful than Newt. At least Newt has the stones to call them out. No one else will!
I think it was on Greta after Wednesday’s debate where I saw Newt answer that question. He said it doesn’t cost their campaigns anything to participate in these debates, and judging by how they affect the polls afterwards, he knows this “free” publicity is getting their messages out. He also said candidates like Santorum and CAIN (yep) would not have stood a chance without the debates. And last, which I think is the most obvious reason, those moderators can ask the questions and try to steer the discussion, but they have NO control over the actual response of each candidate, which means they cannot control the message (something we all know they always do).
Remember, the audiences on left-leaning stations are either average citizens who are unaware that the information they regularly receive has been filtered and contorted by the left OR they are the left themselves, and let’s face it, if not for these debates, where would our guys ever get their opportunity for those people to hear what they have to say? I firmly believe for the independents or clueless citizens who watch these stations, they will eventually hear something out of mouths of one of our candidates that makes total SENSE to them and strikes a chord in their own lives. The left has such a disconnect with reaility. There have got to be people out there who cannot find jobs or are under water on their homes who don’t understand why they keep hearing how great things are in Obama-land when they turn on their left-leaning news station. So they watch a debate and suddenly things start making sense to them.
Our guys are handling these leftwing nitwits just fine and are getting better and better on how to avoid the gotcha questions. Have you noticed how frustrated the moderators were in the two debates this week? I wouldn’t worry about them doing these debates.
That does put things in perspective for me. I never thought of it as free advertisment. I really expected citizens to do their due diligence and seek out candidate’s messages on any forum. It is true that a lot of people who watch one of three broadcast networks think they are being enlightened and educating themselves.
My concern is that when a candidate blows his/her message out of the water in these debates, the media caricatures every candidate two seconds after the debates to “tell” the viewers their own spin.
You gave a validate explanation for why Republicans scramble to these networks just to be debased by them. That was insightful.
What to do, what to do…
As Newton said – at very end of clip –
“… war … kill people who are trying to kill you.”
Makes so much sense and best of all, it drives the libs crazy!
Perhaps just perhaps he can get the votes
Nope….as soon as people catch on to the fact that he is Romney squared…
Look at their respective platforms. Which is more palatable? P.S. Nobody special is going to want to be Romney’s V.P. either. Rubio will be Newt’s. Bank on it.
Probably Romney has a better platform than Newt. RomneyCare is awful, but at least Romney says it should be a state issue.
Based on his comments and record, Newt has no problem with healthcare centrally directed from the federal government.
Remember, the MA individual mandate is an idea that Newt helped develop and promoted.
Romney = Newt = Huntsman = RINO
Honestly, I have been supporting Newt recently (more as VP, however), but after I saw the clips of him praising centralized healthcare, the fairness doctrine, net neutrality, etc…..no Newt for me.
Newty…how I love you, how I love you my dear old Newty… Newt/Cain Cain/Newt
It is the randomness of application of the constitution where the problem lies. George Soros aids the US’s enemies and doesn’t even get declared persona non grata. The US even aids the US’s enemies.
You celebrate when there is equal application of the law, not when the broken clock is right twice a day.
I trust very little of what that little BH Obama does.
Unfortunately “Zero” has been shielding his buddy George, and we have an AG that will not do his job.
This is an issue where Ron Paul looks so very simple minded. If an American citizen has effectively renounced his citizenship, joined a mortal enemy, vowed to kill any and all Americans, wherever he can get at them, then hides in a foreign country, and the foriegn Government either cannot or will not arrest and hand him over,,,,,,,,, you kill that person, very lawfully.
But maybe we can do the high minded thing as Ron Paul says. Let’s request the bad guy be arrested someday by somebody and hope for the best.
Theres very very few things I can say postive about B.H.Obama, but his ruthlessness in killing Al Qaeda baddies is commendable. And yes, that includes Al Awlaki’s poor little 16 y.o. son. A shame he didn’t live longer to slaughter more civilians or kill U.S. troops is some God forsaken cesspool.
When Predator Drones are circling our skies and blowing up houses of suspected drug dealers and gun runners, perhaps you will temper your unbounded pride in killing. The collateral damage from these things is staggering, and when they err, we glibly say “my bad.” Ron Paul, being a baby doctor, perhaps is more in touch with the sanctity of all life.
hey guess what…i think we are going about this war the wrong way…we need to adopt the same methods they used in WW2…carpet boom the hell out of them till they surrender totally…100% destruction 100% surrender nothing in between…if it is true they love death more than life,and we have been told this, then lets give them death…this world would be 100% better off if we killed all moolsums…ALL of them…of coarse i am just kidding…because me know that mooslums hold no ill feeling towards Christians and allow them to practice the Christian Faith in all Mooslum countries…with out fear of retaliation…right…Go to Saudi Arabia and take your Bible out and read it in any Park…no one will say a thing…TRY IT!!!
If you are a Christian it isn’t whether Muslims allow you to practice your faith or not, it is whether you actually practice your faith and if you do are you willing to accept the consequences for it-the Bible is very clear on that the “world” will hate us if we walk with Christ and walking with Him doesn’t mean eliminating those you are afraid of-and of course you really can’t hate anyone if you are a Christian. To live is Christ-to die is gain! (Phil 1:21)
fine then…i want you to go to Saudi Arabia and Preach the Gospel…and i will pay the air fair…Act 9:22 But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ.
Act 9:23 And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him:
Act 9:24 But their laying await was known of Saul. And they watched the gates day and night to kill him.
Act 9:25 Then the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket.
looks like Paul should have just walk out of the city…or was he running away…
if we took your view then Hitler would rule the world…after all being a Christian means submitting to all Authority right…so we need to re think Japans part in world history also and say we were wrong for defeating you…and think about the south and the war you know THE CIVIL WAR guess there needs to be a re do on that too…after all the south had the Authority to enslave people and have slaves.
I’m sorry but i will not lay down and let people kill me just because you think its the Christian thing to do….I believe as Christians we need to fight for righteousness…expose evil,fight it at every level or we become no better than the heathens we look down on as lost…your way of thinking is why we have ,as a nation,sunk as low as we have,,,don’t get in involved..we are not of the world…let the world do what the world is going to do…I’m not going to say -do -react-to anything i as a christian will do my own thing and let the world Merrily go down the road to hell and destruction….
Look around…you have accomplished your goal…we are at the very door of hell right now….as a nation of Christians we have failed……..
But we do hate evil. And we do so much to protect and preserve the lives of even those that hate us. Like it or not, America is still a nation with christian principles. When we destroy enemy combatants that have sworn an allegiance to principles that are based on Anti-Christian attitudes, we are in turn promoting and enabling truth and justice. By the killing of soldiers that fight against christianity, we help to lessen the sufferings of those that choose to have faith in a God that is hated by the world that he created. To kill your enemy on the battlefield is not murder. There are so many of our brave soldiers that believe soundly in Jesus Christ and are called to fight the evil that the world is facing. God hates evil and the righteous rejoice when evil is destroyed. God is a just God. Giving mercy to those that he chooses. The enemies of God on the battlefield have been given every opportunity to see the truth and if it is the will of the most high, they too will see that there is only one path to the Father, the creator of all that is.
I don’t think God meant for us to just sit down and allow someone to attack and kill us without defending ourselves, I think He meant for us to use our brains and fight for what is good and just and right.
I think Newt did really well and he was the only one to stand up for the Christians being murdered in Egypt no one else talk about that and that is going on right now…Christians women are being raped their houses burned down…and no one talks about that…the religion of filth is wiping out all Christianity from their countries and nothing is said about it…the religion of filth and death is coming to this country and what will we do about it….sorry but they need to be kicked out of this country unless they swear allegiance to the Constitution and forsake Shari Law…if they don’t..they go…NOW….
What does Newt propose we do about this problem?
What special knowledge does he have on this issue that other candidates could not obtain from the State Department and intelligence services?
do you know that under this regime the state department has been told to favor Moolusm over Christians as far as legal emigration is concerned…it used to be the opposite now we favor those who would destroy us over those who would pray for us…is it just me or is something wrong here…………
This is about Newt.
Yes it is and this is why we like someone who’s got the guts to take out the scum of the earth. It takes seconds to see that Christians are being persecuted everywhere. Obviously that’s something you don’t care about.
Newt is probably the best brain in the room but he can flip on a dime. I heard Bob Woodson mention on the radio that when NG was speaker he invited Jesse Jackson to his suite to watch a sporting event, and then there is Miss America and Newt on the couch.
This guy is sounding more like he may get the nomination folks! He pulls no punches and he is fearless. I just hope and pray that Newt continues to come clean about his comments in regards to Paul Ryan and Reagan. Other than that I would love to see Newt/Cain in 2012.
Why was this a question?
CBS = idiots
Actually, it is quite the softball for any Republican candidate.
This is pretty close to political porn.
I loved loved loved this response from Newt!
It’s amazing and a bit disconcerting to see so many cheer on a corrupt government the right to kill its citizens. The government can and has called Tea Partiers potential terrorists. Wake up, people! Do not allow your government that kind of power to kill its own citizens without a trial. It may be a radical muslim now, but one thing I have learned with this administration; it could be me or you being called a terrorist (at war with the country) tomorrow. Sounds good now, but think long and hard about it, folks.
Show us ONE instance where a Tea Party member has threatened to kill Americans. Show us ONE instance were a Tea Party member has joined a terriorist group with the explicit aim of killing Americans.
Q: Why do they bury liberals in 100-foot deep graves?
A: Because deep down, they’re really nice people.
Same goes for MoosLoons.
I can’t and that is my point! The Tea Party is peaceful (I am part of the Tea Party), but the government sees us as the enemy and has alluded that many “right wing” people may be domestic terrorists. Have you not seen these quotes by governmental officials?
One can only hope that those making the decisions to drop a Hell Fire on those jerks heads believe in doing it off shore.
In answer to your question, yes I have. It’s far Left rhetoric that is believed by too many sheep.
On face the nation just now he says it was “Gingrich’s day” and cites a stat that a plurality think he’s most ready among the candidates to handle a crisis, “and it showed”. I think he was impressed.
Just now on Face The Nation. Moderator in question says it was “Gingrich’s day” and that Gingrich showed why a plurality of poll takers have said they trust him most in a crisis. I think he was impressed.
Not allowing the lefties to make fallacious assumptions is what has been needed for a long time. Newt does it best with the facts.
I am more and more impressed with Newt. He is strong, he is decisive, he is far smarter than anyone on that stage and in the White House….both historically and in current events…the question is, nationally can he win the general election? I think a Cain/Gingrich ticket is still our best bet for now….
Or should it be a Gingrich/Cain ticket? What say you?
He sure knows how to get our attention.
Terrorists we kill – that is my motto. America has more tough men and women than any other country I know, and a fiercer love of freedom – use that toughness and love of liberty to squash the death worship and revelling in mangling of bodies that characterized any terror groups – such as the Danish Bandidos who engage in serial torture killings of US and Danish nationals disguised as death by natural causes (neck, back manglings, heart attacks).
So let me get this straight, if you are an American citizen, and if a “panel” decides to get together, and accuse you of being a terrorist, without giving the American a chance of defense or council, you can kill them? And forget that as an American citizen you have the right to a trial of your peers, but not anymore. WAKE UP PEOPLE!!! THEY ARE DESTROYING THE CONSTITUTION! IN THE NEW DEFENSE BILL, THEY CAN NAME YOU A ENEMY COMBATANT, MOVE YOU TO GITMO BAY, AND KEEP YOU THERE UNTIL YOU DIE, WHILE YOU ARE HERE IN AMERICA! VOTE RON PAUL, SAVE THE DEMOCRACY!!!
Only an Idiot would think it is ok to kill American citizens without a trial, a right given to us by the Constitution.