White House: No Troy Davis Call By President Obama, Despite Blogger's Claim (UPDATE)

[Tx4obama]

A radio host and blogger who claimed that President Barack Obama made a last-ditch effort to save Death Row inmate Troy Davis on the eve of his execution last week in Georgia has since retracted parts of his story, as White House officials came out today to refute the claims.

SNIP

SNIP

White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer told Politico that the report was completely untrue. According to Politico, a number of black radio hosts attended an off-the-record meeting with the president, and that while Obama was pressed on the Davis issue, he told the group that his hands were tied.

"That article was completely, 100 percent wrong," American Urban Radio Networks radio host April Ryan told Politico. Obama, she told the website, was "unequivocal" that there was "nothing he could do" in the case, adding that Obama did tell the group that in general, he had concerns about innocent death row inmates.

SNIP

Full article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/27/white-house-denies-radio-_n_983949.html

----------


Looks like just another radio host 'making things up'.

[MADem]

1. It would have been incredibly inappropriate for him to do that.

Yes, the issue is a difficult one, but there was no federal opening for Obama to intervene, or even "lean." He had no power to change the outcome. Had he made a call, the GOP would have a field day, suggesting that Obama would interfere with the sovereignty of the individual states.

[rpannier]

3. So you're saying it's a bad idea for the President to try andsave a man who is probably innocent

from being executed because of politics.

So, politics trumps doing the right thing.
Wow

[MADem]

4. Yes, because he would not have succeeded and by making the effort,

it would give the GOP an opening to attack him on a number of fronts.

Attack him enough, and you'll be crying about President Perry in a couple of years. How's that for a "Wow" moment?

I don't think futile, ill-advised gestures are noble. They are certainly unintelligent, and Obama, a Constitutional scholar, is not that. He made a statement about how he feels about executing innocent people, and that's as far as he could go.

I don't WANT a President who does dumb "Emperor-like" things that show him to be a moron who doesn't understand our basic system of governance.

You really do want to go back and study our nation's history. Read about the Founding Fathers, Articles of Confederation, and Constitution. It's plain, from your somewhat snippy comment to me, that you do not understand the relationship between the federal government and the states. You might not think it matters much, but IT DOES.

Have a nice day.

[rpannier]

5. You don't want a President who does "Emperor-like things"

You want one who cowers in the face of adversity
Who is afraid to stand up to others and takes the easy way out of every issue
As Jon Stewart said, "Yes, we can. If it's not too difficult."

[Bodhi BloodWave]

6. is it really that strange that people want a president that follows the rules and laws

of the country rather then breaks them because he thinks something is wrong?

[rpannier]

7. What law is being broken by him calling and asking them to wait

Nowhere in my post, or anyone elses that I have seen was there a suggestion of spiriting him away of breaking the law in any other form
It's a shame some people have created a false narrative to support their position

[Bodhi BloodWave]

8. there have been a ton of suggestions on what Obama should have done

but supposedly was to cowardly(et al) to do, he didn't have any legal avenues to interject himself to try and save him.

When people keep repeating things that he has no authority or legal right to do since it would break different rules again and again and again in a myriad of posts, then yes they are asking him to break the rules/law.

They might see it as a common sense thing to do(which it might be for most) but while being a president might grant you a lot of powers and such they also bind you in a number of other ways.

And exactly what were they supposed to wait on? and for that matter, for how long should they have waited?(doing this by the way would be him interjecting himself into a state case where he holds not one iota of authority)

[polmaven]

13. "asking them to wait"?

Wait for what? The State DID "wait" while the Supreme Court reviewed again and refused to stop the execution. As disgusting as this case was, there is nothing at all the president could have done to stop something on which the State of Georgia was intent.

[MADem]

22. Precisely. NT

[MADem]

10. Your characterization of him is incorrect.

You lack knowledge of our nation's founding documents, you do not understand our laws, and that is coloring your thinking in an adverse fashion.

I don't recall seeing Jon Stewart on any Presidential ballot...but whatever.

[kickysnana]

15. He already does, you haven't been paying attention. n/t

[MADem]

21. If you want to make 'pithy' little statements of that nature without backing them up,

go right ahead. You don't make your point.

[GeorgeGist]

19. So you would approve ...

of John Wilkes Booth assassinating President Lincoln for being a moron who didn't understand our basic system of governance?

[MADem]

20. That's just a silly and childish comment, and you know it.

The place to protest the wrongness of the Davis execution is in GEORGIA, where the authority lay.

You really do need to go back to school. Read the Constitution. Learn American history.

[Ineeda]

11. Do you remember the Terri Schiavo circus?

A certain governor and the legislature got involved, and the governor's brother, the president at that time, signed an outrageous bill, vacating many lower court decisions. It was a travesty, and was soon deemed by SCOTUS that they had no right to do that. Those political entities believed they were doing 'the right thing', too.

[MADem]

23. +1....we even got diagnoses from the floor of the Senate during that sideshow! nt

[SidDithers]

12. So you'd rather have a monarch instead of a President...

:rofl:

I love watching posters play the "So you" game, it's such a weak, laughable debate tactic.

Sid

[bluestateguy]

2. I am unaware of any president ever intervening in a state level execution

And I don't just mean some meaningless public statement.

What I mean is that you can't find an example of any president using formal powers to stop a state level execution.

[Tx4obama]

9. Yep, that's because a president has NO powers to stop a state level execution.

The U.S. Constitution gives the president only power to grant a Reprieve or Pardon when it is a 'federal crime'.
-----

Section 2: Presidential powers
Clause 1: Command of military; Opinions of cabinet secretaries; Pardons

“ The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

---

In the case of Troy Davis it was not a 'federal crime', therefore The President did NOT have any jurisdiction/power.

[former9thward]

14. Obama tried to stop a Texas execution in July.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/05/obama-stop-texas-mexican-execution

[frazzled]

16. Because it was "a breach of INTERNATIONAL law"

It is his duty and within his jurisdiction to make sure that the nation acts in accord with international law. It is constitutionally forbidden to him to interfere in purely state laws.

Jeezus, people. You are so intent on painting Obama as the devil that you will try to use any illogical argument whatsoever.

[former9thward]

17. The poster I replied to asked for any instance where a President

attempted to use the powers of his office to stop a state execution. I provided one. Bush did the same thing in 2007. BTW the courts ruled it was NOT a violation of INTERNATIONAL law. See, I can do meaningless shouts too.

[frazzled]

18. And I specified why that was okay but the other was not

Not every cigar is the same, you know.

[Vattel]

24. Oops. I meant to rec but unrecced instead.

It's the thought that counts, right?

[Number23]

25. Thanks for posting, Tx.

It would have been so wonderful if he could have done something. But it was well known that he could not.