no dice. it s been almost seven years since that executive order was signed and guantanamo is still open. now the defense department is about to release their pentagon plan for how guantanamo could be closed. that plan is due any day now. we are told it will come out this week. it is expected to be released to the public and congress and the white house. we see republicans making this issue into a hillary clinton issue. don t elect hillary clinton president. she ll close guantanamo. what if after all this time president obama closed guantanamo. what if he got it done? what if he could do it before the end of his presidency so it didn t become the first item on the to do list of either hillary clinton or whoever the republican might be who could beat her. president obama s former white house counsel says president obama has the option to close guantanamo during his own
we think that s an unconstitutional restriction on the powers of the president as commander in chiefs and most courts, all courts would find it such. do you believe this matter is something the administration should take to court or something that the president should defy, let congress or somebody else sue him over it and then have the court fight thereafter. this is not something the president takes to court. i think he should do what he s trying to do and has tried to do for seven years which is the preferable way to work with congress and try to get an agreement about how this will happen. there s been a consensus for a long time. only partisan politics got in the way. you pointed it out in the run-up. there was a consensus that it would be in our national interest and we would save a lot of money if we closed guantanamo. i think it s not a matter of the administration going to court. i think the administration exhausts all efforts to work with congress to have congress
the united states military. this power is at its height making dispositions of soldiers, strategy and tactics, assigning equipment. it s at its height in wartime. we are at war with al qaeda and al qaeda affiliates. the president right now is a wartime commander in chief and we believe in the core exercise of his power he has the ability to take a detainee from one facility and if he believes it is in the interest of the nation and advances the war strategy he can move the detainee to another mille tear facility. we think he has the power to do it unilaterally. that s the first part of the argument. the second part is when the congress comes in and says, mr. president, not only are we going to tell you you can t make a decision as to where detanes should go, we ll tell you where to put them and keep them there.
congress s authorization to act f. congress is unable or unwilling to work with him, obama should use his authority as commander in chief to shutter this notorious facility and end this blight on american values and national security. don t take it from me, liberal blowhard on tv. take it from former white house counsel greg craig writing in the washington post with cliff sloan who president obama put in charge of trying to close guantanamo a couple of years ago. congress does keep passing legislation trying to block president obama from trying to close guantanamo. they did it today. the president s former white house counsel says what congress is doing when they pass a restriction is meeaningless. president obama is ignore what congress is doing. he can close guantanamo whenever he wants. if former white house counsel greg craig is right or the white house believes he s right then
commander in chief section of the constitution. i assume in theory and legality and constitutional history the white house agrees with me. there is a little chunk of history that s interesting. back in the debates of the constitutional convention james madison took notes of what was debated. there was an original formulation that congress could make war. they changed it. they said congress can declare war. everybody agreed that when it came to the direction of war and i m not quoting hamilton. when it came to the direction of war, the exercise of power demanded the unity of one hand. that s important about a commander in chief. he s is the unitary commander and clearly has the ability to do this. i can t speak for what the white house believes on the legality or constitutionality of it. it s a very simple, straightforward and quite attractive theory.