Video: Giuliani goes nuclear on Obama over KSM’s trial

posted at 6:36 pm on November 13, 2009 by Allahpundit

On a day when prominent Republicans are piling on, this one obviously carries a little extra weight. It’s 13 minutes long and the best part is at the end of clip two, so skip ahead if you’re pressed for time. Although if you do, you’ll miss his pointed assertion early on that the last terrorist attack on America happened just a week ago.

A few random thoughts to supplement the previous post. One: Unlike Rudy, I’m not worried about the terror threat to NYC from holding the trial here. The NYPD’s been building counterterror resources for eight years; we’re probably better equipped than any other city to deal with it. Two: I haven’t seen it mentioned elsewhere today, but note the perverse incentive this creates. In a sane world, a jihadist who limited his attacks to military targets that are capable of defending themselves would receive more legal protection than one who targeted civilians. In our world, the guy who ordered jumbo jets flown into skyscrapers gets the full complement of constitutional rights in federal district court. Simply put, a terrorist looking to run up a body count is better off going to the mall than to a military base, where the UCMJ might come into play. (Hasan is an obvious example, although his case is unusual because he’s a military man himself.)

Three: Obama and Holder surely realize that the defense is going to try to put Bush on trial by focusing on waterboarding, torture, etc. Is that a feature for them rather than a bug? Nothing would make the left happier than to see Dubya himself in the dock; this is the next best thing, and provides some political cover in case the verdict turns out the wrong way. It’s all Bush’s fault! And four: As you hear the solemn rhetoric pour forth about how this is a glorious victory for due process and the Bill of Rights, bear in mind my point from the Mukasey post. There’s no way they’re letting KSM go. It doesn’t matter what the verdict is or what the judge decides; for reasons of pure national and political survival, Obama and Holder will find a way to reimprison this scum if the trial somehow ends up in acquittal. Which means this is actually the opposite of due process. It’s a stacked deck, right from the get go. So why even bother playing cards?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Everyone bear in mind Eric Holder until recently worked for a law firm that represented Gitmo detainees.

http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2009/11/will-holder-associates-profit-from-nyc.html

“Holder’s previous job, after all, was as a senior partner with Covington and Burling – a white-shoe DC law firm that devotes considerable pro bono time to defending the Gitmo detainees. The job paid $2 million a year, and he expects to collect a like amount this year as part of his separation package.

As a senior partner, he undoubtedly had significant input on what kind of charity cases his firm picked up. He surely knew that dozens of lawyers from from his firm were among the 500-plus civilian lawyers representing the 244 or so remaining detainees (on top of military-court-appointed defenders).”

In fact his law firm were pushing for civilian trials of the detainees. Conflict of interest? You bet.

It also raises major concerns about how watertight the case against KSM and others actually is. Holder’s background is an interest in defending terrorists, not prosecuting them.

Are Obama & Holder more concerned about their so-called principle here- and at the same time scoring points against Bush era policy- than they are about securing violent jihadists who hate America?

As with the decision to close Gitmo by January or their calls for a COIN campaign in Afghanistan- these geniuses maybe haven’t thought the whole process through.

Jay Mac on November 13, 2009 at 10:12 PM

Distraction.

Interesting…wonder what they’re trying to do with this smoke screen?

Dr. ZhivBlago on November 13, 2009 at 10:17 PM

crr6, if you wander through here:

If you can’t answer the question just have the guts to admit it. Don’t shrink off like an intellectual coward.

The truth is there is no answer to the question I posed. You know it. I know it. The fact that you can’t bring yourself to say out loud that the administration is completely f*cked up on this one speaks volumes.

BadgerHawk on November 13, 2009 at 10:26 PM

I just watched the first of the two linked video clips, and all I can say is, THANK YOU RUDY GIULINANI. Every point was a bullseye, dead on.

Kenosha Kid on November 13, 2009 at 10:28 PM

I apologize Holger…I thought you were saying something different. My bad. I apologize. terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 9:11 PM

Holger accepts the apology, he’s out walking our dog, and I have the ‘puter and holding on to it.

BTW he’s one of my sons.

Pelayo on November 13, 2009 at 10:35 PM

BadgerHawk on November 13, 2009 at 10:26 PM

I just don’t buy your logic that if you have a few civil trials, the only fair consequence is that you have to grant everyone in Guantanamo Bay the same trial. Apparently the only two options are everyone gets military tribunals, or everyone gets civil trials. We both know the latter simply isn’t practical.

And you still haven’t defined “show trial” or how exactly this is a “show trial”. If it is a show trial because it shows how enlightened our legal system is…I have no problem with that. We’re engaged in a war, a part of that war is winning hearts and minds. If this helps then I’m for it, whether or not you think it’s a “show trial”.

The fact that you can’t bring yourself to say out loud that the administration is completely f*cked up on this one speaks volumes.

Easy there. I said I’m on the fence about it, just for different reasons than you apparently.

crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 10:47 PM

I had said it before and tonight I have to pull it out again. As a recovered bulimic/anorexic I feel the need to hurl. What the he@% is going on?

proudteadrinker on November 13, 2009 at 10:48 PM

There’s no doubt of KSM’s guilt.
Arbalest on November 13, 2009 at 8:12 PM

ahem, Isn’t a criminal defendant presumed innocent before the trial begins? Am I missing something??

kringeesmom on November 13, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Advertise Here!
Support

Contact
Change the At to “@” and the DOT to “.”
Syndicate this site (XML)
Powered by
Movable Type

KSM to Plead Guilty
Update: Nope, Just Wants to Grandstand

Warning: this is breaking now, and there isn’t much information available about it.

Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks, and four co-defendants have offered to plead guilty. The five have been in proceedings before a military tribunal since February 11, 2008. The government is seeking the death penalty for all five.

“The accused in this case had decided that they wished to withdraw all motions… and wished to enter pleas in what was termed as confessions in this case,” the judge, Army Colonel Stephen Henley, said shortly after the pre-trial proceedings began.
When asked by the judge if he was prepared to enter pleas Monday to all the charges should the commission allow the defendants to withdraw their motions, Mohammed said “Yes.”

“We don’t want to waste time,” Mohammed told the judge.

kringeesomom you may have missed the above

proudteadrinker on November 13, 2009 at 11:04 PM

proudteadrinker on November 13, 2009 at 11:04 PM

Thanks!

kringeesmom on November 13, 2009 at 11:15 PM

You are welcome!

proudteadrinker on November 13, 2009 at 11:20 PM

And you still haven’t defined “show trial” or how exactly this is a “show trial”. If it is a show trial because it shows how enlightened our legal system is…I have no problem with that. We’re engaged in a war, a part of that war is winning hearts and minds. If this helps then I’m for it, whether or not you think it’s a “show trial”.

Enlightened? Our system might be enlightened, but it does not allow civil trials for war criminals. It was never intended for this purpose, in this instance the system is being used for political purposes by incompetent and partisan politicians.

Terrye on November 14, 2009 at 12:04 AM

There’s no way they’re letting KSM go. It doesn’t matter what the verdict is or what the judge decides; for reasons of pure national and political survival, Obama and Holder will find a way to reimprison this scum if the trial somehow ends up in acquittal.

Don’t count on it. If they can’t admit what happened at Fort Hood might have been maybe possibly terrorism, then they can’t be trusted to have the spine to do what needs to be done with KSM & Co.

Obama is fine with being a one-termer, as long as he can reshape the country they way he wants it during that time.

Laura in Maryland on November 14, 2009 at 12:28 AM

I have no problem with that. We’re engaged in a war, a part of that war is winning hearts and minds.

You don’t win hearts and minds by making a mockery of your nation – as this trial will. You show weakness which invites attacks.

Obama thinks he can attack Bush before the world without attacking the United States. He can’t. And if there is a hung jury Obama looks like the fool he is.

Basilsbest on November 14, 2009 at 12:29 AM

Giuliani would make a great president.

jhffmn on November 13, 2009 at 6:46 PM

Unfortunately he’s not conservative enough to get elected by the Republican party, afterall he is a RINO.

Norman Blizter on November 13, 2009 at 6:50 PM

One more time.

Mr. Giuliani is more conservative on more issues that many of the GOP candidates, including McCain.

Among his accomplishments in NYC:
1. He LOWERED TAXES, and in conjunction with Pataki. NYC boomed. Please, how is that NOT conservative?
2. He took on crime and won. NYC was cleaned up because he enforced laws already on the books. How is that NOT good?
3. He streamlined NYC government, fired a whole bunch of people, lowered spending precipitously. How is THAT not conservative?
4. He enabled many people to get off welfare and into real jobs in the private sector. How is that not conservative?
5. Although he is pro-abortion, because of his many financial incentives, abortion rates in NYC WENT DOWN.

I’m so sick and tired of the automatic kneejerking when it comes to this man. He had a core mission to get NYC back to prosperity and peace and he did it. He actually kept political promises, too.

This is a case where one could disagree with him about several things, but respect his accomplishments.

Would that he were at the helm of the the current federal spending spree to kill it and lower taxes and return this country to prosperity.

The narrowmindedness of both republicans and conservatives in this matter is frustrating and WRONG.

Mommynator on November 14, 2009 at 3:01 AM

ahem, Isn’t a criminal defendant presumed innocent before the trial begins? Am I missing something??

kringeesmom

Well, for one, HotAir isn’t a court of law, so no presumption of innocence is required.

We’re engaged in a war, a part of that war is winning hearts and minds.

cr66

And that’s why we’re losing. But please, make up your mind, are we at war, or are we fighting crime? It can’t be both.

xblade on November 14, 2009 at 4:14 AM

Rudy and Neil have it absolutely right. This is about finding more ways in which to make BUSH look bad for the tactics that were employed in ferreting out the evil ones responsible for 9/11. This has nothing to do with justice!

I hope someone opens Congressional hearings on this immediately upon return to work Monday.

Call me naive, but can anyone – a 9/11 widow or widower, surviving child or parent or anyone else directly affected by the loss of life or the tragedy of 9/11 overall – sue Eric Holder for the infliction of emotional distress that holding this trial near the site of the original attack may cause them thereby pre-empting it until it goes all the way to the Supreme Court?

Captain Scarlet on November 14, 2009 at 4:33 AM

Sensible thoughts from a high profile NY’er = ‘going nuclear’ to Allah.

F@#$ you Allah. You are a worthless piece of $#!t.

Mr Purple on November 14, 2009 at 7:06 AM

I don’t think this statement by ap is legally correct:

There’s no way they’re letting KSM go. It doesn’t matter what the verdict is or what the judge decides; for reasons of pure national and political survival, Obama and Holder will find a way to reimprison this scum if the trial somehow ends up in acquittal.

This view also rests upon an almost irrational faith in Holder’s and Obama’s dedication to keeping the nation safe. Irrational, because there is no good evidence that this is their highest priority.

In the civilian justice system, the governement takes its best shot, and if it loses, there are no do-overs. The defendant walks. If there is an acquittal in any of these cases, the Court will order the defendant released. Obama and Holder are running a very high stakes gamble.

james23 on November 14, 2009 at 8:14 AM

Weren’t these guys ready to plead guilty and face their justice when Obama & Co inexplicably suspended tribunals? I think that little bit of history creates quite a bit of context here. We had them where we wanted them, but we are instead taking on a risky maneuver. Something ideological rather than rational is afoot here to be sure.

stvnscott on November 14, 2009 at 9:40 AM

There is no downside for Obama or Holder on this one. Bush and those who want to fight rather than SUBMIT will be injured; Obama and his supporters will skate on into another term fist bumping under the table each time another tool for fighting terrorist or noble warrior goes under the wheels of the bus. Bush and all those nasty one’s who support fighting terrorist with the weapons appropriate for armed combat with an enemy – as opposed to the tools for winning the hearts and minds of those who pray five times a day for our demise; curing the mental anguish of the perpetually aggrieved and generally finding some way to SUBMIT rather than fight.

Not one thing Obama cares about is at risk in this trial – and that is the only thing that goes into making decisions.

Unquiet on November 14, 2009 at 10:12 AM

On a day when prominent Republicans are piling on, this one obviously carries a little extra weight.

Others probably brought this up on previous comment pages, but you left one out:

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/notes/sarah-palin/obama-administrations-atrocious-decision/173486643434

But, let’s ignore this and her other comments on national security, policy etc. and focus on Levi here, shall we?

/sar

cs89 on November 14, 2009 at 10:55 AM

This will be the death knell of Obama. He’ll be damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. When a majority of the US population don’t want him doing this, there will be no 2012 for him. Most American’s would rather they waterboard than not.
This is the 2 of them trying to “get” Pres. Bush and VP Cheney..
May the O admin ROT in hell.

reshas1 on November 14, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Decision on Afghan. put off until Dec. BROTHER

reshas1 on November 14, 2009 at 1:21 PM

We should have buckets of pig’s blood handy in this circus they’re calling a court. Just sayin’.

KrazyKewl on November 14, 2009 at 2:07 PM

Wudy is one wascally wabbit. Angry too!

simplesimon on November 14, 2009 at 2:11 PM

“Eric Holder’s a good man.”

Oh Rudy, after all that common sense… how could you !

Yephora on November 14, 2009 at 2:32 PM

while I am incensed by what Obarfa and the Dems are doing, at least its generating serious and intense debate, forcing the question of Islam and Jihad to the forefront…eventually the truth will be no longer possible to ignore or cover up.

This is what the muslims have in store for us if we fail to wake up in time (via atlasshrugs.com).

thinkagain on November 14, 2009 at 6:53 PM

We went through a decade or so of not treating Islamic terrorism as Ats of War. Bin Laden declared war on us, and we didn’t hear it. We were in a state of denial before September 11th. Except that at least before September 11th, the administrations that existed then, didn’t have the experience of September 11th. But I believe that once September 11th happened, Republican and Democrat would never go back to where we were before, in that foolish state of denial.

— Rudy Giuliani

Wes we can!

— Barry

A nation that cannot face it’s enemies is a nation that’s in danger.

— Rudy Giuliani

Loxodonta on November 14, 2009 at 10:11 PM

This decision is all about political ideology. It was BO’s only motivation in making this decision. He believes it will advance his political agenda. It will, but not with the majority of Americans. While the ACLU and hard core leftists are excited about this opportunity to showcase their version “justice” and point out how evil GW was, Main St. USA is going to be further disgusted by BO’s Marxist leadership tactics of trying to cast blame on everyone but himself.
 
This is the beginning of the end for BO. He’s made the fatal mistake that all leftists eventually make. They confuse apathy on the part of Americans for stupidity. This will engage a whole host of apathetic Americans who, as crazy as it seems, have tried to stay out of politics through it all.

ClanDerson on November 14, 2009 at 10:55 PM

The narrowmindedness of both republicans and conservatives in this matter is frustrating and WRONG.

Mommynator on November 14, 2009 at 3:01 AM

Great post, I’m also a Giuliani fan-he was my choice for 08. He understands the nature of the enemy and how to deal with them. He would’ve had Hamas, Hezbollah, the Taliban, Iran’s regime, CAIR, etc all quaking in their boots. Hopefully he’ll run in 2012, cause presently I don’t much like any of the other potential candidates.

thinkagain on November 15, 2009 at 11:11 AM

Obama and those who agree with him, on this issue like many, are traitors to the US.

proconstitution on November 15, 2009 at 2:14 PM

In the video clips, Rudi is on fire; he has his mojo back. It’s been a while.

Phil Byler on November 15, 2009 at 4:44 PM

This decision is about like the bow. It shocks the nation.

It is a page-turner for his administration, no question.

All discussion of bi-partisanship is offically over.

AnninCA on November 15, 2009 at 5:57 PM

All of these reactions ARE FAR TOO CALM!!!!!!

THIS IS SIMPLY FRIKKIN’ INSANITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SUICIDAL FRIKKIN’ INSANITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Political opponents of this MADNESS should be SCREAMING!!!

Not calmly arguing, as if this is some ethereal exerise!!!

Or chuckling or pontificating or reasonging rationistically.

THIS IS SHEER INSANITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

profitsbeard on November 15, 2009 at 6:57 PM

Allahpundit, like many, misses the point, probably because he, like so many, are a victim of a politically incorrect education.

The simple reality is that spies are people who are at war without a uniform.

Anybody remember Nathan Hale, who was tried as a spy….. no? Okay, you caught me, just checking… of course he wasn’t tried at all.

General William Howe, without the form of a trial, gave orders for Nathan Hale’s execution the following morning.

British Engineer, John Montresor, who was present at Hale’s hanging, heard Hale say “I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country.”

KSM is a spy. But we can be more civilized than people were in the past… we can give him a lethal injection and be done with it.

Danzo on November 16, 2009 at 3:20 AM

The thing that is so crazy about this is the reasoning. This idea that we will show the world the greatness of our legal system is insane. This is not going to be a “fair” trial, their guilt is a foregone conclusion. The world will watch us do a Soviet style kangaroo court at the end of which KSM will be executed. When the world sees this disgrace of a trial our legal system will look like a total joke. The other problem is that the administration has said that it would keep KSM in detention regardless of the outcome.

snoopicus on November 16, 2009 at 5:04 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3