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?
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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Then what is the freaking point then!!!
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 7:43 PM
That doesn’t change the fact that he’s wrong when he says the standard is “any doubt”. Of course I think he knows the correct standard is reasonable doubt, he probably just got carried away while making his point.
Certainly shorter than Rudy’s, probably longer than yours.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 7:44 PM
Maybe the families of the 3,000 Americans killed on 9/11? But, heck with them, put them through the wringer again as they watch people responsible for the deaths of their loved ones spew hatred and bile in a VERY public forum against, not only America, but against those who were murdered on that date.
Nice
Fatal on November 13, 2009 at 7:45 PM
The effects of the Community Reinvestment Act were covered up…
No one investigated the run on the banks right before the elections…
“TARP” was passed, but the funds were not used to buy up bad assets, and no one knows where the bulk of the money went…
“Stimulus” and “Porkulus” were passed, without anyone reading the bills…
After saying that he didn’t want to take over Wall Street, the Car Companies, Student Loans, etc., Obama did exactly that…
Obama uses the White House to coordinate the main stream media on a daily basis…
Republicans, Independents, returning Veterans, and anyone else protesting the policies of this Administration are labeled ‘Extremist’, and should be watched…
The United States is plunged into Trillions of dollars of debt by expanding government programs, but the military and needed upgrades in defense are cut…
Obama has time to fly to argue for the Olympics for Chicago, but not to celebrate the fall of the Berlin Wall…
Troops are dying in Afghanistan, while Obama dithers to make a decision…
Thirteen soldiers and an unborn baby are slaughtered and scores wounded by an act of terror on a United States Military base on United States soil, and Obama tells us “not to jump to conclusions”…
And now, the architect of the 9/11 attack will be privy to the civil courts of the United States courtesy of one Barack Hussein Obama…
… Anyone else see a pattern here?
Seven Percent Solution on November 13, 2009 at 7:46 PM
I’ve thought long and hard about this and tried to rationalize why he would be doing something like he’s doing.
You know I’ve heard “fundamentally transform America” talk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvJJP9AYgqU
and the Constitution is a set of “negative rights”, etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkpdNtTgQNM
and about his “Mentor” Frank Marshall Davis being a Communist…..
http://www.dittowire.com/.a/6a010534d2b08f970b010535bc9f4b970b-800wi
But the only reason that I can come up with for someone doing what he’s doing (OBAMACARE, CAP & TRADE, AMNESTY, and NOW THESE TERRORIST NYC TRIALS) is that he is actually trying to destroy this country. We know his word is “remake”.
This is serious folks.
What he did today with the terror trials decision, actually he lets a JURY do it….so he’s really voting “PRESENT” again, is grounds enough.
IT’S TREASON!!!!
PappyD61 on November 13, 2009 at 7:46 PM
KSM’s trial will be moved from NYC to DC
There he can find the jury of his peers
all employed at one place
the White House
macncheez on November 13, 2009 at 7:47 PM
IAgain, back to my Ted Bundy example, no jury would ever acquit the guy, and no appellate court would ever reverse the conviction if he were somehow acquitted. That doesn’t mean we should have just skipped the trial because it would be “pointless”.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 7:48 PM
Obama wins if the terrorists are executed and he wins if they are acquitted on technicalities because he can blame Boooooosh for the waterboarding. Obama HAD to let the justice system takes it’s course for the sake of our country’s image around the world.
What a despicable sack of crap Obama is!
csdeven on November 13, 2009 at 7:48 PM
Throw out the “confession” as it came after “torture.”
And do you really want someone convicted in civilian criminal court simply because “we all know he did it.” That’s even more frightening. We do not convict people here because “we all know he did it,” the state has to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt using evidence. Aand anyway, if there isn’t the evidence, an appeals court will throw out a conviction that doesn’t have evidence to back it up.
rbj on November 13, 2009 at 7:49 PM
Because he was tortured. Confessions are inadmissable.
Juries cannot deliberate on excluded evidence. They must deliberate on the evidence the court allows. All the confessions, wiretaps and evidence obtained without court order and all that is thrown out. Juries cannot accept his confessions, wiretaps or other evidence gained illegally. If they do, a court has a right if not a duty to overturn the conviction.
KSM must be let go no matter how guilty he is…
Holger on November 13, 2009 at 7:49 PM
Hey genius…. except with Ted Bundy we had NO choice to try him in a civilian court. We have a choice KSM. Idiot.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 7:50 PM
Each one? Do you know? Honestly I’m not sure, but I do remember he’s confessed more than once. If he were somehow put on the stand at trial, do you think he’d deny committing the crime? Sure, his counsel will probably advise him not to testify, but I bet he wants to.
Once again, you’re assuming that all of the inculpatory evidence will be excluded. We don’t know that.
If most of it is, the jury can still return a guilty verdict if they so desire.
Right, they can overturn the verdict because if they find it’s not supported by the evidence, but appellate courts generally give a great deal of deference to jury verdicts. Do you really think an appellate court would overturn a guilty verdict in this case?
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 7:55 PM
PappyD61 on November 13, 2009 at 7:46 PM
Damn right!!
gina4 on November 13, 2009 at 7:55 PM
Seven Percent Solution on November 13, 2009 at 7:46 PM
Not gonna be much left after the O is done with us.
huckelberry on November 13, 2009 at 7:58 PM
The Police investigations and subsequent prosecution of Bundy followed the letter of the law. It was a civilian case from the get go. Warrants, the whole spiel. Ted Bundy’s rights were not violated.
Far cry from KSM who was tortured into confessions, evidence was gained illegally through warrantless communication interceptions, illegal searches and seizures, who was routinely abused and held incumunicado and without representation for long periods of time.
Holger on November 13, 2009 at 7:59 PM
This is astonishing. So unbelievable that it only points to what I’ve been saying all along….Obama is trying to destroy this country! All the people in New York who voted for Obama are now going to get what they deserve. Dumbasses! The only problem is it’s my country too, and my kids, and for all you gullable rejects who brought this on our nation, screw you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
gina4 on November 13, 2009 at 7:59 PM
Serious question that I’m hoping (but doubt) you have an answer to:
Why aren’t we giving everyone at Gitmo a civilian trial, if it’s the right thing to do for these five?
BadgerHawk on November 13, 2009 at 7:59 PM
You want to see KSM let go?
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:00 PM
If such a guilty verdict is not supported by the evidence at trial, then an appellate court has a duty to overturn that verdict. Indeed, I would be more worried about living in a country where you can be convicted without such evidence. Appellate courts routinely do overturn convictions they don’t find supported by the evidence. I am a law librarian and I read such cases all the time.
And I believe that KSM at first did deny, it was only last year he confessed. Now if he hasn’t been given his Miranda rights and expressly waived them, then such a confession has to be thrown out. It’s the whole basis for the Miranda warnings.
Plus, what’s his incentive to admit it now? A long, expensive trial would work more in his favor just to cause chaos and hit us up for a few tens of millions of dollars.
rbj on November 13, 2009 at 8:02 PM
He never said that. You are inferring statements that were not implied.
MeatHeadinCA on November 13, 2009 at 8:04 PM
I’m honestly on the fence as to whether it’s the right thing to do. My concern isn’t that they’ll be acquitted, as I’ve said repeatedly in this thread that simply won’t happen. My concern is that national security secrets will be exposed. They’d better be very careful during voir dire, because of a single juror is chosen who’ll squeal about national security secrets after the trial, that’d be disastrous.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 8:05 PM
http://www.facebook.com/sarahpalin?ref=mf#/note.php?note_id=173486643434
This what I would call spitting nails. “Hang ‘em high”
Sarah took the words right out of my mouth.
Clyde5445 on November 13, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Are you kidding? I want to be there at his execution.
I want to see him hang from a rope with no drop, let him kick and strangle. I wish I could’ve waterboarded him!
Doubt it is going to happen now with Obama making a goatfuque of this.
Civilian court, with civilian rules, KSM walks. Either the Jury do their duty and render an acquital because the law demands it or conviction is overturned upon appeal.
Simple as that.
I am holding out that the jury convicts and the case reaches to the supreme court who upholds the conviction and KSM gets soup or rides the lightning a decade after that.
Military court. Two week trial. KSM dangles from the gallows one week later, preferably on live TV.
Holger on November 13, 2009 at 8:08 PM
If he doesn’t, he’ll look like a coward and a turncoat to his fellow jihadist scum. Also, he wants to be a martyr, if he’s denies the committing the crime robbed of that he has nothing at all.
Oh there’s plenty of evidence here.
I’m a law student myself. I wouldn’t say guilty verdicts are overturned by appellate courts “routinely”, but yes it does happen. I just don’t think it would ever happen in this case. I don’t think any appellate court in the country would overturn a guilty verdict. I guess that’s where we differ.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 8:11 PM
Got it. You want to see KSM out on the streets.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:11 PM
The decision to try KSM in civilian court is, as Giuliani says, incompetent.
.
I’m still wondering why we extend and apply the rights of American Citizens to a man caught overseas, and apparently a man who was a combatant at the time.
.
The laws of the US did not and do not apply in Pakistan; how will evidence gathered there be analyzed for admissibility? And since when does US civilian law extend to battlefields or holding areas for captured enemy combatants?
.
There are too many procedural “outs” for the defense, and too much information that either can be excluded, or can be cast in the light of “not obtained legally”.
.
This is going to blow up in Obama’s and Holder’s faces. Whatever the polls said about Obama in 2008-2009, the polls of October 2001 are the ones that apply to Obama now.
.
There’s no doubt of KSM’s guilt. If KSM is not found guilty and sentenced to death, Obama loses. Big.
.
This is indeed political suicide. And it looks like there’s no longer a way out.
.
Exit questions:
.
1. How could a lecturer of Constitutional Law make such mistakes?
.
2. How could someone so politically-savvy and image-conscious make such mistakes?
Arbalest on November 13, 2009 at 8:12 PM
I’m in complete agreement that there will be no way he isn’t convicted (I agree with your whole statement (!) in general).
That’s why I think these are show trials. They’re only prosecuting the guys they know they can get a conviction on. They get to repudiate Bush while still delivering ‘justice’.
It’s a sham, and I haven’t heard anyone on the left be able to explain why it’s not.
BadgerHawk on November 13, 2009 at 8:14 PM
obama is a pathetic pansy – a weak, evil, hate filled monster. He is the ultimate coward and a sniveling piece of shit. He is not American; no true freedom loving American would do these things. The 9.11 families have suffered enough & he dumps this shit onto their heads AFTER he jets off to Asia.
I PHUCKING HATE HIM & hope his every endeavor in his miserable, sorry, tripe filled life fails.
(sorry for the curse words but ****’s are not enough this time)
Ris4victory on November 13, 2009 at 8:14 PM
Note to U.S. troops;
If you’ve got an AQ suspect in your sights, make sure you terminate your target. Otherwise you’ll find yourself on the witness stand trying to defend your actions under the browbeating you’re going to get from some terrorist’s slime-bag scheister attorney. They don’t give a damn about America. They’re only in it for the money. If there’s any true justice, maybe their families and children will perish in the next AQ attack. These jerk-off IDIOTS will bring it upon themselves.
bannedbyhuffpo on November 13, 2009 at 8:16 PM
That explains a lot.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:17 PM
Heh.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 8:19 PM
As soon as Major Nidal Malik Hasan is feeling better, I’m sure he’ll be happy to serve on the jury. Afterall, he’s a peer of KSM, is he not?
Special K on November 13, 2009 at 8:21 PM
BS.
BS.
Poor baby. I guess that’s war for ya, eh?
Patrick S on November 13, 2009 at 8:22 PM
Lawyers are ruining this country.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:22 PM
Libs like to talk to each other about the rest of us.
Libs also like to give out awards to other libs who are especially good at screwing us over.
Libs rave about the movies that other libs make mocking, insulting or tearing us down.
Libs who are judges also like to make judgments from the bench that they think will hurt the rest of us, put us in our place or make our lives more difficult.
So yeah, I could see a Lib judge letting them all go free and even ordering Bush to unlock the cell. All the other Libs in Libland will gush, faint and wet themselves. It would be like a giant cosmic Lib organism all over Libland. And the Lib judge who does it will be a hero to all Libs for evermore, or until our country finally implodes, whichever comes first.
Why? Just because they’re Libs.
JellyToast on November 13, 2009 at 8:23 PM
This is one of the little ironies about this whole issue. Conservatives arguing that he should be tried in a military tribunal also have to argue that Bush’s policy’s were reprehensible. You sound like a Dkos poster here.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 8:24 PM
Alrighty then. So you agree with this guy rbj?
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 8:26 PM
Uh, why? I don’t.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:26 PM
Odumbass will let KSM walk.
txag92 on November 13, 2009 at 8:28 PM
Thank God I live just north of Detroit.
I wouldn’t want to be in New York City when this trial begins.
I’m not a lawyer…I just really, really, get a bad feeling about this.
Really.
Scoreboard44 on November 13, 2009 at 8:29 PM
As someone who works in Manhattan I couldn’t agree with you less on two counts.
One is, Yes, I AM worried about the terror threat despite NYPD training. The police tend to show up after they could do any good, though well armed should a second attack occur immediately afterward.
Two is, I am SO FRIGGIN TIRED of living in a semi-police state every time I take public transportation. Spot bag searches, police dogs, the occasional armed soldiers, all may seem to be the cost of living in today’s world, but it wasn’t so long ago that they were unheard of. Dragging these human cockroaches to NYC will only increase the inconvenience and fear all of us have to go through.
I say we just give in and release them all in their own countries….from a Boeing 757 at 30,000 feet.
Wine_N_Dine on November 13, 2009 at 8:30 PM
Why? I’m assuming you think that the reason most of us don’t want them tried in a civilian court is because all the evil things Bush did to coerce confessions wouldn’t be permissible, but if there’s something else please explain.
BadgerHawk on November 13, 2009 at 8:30 PM
And living just north of Detroit….we know about impending doom.
Good luck folks. This is bad, bad mojo.
Scoreboard44 on November 13, 2009 at 8:31 PM
Got it, you got a fifth grade reading comprehension.
Holger on November 13, 2009 at 8:31 PM
I don’t care about if they put the enhanced interrogation on trial. I think most of the country will hear all the evidence against this scum KSM amd most will say “I’m so glad we waterboarded this piece sh!t!”
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:34 PM
Sorry but that’s what you are arguing in a lawyerese kind of way. My bad if I call you out.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:35 PM
Yeah, but I’m guessing that what a lot of the left who supports this decision thinks is behind us not supporting it. Which is why I’m wondering if crr6 had something else.
BadgerHawk on November 13, 2009 at 8:37 PM
No, Holger never said what you accused Holger of. This seems to be your MO.
MeatHeadinCA on November 13, 2009 at 8:38 PM
But, it is Lose/Lose for America. If they walk, we look stupid and weak. If they are convicted, then it was ‘a show trial before a kangaroo court.’
Lou Budvis on November 13, 2009 at 8:41 PM
I don’t understand what you’re asking.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 8:41 PM
I’m sorry but I can’t imagine the American public throwing a hissy fit about waterboarding a piece of sh!t like KSM. It won’t happen. Maybe in their imaginary dreams the Left thinks this will happen.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:43 PM
Fine I’ll ask you again and answer CLEAR and CONCISE this time. Do you think KSM should be let go?
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:45 PM
No one asked for your input.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:46 PM
Same goes for you.
MeatHeadinCA on November 13, 2009 at 8:48 PM
Racist!
Django on November 13, 2009 at 8:48 PM
New to the internet?
tom on November 13, 2009 at 8:49 PM
Failure to pay his health care premiums?
chickasaw42 on November 13, 2009 at 8:50 PM
You now Holger doesn’t want to answer my question. Oh well.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:53 PM
Can someone explain to me how Holder is going to ask for the
death penalty when New York State abolished the death penalty? ( NYS death penalty was found to be unconstitutional in 2004 and that decision was upheld in
2007)
centre on November 13, 2009 at 8:55 PM
No, we don’t know that.
MeatHeadinCA on November 13, 2009 at 8:56 PM
Point out where I said I want him free? I never did.
I have not argued that I want KSM released. I have argued that Civilian court will have to let him go. Or at they very least throw out a lot of evidence because it was obtained in a manner that is illegal in civilian domestic law. Release on a techincality is very likely.
The Military siezes enemy documents, computers and listens in on their communications all the time, it is part of their job. There is no law against it. All that evidence is technically inadmissable because it is obtained without warrant, but this evidence is admissable in military courts with regards to the enemy, it always has because the military does not need warrants to intercept enemy communications, sieze enemy equipment such as computers or detain enemy combatants. In civilian law, Law Enforcement must have warrants for very nearly everything.
So, if a key piece of evidence comes from an enemy computer taken from an enemy location, it is inadmissable because their was no warrant to sieze it.
I got no problem with what we did to KSM. I wish I could’ve participated. But it is inadmissable in our domestic criminal courts and is very easily a cause to release him on a technicality.
This case may set precedents in domestic criminal law for US citizens that clash with the Bill of Rights, let me put it that way.
Holger on November 13, 2009 at 8:57 PM
Today on NPR they talked about KSM admitting to being the mastermind of 911 BEFORE he was tortured or had water put up his nose.
Could NPR be wrong?
ooonaughtykitty on November 13, 2009 at 8:57 PM
He evaded my question the first time and he’s doing it again.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 8:57 PM
They’re being tried in a federal court, and federal law provides for the death penalty.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 8:58 PM
1) He could have left his computer.
2) Does this sound familiar? Is he dodging?
MeatHeadinCA on November 13, 2009 at 9:00 PM
They’re being tried in a federal court, and federal law provides for the death penalty.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Thanks crr6. Now I can sleep at night.
centre on November 13, 2009 at 9:00 PM
That is why in my second question I asked “should” and not what YOU want.
That all I needed to know.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 9:02 PM
You do realize he’s right, though. The ordinary domestic criminal cannot be treated the way KSM was. That should be quite obvious. How can we argue that KSM is a war criminal and somehow expect him to have the same rights as a domestic criminal?
MeatHeadinCA on November 13, 2009 at 9:05 PM
Probably, or maybe Hasan what’s-his-face. Same function.
Sweet_Thang on November 13, 2009 at 9:07 PM
Yes.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Sorry for the confusion. Two things:
Why?
And,
Can you refute that?
BadgerHawk on November 13, 2009 at 9:08 PM
I think that phrase might be losing it usefulness. They might say, at least Bush caught the guy and all you people have done is screw up.
Terrye on November 13, 2009 at 9:10 PM
I apologize Holger…I thought you were saying something different. My bad. I apologize.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 9:11 PM
crr6:
Bush’s policies were not reprehensible. Not at all. In fact I am surprised at how many of those policies have been adopted by the same cowardly whining little libs who complained about them.
Terrye on November 13, 2009 at 9:12 PM
I hope that all of the Sunday shows make an effort to book Mayor Guiliani and VP Dick Cheney to comment how absurd DOJ’s/Holder’s/Obama’s action here are.
And, Obama is in Asia, so that he doesn’t have to answer questions about this travesty. Manly? Not so much.
bbh on November 13, 2009 at 9:12 PM
Because they need to argue that the evidence is inadmissible. In order to argue the evidence is inadmissible, they need to argue that the evidence was obtained through torture etc. etc.
Define “show trial”. Is it a “show trial” because the result is pretty much a forgone conclusion? That’s true in many cases.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 9:13 PM
Rudy, while leaps and bounds better than Obama, still doesn’t get it vis a vis Islam. Islam IS the problem, Rudy! Why do you think all these terrorists justify their actions with passages from the Koran and Hadith?
LeBron on November 13, 2009 at 9:16 PM
There was never any real doubt that he was the mastermind, in fact the 911 Commission knew that much. And he was not tortured.
Terrye on November 13, 2009 at 9:16 PM
He wasn’t tortured.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 9:19 PM
Dear God. Are you serious advocating what I am thinking you are advocating? You cannot just toss out the Bill of Rights because it suits you.
The Courts have ruled continually, without waver, that anyone charged under our domestic criminal law, has all constitutional protections, even foreigners. Which is why KSM will be released by said Courts unless they through out the Bill of Rights which would set an ugly precedent.
Which is why KSM shouldn’t be charged under the same laws we are subject to as Civilians. Either he goes or bad precedents are set.
Holger on November 13, 2009 at 9:19 PM
The damage is the propaganda. These guys are not going anywhere and I’m sure the NYPD, US marshalls and others can keep a lid on stuff there, that’s not the question. This is the equivalent of having the child rapist over for dinner to sit at mom’s table. It’s an insult. It’s not a matter of a fair or unfair trial. It’s not a matter of escape. It’s a matter of right and wrong. The legality of the case or outcome is moot. It’s the principle and morality. Those are concepts the administration does not understand, or they understand them enough to offend the people who have skin in this game.
Insensitive, insane, and just utterly stupid.
If there was a kid that was teasing one of Obama’s girls at school every day, calling her names, yanking her around or something, do you think the Obama’s would tolerate being forced to have that kid over for dinner every night for four years? Moreover, not saying anything about it.
Stupid.
ted c on November 13, 2009 at 9:20 PM
crr6:
They have a lot of evidence against this guy and the truth is he was not tortured. Water boarding is certainly not pleasant, but I do not believe it is torture. I do realize that certain people love the feeling of moral superiority they get when they sanctimoniously yammer on about the horrors of the Bushies etc, but these are people who would happily lob off your head and dance about your body in manic ghoulish glee.
I don’t doubt that some anti American lefty lawyer will do his darndest to get this poor little terrorist set free because the big bad CIA was so unkind to him, but we all know that some one would shoot him before he got 200 feet from the Court room anyway. And no doubt there would be media stories about violent Americans and their love affair with fire arms after the deed was done.
Terrye on November 13, 2009 at 9:21 PM
Bill of Rights applies to Americans. Not enemies of your country.
ted c on November 13, 2009 at 9:21 PM
They’re only giving trials to guys they know they can convict. You and I seem to be in agreement on that. They are not giving everyone at Gitmo a trial and letting the chips fall where they may.
That makes these show trials.
BadgerHawk on November 13, 2009 at 9:25 PM
This is true and if anyone today believes that George Washington or Thomas Jefferson or Abraham Lincoln or FDR or any other American president or leader in war time would have given someone like this all the rights provided to American citizens they are dreaming. They would have had them hanged after a military tribunal. End of story.
Terrye on November 13, 2009 at 9:25 PM
LOL! Now I think I guess you misunderstood what I said. I was somewhat agree with you…that is why I apologized. He shouldn’t be in civilian courts to be with.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 9:26 PM
I heard a phrase today I had never heard before..
acquittal detention. Think about that.
It is a show trial, because the whole point of this is to give the Obama administration an opportunity to pander to its wacky nutso base while they jerk the Bushies around. It is purely political. and it is disgraceful.
Terrye on November 13, 2009 at 9:28 PM
It would set an ugly precent letting KSM go.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 9:29 PM
Oh, he wasn’t? Great, all the evidence is admissible then.
I suppose it’s a show trial in the sense that it’s partially a calculated move to assert our moral high ground. I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 9:32 PM
Think about this: Before the O J Simpson trial, how many of you thought that it was a “slam dunk” for the prosecution? Here we have another on on them there “slam dunk” cases.
Pelayo on November 13, 2009 at 9:35 PM
I should clarify where I agree with you. I don’t agree with that KSM should be let go. I do agree with that he should be charged in civilian courts….which is what i think you were first saying.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 9:36 PM
Ugh. Meant to write
I do agree with that he shouldn’t be charged in civilian courts….which is what i think you were first saying.
Ok enough clarifying.
terryannonline on November 13, 2009 at 9:37 PM
So you support us only giving trials to pre-selected individuals based off of the evidence against them, and holding everyone else indefinitely?
Because I think that would be a hard position to defend from a moral position.
BadgerHawk on November 13, 2009 at 9:39 PM
crr6, the “moral high ground” is going to get a lot of Americans killed. If those people who were pulverized when the towers fell could talk, I think they would tells us how wonderful it is to have the moral high ground.
Pelayo on November 13, 2009 at 9:40 PM
8 years after the WTC event, and the terrorists are still breathing. There’s your problem.
docdave on November 13, 2009 at 9:41 PM
It’s more defensible than not giving any trials. Or giving a few trials by military tribunals.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 9:43 PM
I guess we just are going to have to fundamentally disagree on that point.
crr6 on November 13, 2009 at 9:44 PM
crr6:
If Obama had just left well enough alone, this murderer would have been tried and sentenced in a military commission. He would have had a lawyer and more of an opportunity to defend himself than he ever gave any of his thousands of victims. I realize that folks such as yourself are all excited about the whole socalled torture issue, but keep in mind that they knew who and what this man was before they water boarded him. They did not need to do that to get a confession, he was proud of the role he played in the WTC attack. They did it to stop other attacks.
So, would you like to be one of the thousands of people who would be dead today if they had not gotten that information?
Terrye on November 13, 2009 at 9:49 PM
That’s a pretty serious side-step. I’m looking for a legitimate answer as to how the administration can only give trials to guys they know they can convict and not call that a show trial.
I personally don’t find any rational for giving any of these guys a civilian trial. But I’m interested in hearing one that isn’t a complete crock of sh!t. And, respectfully, you haven’t provided one, I don’t think you can, and I think you’re fully aware of that fact.
BadgerHawk on November 13, 2009 at 9:51 PM
And what is more, Obama has actually made sure that he has the right to use the exact same tactics if he deems it necessary…he is just counting on the fact that either he won’t have to, or he will get a pass if he does…or he can just send them to someplace like Jordan and let them do it for him.
Terrye on November 13, 2009 at 9:51 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »