Then 9/11 came under Bush’s watch (though it was planned – and financed – under that other guy’s watch).

This will be a monkey trial, with Bush and Cheney as the defacto defendants. Secrets will get out, and Bin Laden will be informed again (see trial of blind sheik). These asshats are willing to get Americans killed to trash the GOP (who the left see’s as the real enemy).

And America will be attacked again. Who knows how many how many will die this time. Please, oh please, let it be in one of our liberal bastions. That would just be like they lanced a big pimple, anyway.

I doubt it. The pressure here is to win a conviction. Stakes are too high for political grandstanding.

Bleeds Blue on November 18, 2009 at 12:29 PM

These dirtbags were set to plead guilty in a military commission 11 months ago, until this administration decided to put a hold on the entire thing.

How would that not have been a guaranteed conviction?

Holder: I picked criminal court because … I’m really smart

Somehow I imagine an underachieving 5th grader is smarter than you bub.

maverick muse on November 19, 2009 at 8:59 AM

roger that

Keep f**kin that chicken.

Sincerely,

OHV

When asked what actions inspired his decision Holder replied:

“A coyote in a Road Runner episode.”. “I watch a lot of “Law and Order”. I also greatly admire Lionel Hutz”

viking01 on November 19, 2009 at 10:04 AM

Is it legal for him to say that?

the_nile on November 18, 2009 at 12:42 PM

Sure it’s “legal”. I’m sure KSM’s attorney wants Barry and Holder to keep talking. Heaven forbid we jump to any conclusions about the outcome.

Members of Congress have it in their power to put an end to this lunacy right now. If they don’t, they are as complicit in Mohammed’s civilian trial as the president. Article I, Section 8, and Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution give Congress the power to establish the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts and to create exceptions to that jurisdiction.

Congress could pass a statute limiting federal court jurisdiction to individuals not subject to trial before a military tribunal. if not, then they have more Rights then our own military.
Ah, the unexpected Consequences

The libs want to fight terrorism with police, not military.

Phil-351 on November 19, 2009 at 10:02 AM

They are the most twisted sophists ever to corrupt the face of the earth. Those libs would also unleash a authoritarian militarized police force (DHS) against conservative citizens they already are depriving of Constitutional Rights extended to international terrorists.

“A coyote in a Road Runner episode.”

Aside from the fact that everything about this case was and is always going to be political, I’m curious what the expected political benefits of this trial are?

Bleeds Blue on November 18, 2009 at 12:22 PM

This is easy to understand. the Liberal spin on terrorism is that it is a criminal act, not an act of war. Trying them in civilian court is only to reinforce that line of thought. The libs want to fight terrorism with police, not military. If they try them in military tribunals, they reinforce the Bush stance. Simple.

I firmly believe they are full of crap, and will do more harm than good, especially since they have to show some sort of constitutional protection of the defendants to pull this off. That to me is a bastardization of or legal system, and may blow up in thier faces, leaving us covered in thier feces.

ERIC HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL: I don’t know. I’d have to look at that. I think that, you know, the determination I’ve made –

GRAHAM: We’re making history here, Mr. Attorney General. I’ll answer it for you. The answer is no.

HOLDER: Well, I think –

GRAHAM: The Ghailani case — he was indicted for the Cole bombing before 9/11. And I didn’t object to it going into federal court. But I’m telling you right now. We’re making history and we’re making bad history. And let me tell you why.

When asked why, Clinton responded, “Because I could.”

YES WE CAN!
THAT’S CHANGE NYC CAN BELIEVE IN?

America refuses to accept the Obama-Holder decision.

The Bennett bet is that Holder’s going to be forced to reconsider his death wish on America.–maverick muse on November 19, 2009 at 8:08 AM

I sure hope so!–cmsinaz on November 19, 2009 at 8:19 AM

Ironically, via his own decision, Holder has served his own head to America on a silver platter.

He must step down. He has lost ALL credibility. America will NOT swallow this, no matter how Obama serves it. And if Obama remains tied to Holder, Obama’s going to provide America with his own impeachment.

Johan Klaus on November 19, 2009 at 12:22 AM

My point being, though the Military does not function according to Constitutional Civil Law, it functions under the Constitution according to their own construct as you both point out their unique status, rules and traditions.

Just as our Constitutional Rights necessarily apply to US Citizens (not foreigners), protection according to international treaties like the Geneva Convention apply according to that treaty, and no further just as no less than what the treaty stipulates.

A Constitutional military tribunal, what the lib idiots wanted, is an oxymoron.

The military operates under the UCMJ specifically because it does not operate under the Constitution!

DSchoen on November 18, 2009 at 4:37 PM

The military is definitly not a democracy.

Johan Klaus on November 19, 2009 at 12:22 AM

On the contrary, our Military operates WITHIN the Constitutional Republic precisely as it has to date since our Revolution, the Great Cause, and never as a democracy. Even our Constitutional Republic that the USA exists as amalgamates a democratic republic. Not every segment within our government operates under the same circumstances. Our Military organized subsequently to our Declaration of Independence, but predates our Constitution. Hence, the Military has its own construct and regimen. The Constitution that was defined years following our victory against subjugation by the British monarchy and parliament, made provisions for our Military to function as a proper military force under the tradition of authority as vested by the Constitution.

Btw, Sen. Graham was a military lawyer in the Air Force and speaks as one with authority according to the LAW.

Holder, AG, is an ACLU wannabe big shot who bit off more than he can legitimately chew, and who is effect functioning HIMSELF as a terrorist within the construct of our Constitutional Republic, destroying the balance of powers, destroying the function of the Judicial Branch and terrorizing the American citizenry with his own radical agenda.

Pres. Obama is TAINTING the evidence against terrorists by calling legal harsh interrogation techniques “torture”, paving the way for the dismissal of evidence as “tainted” just as Bill Ayers’ prosecution was dismissed because his lawyers argued evidence to convict had been “tainted”.

COWARD HOLDER
COWARD OBAMA
Traitors of Justice

How are those NYC liberal progressives embracing their vote for CHANGE?! How does “We will NEVER forget” mesh with Obama’s “Quit complaining and get in line” antipathy for America expressed by his administration’s conspiracy to coerce a civil trial for the terrorist who masterminded and participated in the destruction of 9/11/01? Liberalism is a mental disorder. The NYC liberal voters bear the onus to right their ship and nip this ACLU travesty in the bud. They want closure, they’d better rope in and corral their own madmen and prevent their own loose canons from unleashing MORE evil.

Obama failed to chest his cards on this gamble. This Obama/Holder determination to destroy our Judicial Branch will in turn destroy our entire nation’s self defense. And though Obama, Inc. hold at the moment the keys of authority, they do NOT have popular support, and they do NOT stand on the law. Rather, Obama is burning the law and fiddling in Asia while our nation burns as if he won’t get scorched.

Now that’s hard-hitting journalism.