Obamateurism of the Day

posted at 8:05 am on November 20, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

You knew we would come back to this one, right? Be sure to read Allahpundit’s takedown from Wednesday, but Barack Obama’s effort to sell federal-court trials for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four of his closest friends as both fair and convictions a foregone conclusion had even NBC scratching its head:

NBC: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — can you understand why it is offensive to some for this terrorist to get all the legal privileges of any American citizen?

Obama: I don’t think it will be offensive at all when he’s convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him.

NBC: But having that kind of confidence of a conviction — I mean one of the purposes of doing — going to the Justice Department and not military court is to show of the the world our fairness in our court system.

Obama: Well —

NBC: But you also just said that he was going to be convicted and given the death penalty.

Obama: Look — what I said was people will not be offended if that’s the outcome. I’m not pre-judging, I’m not going to be in that courtroom, that’s the job of prosecutors, the judge and the jury.

If convictions in the federal courts are going to be an inevitable result, then how does that show the world the fairness of our court system?  Obama seems blissfully oblivious to that contradiction until NBC points it out.  But even apart from that, Obama — and for that matter Eric Holder — never explain why it’s such a high priority to turn KSM’s adjudication into a multiyear advertisement for how groovy the American court system can be.

Nor, for that matter, does Obama satisfactorily explain in that context why KSM and the other four 9/11 plotters get a federal trial, but al-Nashiri and dozens of other Gitmo detainees will get the military tribunals that Congress wanted for all of them, KSM included.  Obama implies that the rest of the detainees will get something other than “fairness in our court system” because the others attacked military targets rather than civilian, which means that if terrorists really want the fairest treatment from the US, they should always attack civilians rather than our military.

Curious incentive system Obama has set up.

Got an Obamateurism of the Day? If you see a foul-up by Barack Obama, e-mail it to me at obamaisms@edmorrissey.com with the quote and the link to the Obamateurism. I’ll post the best Obamateurisms on a daily basis, depending on how many I receive. Include a link to your blog, and I’ll give some link love as well. And unlike Slate, I promise to end the feature when Barack Obama leaves office.

Illustrations by Chris Muir of Day by Day. Be sure to read the adventures of Sam, Zed, Damon, and Jan every day!


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

All hail the King!

blatantblue on November 20, 2009 at 8:11 AM

After zero and holder had come out and said this, they need to scrap this trial and do a military tribunal. This is probably what gets him off the hook. This is unheard of in our justice system for the president to come out and say this.

Brat4life on November 20, 2009 at 8:12 AM

O/T important BREAKING NEWS….

Global Warming complete and total Hoax

Breaking News Story: CRU has apparently been hacked – hundreds of files released
Watts Up With That? ^ | 19/11/2009 | Anthony Watts

Posted on Friday, November 20, 2009 1:39:35 AM by jsh3180

UPDATE: Response from CRU in interview with another website, see end of this post.

The details on this are still sketchy, we’ll probably never know what went on. But it appears that University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit has been hacked and many many files have been released by the hacker or person unknown.

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/annrep93/cru.jpg

UPDATED: Original image was for Met Office – corrected This image source: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk

I’m currently traveling and writing this from an airport, but here is what I know so far:

An unknown person put postings on some climate skeptic websites that advertised an FTP file on a Russian FTP server, here is the message that was placed on the Air Vent today:

We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps.

We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents

The file was large, about 61 megabytes, containing hundreds of files.

It contained data, code, and emails from Phil Jones at CRU to and from many people.

I’ve seen the file, it appears to be genuine and from CRU. Others who have seen it concur- it appears genuine. There are so many files it appears unlikely that it is a hoax. The effort would be too great.

doriangrey on November 20, 2009 at 8:14 AM

Queen of Hearts: Now then, are you ready for your sentence?
Alice: But there has to be a verdict first.
Queen of Hearts: Sentence first! Verdict afterwards.
Alice: But that just isn’t the way.
Queen of Hearts: [shouting] All ways are…!
Alice: …your ways, your Majesty.

Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll

Wethal on November 20, 2009 at 8:14 AM

Obama seems blissfully oblivious

Yes.

ladyingray on November 20, 2009 at 8:16 AM

Obama’s supposed to be some kind of legal genius. And yet, he is trying to give our constitutional rights to enemy combatants. Treasonous.

kingsjester on November 20, 2009 at 8:17 AM

Why isn’t the Pentagon considered a military target? New York was not the only place hit.

Bobbi on November 20, 2009 at 8:17 AM

I still think this is all a waste of time and tax payer dollars. They are going to plead guilty!!! They are not going to stand infront of a judge and plead innocent given the fact that the world is going to be watching. If they did they would defeat their purpose of jihad and becoming martyrs. Killing “infidels” is their only purpose. Not to mention the fact that if they did plead innocent they would not only bring shame to AQ but, also to the practice of jihad and their families would have to live with the shame for eternity…if they are allowed to live at all. Families are paid by the terrorists to allow their young sons and sometimes daughters to preform suicide bombings. If these guys families were paid do you really think AQ has a “re-payment” plan…sure they do…but it’ll cost you your head. Literally!

When they plead guilty there is no need for a trial.

milwife88 on November 20, 2009 at 8:17 AM

Obama seems blissfully oblivious

you could say that he’s been this way since the beginning of his term and continues to be

CLUELESS on how he sounds to folks

cmsinaz on November 20, 2009 at 8:18 AM

Gee, why did we get such an ignoramus from a red-neck Alaska type state rather than a constitutional law professor? Oh wait, we did.

There is a reason why parties to a trial say “no comment.”

Dear Liar has absolutely no clue as to how to act as president. The sadly terrifying thing is that may be the only thing to save us from a truly fascist–socialist state.

rbj on November 20, 2009 at 8:18 AM

Obama: I don’t think it will be offensive at all when he’s convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him.

That’s it! Case closed! Utterly tainted jury pool when the POTUS announces the verdict and sentence before a trial even begins and there is no way KSM, et al. can get a “fair” trial under our legal system.

Pretty damn smart lawyer this Obama guy!

Trafalgar on November 20, 2009 at 8:19 AM

This is what happens when you use affirmative action to push kids through law school who just ain’t that bright.

Obama could have been a very successful vacuum cleaner salesman, but no, he was told to ‘aim higher’.

EnglishMike on November 20, 2009 at 8:19 AM

What a blithering idiot!

mizflame98 on November 20, 2009 at 8:21 AM

I don’t give a flip about what the rest of the world thinks of our court system. My land, how loathsome is the left.

DrMagnolias on November 20, 2009 at 8:21 AM

Let me be clear….

cmsinaz on November 20, 2009 at 8:22 AM

The man is an absolute dolt. Thank you enlightened voters . . . you really stuck it to us this time.

rplat on November 20, 2009 at 8:23 AM

KSM is innocent until proven guilty…an ugly statement, but bringing into civilian court brings that statement out.
The president should understand, and I would love to get someone to get him to admit…KSM is innocent until proven guilty…my God, that is a horrible sentence to post.

right2bright on November 20, 2009 at 8:23 AM

Why are they doing this?

ronsfi on November 20, 2009 at 8:26 AM

I’ve never heard any evidence that world wide, there was doubt in the fairness of the US court system.

MarkTheGreat on November 20, 2009 at 8:28 AM

Obama seems blissfully oblivious

Seems?????

MarkTheGreat on November 20, 2009 at 8:29 AM

Someone should ask Ogabe why, if this is a law enforcement matter, that he is allowing Predator drone strikes against people like KSM and why we aren’t launching Hellfire’s against gang members or mafia kingpins here in America.

Bishop on November 20, 2009 at 8:29 AM

Dear Mr. President, please explain why does KSM and the other four 9/11 plotters get a federal trial, but al-Nashiri and dozens of other Gitmo detainees will get the military tribunals?

slp on November 20, 2009 at 8:31 AM

Oh, please – this is so easy to understand:

Under the reign of Obamao, everyone is guilty until proven innocent. And even then, it won’t matter.

Does that clear it up for everyone?

Now, everyone line up, single file, so that ye may be judged…

Timothy S. Carlson on November 20, 2009 at 8:31 AM

Why are they doing this?

ronsfi on November 20, 2009 at 8:26 AM

To put the Bush Administration on trial for War Crimes… period… End of story…

doriangrey on November 20, 2009 at 8:32 AM

Why are they doing this?

ronsfi on November 20, 2009 at 8:26 AM

Part of dismantling America plan.

OmahaConservative on November 20, 2009 at 8:32 AM

I think Obama’s reason for doing this is: To embarrass and shame the previous administration and our country by revealing interrogation techniques and espionage secrets, thereby showing the Islamists that we now have a leader who is willing to sit across a diplomatic table and talk to them. It seems like Mr. President cares more for the perceived “rights” of the Islamists that he does for the actual right for justice for the victims and their families.

kingsjester on November 20, 2009 at 8:32 AM

If convictions in the federal courts are going to be an inevitable result, then how does that show the world the fairness of our court system?

Well you have to read Kafka’s The Trial to understand Absurdity, Paradox, Futility and the finer points of BACKASSWARDNESS.

Geochelone on November 20, 2009 at 8:33 AM

kingsjester on November 20, 2009 at 8:32 AM

spot on

cmsinaz on November 20, 2009 at 8:34 AM

My fourteen year old has a better understanding of the court system than this ‘constitutional scholar’! He is too dangerous for words…

libertylady on November 20, 2009 at 8:34 AM

It won’t be a show trial – show trial.

Caper29 on November 20, 2009 at 8:35 AM

Dear Mr. President, please explain why does KSM and the other four 9/11 plotters get a federal trial, but al-Nashiri and dozens of other Gitmo detainees will get the military tribunals?

slp on November 20, 2009 at 8:31 AM

Luck of the draw… Or most likely, they are the ones with the highest name recognition. Make no mistake about it though, this is not a trial of KSM, it is a sneaky underhanded deceitful way of putting Bush and Cheney and their administration on trial for War Crimes.

doriangrey on November 20, 2009 at 8:35 AM

Do I understand this correctly: the POTUS and AG both state publicly that the defendants are guilty. Grounds for a mistrial. Right? Or am I still dreaming…

winfield on November 20, 2009 at 8:37 AM

I think Obama’s reason for doing this is: To embarrass and shame the previous administration and our country by revealing interrogation techniques and espionage secrets, thereby showing the Islamists that we now have a leader who is willing to sit across a diplomatic table and talk to them. It seems like Mr. President cares more for the perceived “rights” of the Islamists that he does for the actual right for justice for the victims and their families.

kingsjester on November 20, 2009 at 8:32 AM

And I think if Obama and Holder insist on continuing down this path that the next Republican President will have little choice but to put Obama and Holder on trial for TREASON…

doriangrey on November 20, 2009 at 8:37 AM

I’m having a hard time understanding how bad policy is an Obamateurism.

highhopes on November 20, 2009 at 8:37 AM

Look — what I said was people will not be offended if that’s the outcome. I’m not pre-judging, I’m not going to be in that courtroom, that’s the job of prosecutors, the judge and the jury.

-Barry

So its the job of the prosecutors, the judge and the jury to PREJUDGE?

And this Clown is a Lawyer? Sheeesh.

Geochelone on November 20, 2009 at 8:38 AM

Do I understand this correctly: the POTUS and AG both state publicly that the defendants are guilty. Grounds for a mistrial. Right? Or am I still dreaming…

winfield on November 20, 2009 at 8:37 AM

If the guilt is established, why hold a civil trial in the first place?

highhopes on November 20, 2009 at 8:38 AM

Do I understand this correctly: the POTUS and AG both state publicly that the defendants are guilty. Grounds for a mistrial. Right? Or am I still dreaming…

winfield on November 20, 2009 at 8:37 AM

You are not dreaming, you are correct… The legal term is Prejudicing the Jury, also known as Poisoning the Jury, or Fruit of the Poison Tree…

doriangrey on November 20, 2009 at 8:39 AM

And I think if Obama and Holder insist on continuing down this path that the next Republican President will have little choice but to put Obama and Holder on trial for TREASON…

doriangrey on November 20, 2009 at 8:37 AM

True but this incident will only be a throw away charge on a much more comprehensive list of ways they have betrayed the nation.

highhopes on November 20, 2009 at 8:40 AM

highhopes on November 20, 2009 at 8:37 AM

I believe it is the way he handled himself in the interview, pre-judging

cmsinaz on November 20, 2009 at 8:40 AM

OT
Nebraska posters and readers, please fax Senator Ben Nelson today to vote no on the cloture vote tomorrow at 402-476-8753. His phones are full, so please fax him.

yoda on November 20, 2009 at 8:40 AM

If the guilt is established, why hold a civil trial in the first place?

highhopes on November 20, 2009 at 8:38 AM

For the Discovery phase… This allows Obama and Holder to put the Bush Administration on trial…

doriangrey on November 20, 2009 at 8:41 AM

KSM should be thanking his lucky stars he hasn’t quit the oxygen habit.

There are NO rights afforded murders from other countries fighting out of uniform. Nor should there ever be.

DavidM on November 20, 2009 at 8:42 AM

OT
Nebraska posters and readers, please fax Senator Ben Nelson today to vote no on the cloture vote tomorrow at 402-476-8753. His phones are full, so please fax him.

yoda on November 20, 2009 at 8:40 AM

Done.

OmahaConservative on November 20, 2009 at 8:43 AM

the “diplomacy of deference” is just weak. why doesn’t Bambi say out loud & in plain language (as he seems to say to NBC):

This terrorist is a Islamic fanatic that plotted to kill 3,000 Americans. Because he has admitted his guilt with no remorse, we will execute him.

Do we care if there are Libs in this country or the world that don’t understand the concept of protecting our own & swift justice.

kelley in virginia on November 20, 2009 at 8:44 AM

I’m not pre-judging, I’m not going to be in that courtroom, that’s the job of prosecutors, the judge and the jury.

LOL. What an idiot.

LibTired on November 20, 2009 at 8:45 AM

dorian: Bambi might be prejudicing the jury, but “fruit of the poison tree” refers to evidence offered that is a result of a breach in a fundamental right.

kelley in virginia on November 20, 2009 at 8:46 AM

Of course, we could just follow history as in the Lincoln assasination, when they forced all the non-military defendents into a military trial, and denied every one of their lawyers objections, while sustaining every one of the prosecutor’s objections – a real comedy of justice. (No, I’m a Yankee)

The tone was set by the Secretary of War (a close Lincoln friend) the morning after the assassination when he said that he wanted them all “tried and buried in three days.”

Don L on November 20, 2009 at 8:46 AM

Obama: I don’t think it will be offensive at all when he’s convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him.

Surprised the U.N. hasn’t already chimed in about human rights abuses against the terrorists.

fourdeucer on November 20, 2009 at 8:49 AM

Remember how when this story first broke people thought this was some way for President Obama to end up letting some of these guys go?

Yeah, there’s no way these guys are every going free, no matter what happens in civilian court.

Show trials.

BadgerHawk on November 20, 2009 at 8:50 AM

In the same conversation he says KSM will get the death penalty but he is not pre-judging. His statements are now expiring in record time.

sherry on November 20, 2009 at 8:50 AM

Done.
OmahaConservative on November 20, 2009 at 8:43 AM

I knew I could count on you!!!! He is out in 2012 if he votes to let this come to the floor. ((( :::

Let’s pray Senator Nelson thinks of Nebraska voters first and not the party.

yoda on November 20, 2009 at 8:51 AM

I believe it is the way he handled himself in the interview, pre-judging

cmsinaz on November 20, 2009 at 8:40 AM

OH! I guess the fact that the filthy liar has his understanding of the law from Law and Order makes such statements Obamatuerism worthy! :-0

highhopes on November 20, 2009 at 8:51 AM

If convictions in the federal courts are going to be an inevitable result, then how does that show the world the fairness of our court system?

This is simply fallacious logic on the part of a “constitutional lawyer?”

Obama: We have a predefined end result (death penalty), now let’s give a “fair trial” and “sentencing” as a means to get to our predetermined end result….

sounds like how they handle elections…

2008 Election: We have a predefined election result (victory), now let’s hold an “election” as a means to get to our predetermined end result (enter ACORN)…

Where in the name of truth and logic does this guy arrive at these types of arguments?

ted c on November 20, 2009 at 8:51 AM

KSM is innocent until proven guilty…an ugly statement, but bringing into civilian court brings that statement out.
The president should understand, and I would love to get someone to get him to admit…KSM is innocent until proven guilty…my God, that is a horrible sentence to post.

right2bright on November 20, 2009 at 8:23 AM

But you’re absolutely correct, he is now by law presumed to be innocent. We also have the situation where both the leader of the free world — talk about a horrible thing to post — and the nation’s chief legal officer, the AG, have publicly pronounced KSM guilty, thus tainting the jury pool, a point no doubt his attorneys will be raising at every level of the proceeding.

TXUS on November 20, 2009 at 8:52 AM

fourdeucer on November 20, 2009 at 8:49 AM

just wait…there is still time for that…

cmsinaz on November 20, 2009 at 8:52 AM

Everything barry touches turns to Schmidt.

Geochelone on November 20, 2009 at 8:53 AM

For the Discovery phase… This allows Obama and Holder to put the Bush Administration on trial…

doriangrey on November 20, 2009 at 8:41 AM

IMO, that dog don’t hunt. The public isn’t going to abide by prosecuting the previous administration and the filthy lying coward had better be very careful about setting the precedent that the current adminstration can go out after the previous one. Like him or hate him, GWB ran a much more ethical administration than what we’ve seen this past year.

highhopes on November 20, 2009 at 8:53 AM

I’m having a hard time understanding how bad policy is an Obamateurism.

highhopes on November 20, 2009 at 8:37 AM

The constitutional lawyer not understanding how the President of the United States declaring a guy will be convicted before the trials starts is grounds for a mistrial is the Obamateurism.

BadgerHawk on November 20, 2009 at 8:54 AM

Did anyone see Holder get grilled on this one the other day. Oreilly said Holder looked like a third grader answering these questions about KSM.

I took it as an insult….. to third graders…

ted c on November 20, 2009 at 8:54 AM

Attack the military – Get a Military Tribunal

Attack a civilian target – Get better treatment in a civilian court

Attack a elementary school – Get tried as a minor in juvinile court!

gridlock2 on November 20, 2009 at 8:54 AM

highhopes on November 20, 2009 at 8:51 AM

yepper

cmsinaz on November 20, 2009 at 8:56 AM

The White House is being run by a gaggle of buffoons. That’s a horrible sentence to post too but every day seems to bring a new reason to post it.

scalleywag on November 20, 2009 at 8:56 AM

They are doing this as a distraction.

They hope that they can get people all charged up about President Bush, torture and Abu Graib all over again. Those were great days for the left. They didn’t have to govern, and nobody asked any questions.

They want those days back again, so they are going to have these trials in civilian court.

gridlock2 on November 20, 2009 at 8:56 AM

gridlock2 on November 20, 2009 at 8:54 AM

blow up a bridge somewhere or a tunnel and get a traffic ticket….

Obamajustice…

ted c on November 20, 2009 at 8:56 AM

Our civilian court system grants rights to the accused. The first and basic right is to a fair trial. How in God’s name can KSM get a fair trial in NYC when the POTUS and the AG have both prejudiced the already prejudiced jury?

The case would have to be thrown out. Honestly, I think this is just a distraction to keep our guard down on HC reform and capntrade.

jbh45 on November 20, 2009 at 8:56 AM

KSM is innocent until proven guilty

One thing that I keep thinking about is Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals: make the other side live up to their rules. This is a juvenile line of reasoning but it has sustained liberals for a long time.

Obama would also like to say that we are not at war, although we are.

Liberals always come back to the theme that we have to prove (to ourselves? some unseen audience?) that the U.S. is a special country, or failing that that we are all hypocrites and no better than…Angola, say. “If your justice system is so great, it should be able to handle KSM.”

In other words, liberals refuse to accept the fact of American exceptionalism and demand constant proofs. They will never be satisfied; they will always doubt America, and the proofs (in this case the farcical trial of savage terrorist) end up being as exercises in national self-delusion.

GTR640 on November 20, 2009 at 8:57 AM

Obviously you miss the spirit of Obama’s legal genius…

Always suck up to the leftist professor and convince him he’s never wrong. Spend hours on your knees convincing leftist professor that he’s an utterly irresistable genius. Learn to spend 4000 words anytime 40 would work just fine. Hope for best.

Griz on November 20, 2009 at 8:58 AM

IMO, that dog don’t hunt. The public isn’t going to abide by prosecuting the previous administration and the filthy lying coward had better be very careful about setting the precedent that the current adminstration can go out after the previous one. Like him or hate him, GWB ran a much more ethical administration than what we’ve seen this past year.

highhopes on November 20, 2009 at 8:53 AM

First of all, Obam and the Democrat dont give a rats a$$ what the American people will or will not stand for, healthcare Cap and Trade Porkulus? Second of all that is the reason they are putting KSM on trial, so they can pretend that they are not putting bush on trial….

doriangrey on November 20, 2009 at 8:59 AM

Nah, I’m liking yesterday’s “accounting is an inexact science”
Do not question the ‘Won’. Those rascally republicans are mean and just waiting to find something wrong.
The smartest power crowd apparently forgot to leave their calculators and list of districts out for the sun to recharge.

Blacksmith8 on November 20, 2009 at 9:01 AM

referring to gridlock above: you know, many Libs are still worked up about waterboarding blah blah. But after Hasan shot up Ft Hood & it is coming to light that he was an Islamic jihadist, people are impatient with the coddling of terrorists attitude.

As I told a friend on his way to Afghanistan, “don’t bring us any detainees.” he grinned. He used to be on the USArmy rifle team so I presume he is a good shot.

kelley in virginia on November 20, 2009 at 9:02 AM

O/T important BREAKING NEWS….

Global Warming complete and total Hoax

Breaking News Story: CRU has apparently been hacked – hundreds of files released
Watts Up With That? ^ | 19/11/2009 | Anthony Watts

Posted on Friday, November 20, 2009 1:39:35 AM by jsh3180

UPDATE: Response from CRU in interview with another website, see end of this post.

The details on this are still sketchy, we’ll probably never know what went on. But it appears that University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit has been hacked and many many files have been released by the hacker or person unknown.

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/annrep93/cru.jpg

UPDATED: Original image was for Met Office – corrected This image source: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk

I’m currently traveling and writing this from an airport, but here is what I know so far:

An unknown person put postings on some climate skeptic websites that advertised an FTP file on a Russian FTP server, here is the message that was placed on the Air Vent today:

We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps.

We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents

The file was large, about 61 megabytes, containing hundreds of files.

It contained data, code, and emails from Phil Jones at CRU to and from many people.

I’ve seen the file, it appears to be genuine and from CRU. Others who have seen it concur- it appears genuine. There are so many files it appears unlikely that it is a hoax. The effort would be too great.

doriangrey on November 20, 2009 at 8:14 AM

This is huge news. They have been exposed.

True_King on November 20, 2009 at 9:03 AM

Didn’t Holder say as much not too long ago?

They should have sent KSM here to to Texas. We’ve had three executions this week alone.

madmonkphotog on November 20, 2009 at 9:04 AM

you are right about that Dorian. The Bambi administration, which I take to include Pelosi & Reid, really doesn’t care. do they even look at the national poll #s?

kelley in virginia on November 20, 2009 at 9:04 AM

I knew I could count on you!!!! He is out in 2012 if he votes to let this come to the floor. ((( :::

Let’s pray Senator Nelson thinks of Nebraska voters first and not the party.

yoda on November 20, 2009 at 8:51 AM

My prayers are that he votes against and is still defeated in 2012. ; )

OmahaConservative on November 20, 2009 at 9:04 AM

Maybe it’s time for a ‘Destroying America Move of the Day’- they seem to be more common than true obamateurisms.

Monica on November 20, 2009 at 9:10 AM

I love how he says, “what I said was…” instead of “what I meant was…”

It may have been what he meant, but that’s not what he said.

JohnJ on November 20, 2009 at 9:14 AM

Going from “what I meant was…” to “what I said was…” shifts the burden to the listener. “I said it right, so it’s your fault for misunderstanding me.”

Absolute failure to take responsibility for himself.

JohnJ on November 20, 2009 at 9:15 AM

My prayers are that he votes against and is still defeated in 2012. ; )

OmahaConservative on November 20, 2009 at 9:04 AM

Let’s hope he has enough sense to think about Nebraska. You can bet, he is getting his morning call from Reid and the President….he seems to like the attention from the top.
I can guarantee Senator Nelson will get some attention from the Nebraska voters if he votes yes tomorrow.

yoda on November 20, 2009 at 9:16 AM

Sounds like TOTUS was malfunctioning in this interview….

rockmom on November 20, 2009 at 9:17 AM

the idiot boy precedent strikes again, and again, and again…….sigh……. How did we get to this point?

clinker46 on November 20, 2009 at 9:17 AM

He lied about what he’d just said. Or was that nuance?

Drained Brain on November 20, 2009 at 9:21 AM

I can guarantee Senator Nelson will get some attention from the Nebraska voters if he votes yes tomorrow.

yoda on November 20, 2009 at 9:16 AM

I just got through on the Lincoln number (402) 441-4600.

I very politely told the young lady that if Sen. Nelson doesn’t vote no on the cloture vote, I will spend every penny I have to see he is defeated in 2012.

OmahaConservative on November 20, 2009 at 9:22 AM

Hey, don’t harsh his mellow.

Alden Pyle on November 20, 2009 at 9:23 AM

Obama seems blissfully oblivious

First objection:
Only SEEMS? He IS!

Second objection:
I might be able to argue with you if he is blissfully or not.

Sir Napsalot on November 20, 2009 at 9:28 AM

Obama seems blissfully oblivious to that contradiction until NBC points it out.

And we are to believe, as we were told over and over again, these (Obama clan of clowns) are the more smarter guys in charge now.

Sir Napsalot on November 20, 2009 at 9:30 AM

What were his law school grades again? Let the back tracking begin.

Kissmygrits on November 20, 2009 at 9:32 AM

Constitutional Scholar. Editor of the Harvard Law Review.

blithering idiot.

cs89 on November 20, 2009 at 9:36 AM

I remember President Nixon declaring the defendant guilty during the Manson trial.

There was a motion for a mis-trial but the judge overruled it after interviewing the jurors. The trial continued.

If a guy the people loved to hate got that treatment one wonders what would happen when this ‘Victim’ goes to trial.

TimBuk3 on November 20, 2009 at 9:39 AM

NBC: But having that kind of confidence of a conviction — I mean one of the purposes of doing — going to the Justice Department and not military court is to show of the the world our fairness in our court system.

Obama: Well —

NBC: But you also just said that he was going to be convicted and given the death penalty.

Obama: But see, “I won“!

Goody2Shoes on November 20, 2009 at 9:44 AM

Obama seems blissfully oblivious
Seems?????

MarkTheGreat on November 20, 2009 at 8:29 AM

Wrong! There are too many of these rookie mistakes for them to actually be mistakes. Even those of us without law degrees and fancy-pants community organizer experience can see the problem here. I find it difficult to believe that an administation full of lawyers and career politicians, no one realized that implications of this decision.

Laura in Maryland on November 20, 2009 at 9:49 AM

NBC: Mr. Obama, you have made numerous proposals that, if enacted, would destroy this country, including socialized medicine and cap and trade. Yet, they seem to be bogged down.

Obama: The foundations upon which this country were built were stronger than we anticipated. We inherited that. It will take continued effort on our part to erode them. Look, Rome wasn’t destroyed in a day.

justltl on November 20, 2009 at 9:49 AM

People; PEOPLE: You all completely misunderstand Obama. He’s psychic, and can foretell the future, based on all his extensive legal prowess.

Cybergeezer on November 20, 2009 at 9:51 AM

I just got through on the Lincoln number (402) 441-4600.

OmahaConservative on November 20, 2009 at 9:22 AM

I will keep trying on the phone….it’s busy!!!!!

yoda on November 20, 2009 at 9:51 AM

FRED THOMPSON nailed Obama’s Doctrine.

Encourage terrorists to attack US civilians (rather than military personnel) by demanding said terrorists (if caught) be given a US Civil Court trial with all the bells and whistles of Constitutional citizenship rights, and refusing to prosecute said terrorists in a US Military Tribunal.

The Obama Doctrine targets US civilians to affect greater terrorism against US civilians.

maverick muse on November 20, 2009 at 9:52 AM

And any discovery phase applies to KSM: he gets to have his lawyers perform discovery on not only the Bush Administration but the Clinton Administration and Obama Administration, looking for anything they might have done that is esculpatory. It seems the AG has forgotten that… as well as the President who whould know better. Did Sandy ‘Big Socks’ get all the juicy tidbits out of the way? What did or didn’t the Clinton Administration do to track, trail and otherwise see what al Qaeda was up to?

Holder and Obama may want to put the Bush Administration on trial.

KSM will put America on trial, and drag that out for years and years.

Meanwhile he deserves his sentencing under the GC for his activities, that should include 230 grains of lead moving at high velocity. That is the punishment for unlawful combatants who wear no uniform and commit acts of war. Any judge should throw this back as being out of his jurisdiction, and in the jurisdiction of the military. I doubt that will happen as Holder will go Judge Shopping to get a sympathetic judge who is willing to throw the SCOTUS decision out… won’t that be fun?

ajacksonian on November 20, 2009 at 9:53 AM

Btw, who caught C-SPAN’s broadcast yesterday of Sen.Lieberman’s panel of witnesses to explicate the Hasan incident at Ft. Hood? Bravo to Gen. Keele* (Ret.) for testifying against the greatest threat to ever face America, Jihad terrorism that abuses the American tolerance for PC that has proven to overly protect minorities from undergoing the same scrutiny as whites face.

*Attempted to verify the general’s name by referencing sites listing Bush’s staff and the C-SPAN site that has yet to include yesterday’s Lieberman broadcast.

maverick muse on November 20, 2009 at 9:55 AM

This is exactly what I have been saying ever since this decision was made and the administration’s defense of it was that they would be found guilty – so my question is: If it is a foregone conclusion that they will be found guilty and won’t be released EVEN if they are found not guilty – then what is the point – these liberals are suggesting to subvert something that is a cornerstone of our legal system INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. What they are saying already has the hallmark of rigging a trial. UNBELIEVABLE

AusTex girl on November 20, 2009 at 10:00 AM

Constitutional Scholar. Editor of the Harvard Law Review.

blithering idiot.

cs89 on November 20, 2009 at 9:36 AM

Obama wears whole cloth.

Obama was a guest lecturer who taught community organizing (how to milk the system). It takes a liar to bloat that itinerant job into a full blown member of the university faculty touted as a full fledged professor of Constitutional Law.

To be a Constitutional Scholar, one must AUTHOR and publish proof, and participate in scholarly debate with real scholars, not fabricated posers. Where are Obama’s dissertations or treatise on the US Constitution? None to be found proves Obama’s fraud.

Obama, Editor of the Harvard Law Review, failed to edit though he posed as “present”. Where is any editorial by Obama reviewing law published in the HLR? None.

maverick muse on November 20, 2009 at 10:08 AM

AusTex girl on November 20, 2009 at 10:00 AM

And they’ve already threatened one of the witnesses; The CIA.

Cybergeezer on November 20, 2009 at 10:09 AM

Aren’t you starting to wonder if when the KSM case is dismissed and after Obama recalls our troops from Afghanistan and after he bows to the Saudi’s, after he refuses any action on Iran,and after he shoots down Israeli planes over Iraqi airspace as threatened that he is going to remove his mask and declare himself not just a Marxist but a Marxist jihadi terrorist?

Christian Conservative on November 20, 2009 at 10:10 AM

Comment pages: 1 2