Momentum building for blocking terrorist trials?

posted at 10:55 am on January 29, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Over the last few days, the Obama administration reliance on a law-enforcement approach to counterterrorism has come under bipartisan fire.  Reports that key CT officials were not consulted on how to handle the EunuchBomber angered Congress enough to propose a law requiring such consultation in the future.   Now, with Democrats beginning to object to the New York City trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the closure of Gitmo hopelessly mired in what the Washington Post calls “dwindling options,” Lindsey Graham will attempt to reintroduce a bill prohibiting any funding for federal trials of 9/11 terrorists, at least:

The closure of the military detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is beginning to look like a protracted and uncertain project for the Obama administration as political, legal and security concerns limit the president’s options.

Having blown the one-year closure deadline set last January in an executive order, the administration is planning to transfer some detainees to a state prison it hopes to acquire in Illinois. But there appears to be little mood in Congress to provide the administration with either the funding for the prison or the authority to transfer detainees who will be held indefinitely. …

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) plans to introduce a bill next week that would prohibit funding of a federal trial for Mohammed and other Sept. 11 defendants, in an effort to force the case into a military tribunal. An earlier such legislative effort failed, but a spokesman for Graham said that the senator has been taking the pulse of his colleagues and that “momentum has been building.”

Until the attempted bombing of Northwest 253 on Christmas Day, Obama appeared to have some momentum on the law-enforcement approach.  However, the outrage over reading a terrorist his rights and providing him an attorney rather than a lengthy interrogation to discover what we could about any impending attacks has seriously derailed both the trial process and the closure of Gitmo.  After all, if the terrorists can’t get tried in federal court, they will have to be both tried and held in military custody — which means Gitmo, at least for the foreseeable future.

This could set up a constitutional showdown between Congress and the judiciary, depending on whether the courts eventually reject the current military commission system.  If Congress refuses to provide funds for criminal trials and the Supreme Court throws out the current military system (which I believe has yet to be challenged to that court), then the detainees will be left in limbo.  The three branches will have to fight for jurisdiction, which could make the entire process a decades-long mess, with some of the detainees expiring of natural causes before anything gets settled.

Meanwhile, the Department of Justice is attempting to cut a plea deal with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, aka The EunuchBomber, to get the information that CT specialists could have extracted without playing Monty Hall:

Authorities are inching toward an agreement that would secure cooperation from the suspect in the failed Detroit airliner attack, according to two sources familiar with the case, even as fresh details emerged about the intense and chaotic response to the Christmas Day incident.

Seizing on the near miss, GOP lawmakers have mounted a sustained attack on President Obama and the Justice Department, saying they may have lost out on valuable intelligence by charging Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in a federal court rather than under the military justice system. …

Public defenders for the Nigerian student are engaged in negotiations that could result in an agreement to share more information and eventually a guilty plea, the sources said.

Negotiations could still collapse before the next scheduled court date, in April, the sources said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing. But senior members of the administration’s national security apparatus have publicly said that a plea deal is likely, given the virtual life sentence that Abdulmutallab could face on charges of using an airplane as a weapon of mass destruction.

So the administration’s CT strategy is to catch those terrorists who remain alive after an attack attempt, and then offer them eventual freedom for their part in targeting hundreds of civilians for mass murder?  Yes, I can see al-Qaeda shaking in their boots now.  Maybe Abdulmutallab can help radicalize his prison population, assuming they allow him enough time to do so.


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

I’m hearing “move the trial”. To where? Chicago? San Francisco?

Knucklehead on January 29, 2010 at 10:59 AM

plea deal??!!

way to go holder…looking good

utter failure by DOJ

cmsinaz on January 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM

I’m hearing “move the trial”. To where? Chicago? San Francisco?

Knucklehead on January 29, 2010 at 10:59 AM

I’m thinking a small town in Texas.

VegasRick on January 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Here’s a collection of related parodies of the Administration’s misguided policies: http://optoons.blogspot.com/search/label/national%20security

Mervis Winter on January 29, 2010 at 11:02 AM

This could set up a constitutional showdown between Congress and the judiciary, depending on whether the courts eventually reject the current military commission system.

paging alito…

cmsinaz on January 29, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Chicago?

Mayor Daly (spelling?) did not get the Olympics, so he needs another source of funding.

Sir Napsalot on January 29, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Move the trial to Islamabad…

PatriotRider on January 29, 2010 at 11:05 AM

I’m hearing “move the trial”. To where? Chicago? San Francisco?

Knucklehead on January 29, 2010 at 10:59 AM

Best suggestion I have heard so far? West Point.

Del Dolemonte on January 29, 2010 at 11:09 AM

I’m hearing “move the trial”. To where? Chicago? San Francisco?

Knucklehead on January 29, 2010 at 10:59 AM
__________________

How about…..Gitmo?

uknowmorethanme on January 29, 2010 at 11:10 AM

I know, let’s move the trial to Haiti!

– and have the plane carrying these scum “develop engine trouble” over the Caribbean, with the crew fortunately bailing out, though tragically the prisoners do not make it.

rbj on January 29, 2010 at 11:10 AM

I’m thinking a small town in Texas.

VegasRick on January 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Let’s hope so. Then, one morning when the feds arrive for the trial, they’ll find the “defendants” swaying gently in the Texas breeze.

Kafir on January 29, 2010 at 11:11 AM

It will be interesting just how far the administration backtracks, if at all. Somebody is going have to lose face and Obama is pretty thin-skinned when he doesn’t get his way.

highhopes on January 29, 2010 at 11:13 AM

“with some of the detainees expiring of natural causes before anything gets settled.”

I would prefer some type of Un-natural death, brings to mind hanging, shiv, gas, etc.

hip shot on January 29, 2010 at 11:13 AM

I say Guantanamo Bay. He can use it as an excuse to keep it open.

“Well, as I have always said, I want to close Guantanamo Bay. But, and let’s be clear about this, I will now have to wait until all the trials are over.”

Lily on January 29, 2010 at 11:14 AM

Let’s hope so. Then, one morning when the feds arrive for the trial, they’ll find the “defendants” swaying gently in the Texas breeze.

Kafir on January 29, 2010 at 11:11 AM

I’ll have you know we give all murderers a fair trial before we execute them. ;)

Texas Gal on January 29, 2010 at 11:15 AM

How do you think the people flying on that plane with the undie bomber feel about him getting a plea-deal? This single issue is reinforcing the idea that Democrats in general and Obama specifically are weak on national security and incompetent overall.

Mord on January 29, 2010 at 11:15 AM

So we’re left with rearranging the furniture. If the right thing (ie treating this guy as an enemy combatant) would’ve been done in the first place, then we wouldn’t be left with trying to find someone’s doorstep to dump this steaming pile of AQ dogshite upon. The utopian “he can receive justice in the American system” dream is now a scrambled mess that could have been prevented if these guys would’ve simply done the right thing from jump street.

Naive’, incompetent, pathetic, and dangerous. And I’m not referring to UFA, although those descriptions are fitting as well. The B+ team is in charge and they’ve brought their B+ game.

ted c on January 29, 2010 at 11:17 AM

I’m thinking a small town in Texas.

VegasRick on January 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Agreed, put’em on trial, after being found guilty, find a tall tree and short rope.

la.rt.wngr on January 29, 2010 at 11:18 AM

It will be interesting just how far the administration backtracks, if at all. Somebody is going have to lose face and Obama is pretty thin-skinned when he doesn’t get his way.

highhopes on January 29, 2010 at 11:13 AM

They won’t backtrack, it’s Barry’s way or the highway. We already heard that on Wednesday night.

He’ll double down and hold the trial in the Supreme Court building.

Knucklehead on January 29, 2010 at 11:19 AM

It seems they have been arresting several people in Malaysia associated with Muttalab, so maybe they are interrogating him but trying not to tip off any of his co-conspirators that he’s singing like a canary.

Buddahpundit on January 29, 2010 at 11:19 AM

The only way out of this debacle is for KSM to go gently into that good night, unexpectedely.

sherry on January 29, 2010 at 11:19 AM

Maybe Abdulmutallab can help radicalize his prison population, assuming they allow him enough time to do so.

Negotiations could still collapse before the next scheduled court date, in April

Seems he’s already got plenty of time.

JCred on January 29, 2010 at 11:19 AM

Federal trials use locals to make up the jury pool. Moving it the trial to some liberal area would almost guarantee a cluster $#%^ from the start. Can you imagine a San Francisco jury overseeing the trial of some Bush “tortured”. Obama and his retarded Attorney General should have seen all of this coming, now they are stuck with risking a circus trial or admitting defeat and keeping this at Guatanamo.

Howcome on January 29, 2010 at 11:20 AM

Graham is smart to reintroduce this bill now. It should generate a lot of controversy and debate, and give the ‘critters an excuse to quietly back-burner the healthcare insurance takeover bill.

*Crossing my fingers that I’m right about this.

RushBaby on January 29, 2010 at 11:21 AM

Lindsey Graham will attempt to reintroduce a bill prohibiting any funding for federal trials of 9/11 terrorists, at least:

I’m waiting for more of the “Grahmnesty’s a RINO” nonsense…

JetBoy on January 29, 2010 at 11:22 AM

The three branches will have to fight for jurisdiction, which could make the entire process a decades-long mess, with some of the detainees expiring of natural causes before anything gets settled.

Could it be justice delayed is justice served? Mr. Con Law Prof sure can dazzle with his smarts. Toss the whole thing up in the air, claim to want to do something, but deny any clear avenue to proceed.

Hmm, either Mr. Con Law is as smart as a fox (not yet demonstrated) or so foolish that he wins with the stupidiest of policies. Those guys are not going anywhere for a very long long time.

EliTheBean on January 29, 2010 at 11:23 AM

They won’t backtrack, it’s Barry’s way or the highway. We already heard that on Wednesday night.

He’ll double down and hold the trial in the Supreme Court building.

Knucklehead on January 29, 2010 at 11:19 AM

Good. I want this front and center during midterms and the presidential campaign in 2012.

a capella on January 29, 2010 at 11:25 AM

Deal? A f*****g plea bargain?

Any terrorist should be treated badly, by design. Enough
of this shit.

thgrant on January 29, 2010 at 11:26 AM

Best suggestion I have heard so far? West Point.

Del Dolemonte on January 29, 2010 at 11:09 AM

Actually, that’s a terrible idea. West Point has already been used as propaganda by BO this year.

Oh and….Beat Navy!

Youngs98 on January 29, 2010 at 11:27 AM

Before there is anymore talk about moving the trials to wherever, may I suggest that there be discussion as to the moving of something else…..like maybe moving Eric Holder out of the position that he has now proven beyond any shadow of a doubt to be totally unqualified to be in?

pilamaye on January 29, 2010 at 11:27 AM

If he offers amnesty to this trash, ed’s right. It will do nothing but embolden the Terrorists. Obama and Holder do not care about the safety and security of this nation.

kingsjester on January 29, 2010 at 11:29 AM

This is just unbelievable. Almost ten years after 9-11 and we still don’t have a clear way to handle these terrorists. This should be a non-issue at this point. Although, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised – look at how many other issues in this country are just as screwed up. Sigh . . .

KickandSwimMom on January 29, 2010 at 11:32 AM

We need to just get it to the Supreme Court, right now they aren’t in any mode to help Obama.

lavell12 on January 29, 2010 at 11:32 AM

And this is the reason Bush didn’t want these thugs on our soil. With all this bickering about “not in my backyard”, “cost of security is too high for my city” and on and on, how could we have been as successful in the “War on Terror”?

Electrongod on January 29, 2010 at 11:32 AM

“Well, as I have always said, I want to close Guantanamo Bay. But, and let’s be clear about this, I will now have to wait until all the trials are over.”

Lily on January 29, 2010 at 11:14 AM

There is no way he could do that now that he has so often stated that GITMO is making us less safe because of all those angry Muslims out there.

highhopes on January 29, 2010 at 11:34 AM

I say we cut him open and plant some C4 and a tracking device, then we release him in Afghanistan and wait until his has been picked up and being tortured(real torture) by his old buds for turning on them and we blow him up.

jeffn21 on January 29, 2010 at 11:35 AM

So, our government plea bargains with Islamic terrorists so that they agree to tell us the truth? Our government, quite PC, ignores the fact that there is no concept of “telling the truth to infidels” in Islam because there is no concept of “lying to infidels” in Islam?
Waterboarding would get the job done.

GaltBlvnAtty on January 29, 2010 at 11:36 AM

I’m sure Eric Holder has viable reasons for acting the way he does. After all, he was selected by a Harvard trained Professor of Constitutional Law.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

GarandFan on January 29, 2010 at 11:36 AM

This is just unbelievable. Almost ten years after 9-11 and we still don’t have a clear way to handle these terrorists. This should be a non-issue at this point. Although, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised – look at how many other issues in this country are just as screwed up. Sigh . . .

KickandSwimMom on January 29, 2010 at 11:32 AM

We did have a way until the filthy lying coward took over the White House and started cancelling Executive Orders and appointing people who value political correctness over national security. That’s why we have the Army Chief lecturing us about not leaping to conclusions about Maj. Hassan’s motives and why the filthy lying coward himself referred to Abdulmutallab as an alleged bomber (as if there might have been some other reason his underpants ignited).

highhopes on January 29, 2010 at 11:37 AM

West Point? Have you seen how beautiful and historic that is? How would you like to see it bombed? How would you like to see those unarmed cadets harmed?

Another site being considered is White Plains. They are saying no. Another site is Newburgh, NY. While it doesn’t have the density of NYC, there will be citizens needlessly put in jeopardy.

The Bush Administration worked hard to get a military process the Supremes could approve. USE IT! KSM and his filthy ilk need to be tried in Guantanamo by a military tribunal.

Eric Holder needs to be fired.

marybel on January 29, 2010 at 11:38 AM

If they let the EunuchBomber cop a plea, Obama is finished. That alone will kill any chance he has of reelection.

We’ve gone from a policy of the US refusing to negotiate with terrorists to plea bargaining with them. And to add insult to injury, we don’t even need to negotiate with this punk. He’s not a US citizen and has no constitutional rights.

Doughboy on January 29, 2010 at 11:40 AM

I know, let’s move the trial to Haiti!

– and have the plane carrying these scum “develop engine trouble” over the Caribbean, with the crew fortunately bailing out, though tragically the prisoners do not make it.

rbj on January 29, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Let the punishment fit the crime. Shackle Great Balls of Fire to his seat of a small plane flying over the ocean, with pilots and CIA interrogators all with parachutes on their backs.

Interrogators: Mr. Abdulmatullab, you have 10 minutes to tell us the names and plans of your Yemeni buddies, or else we ditch this plane and jump. What say you?

Abdulmatullab: ???

Steve Z on January 29, 2010 at 11:42 AM


highhopes on January 29, 2010 at 11:37 AM

He had to prove to the world that he was the anti-Bush and that mean’t doing a 180 degree turn on everything the Bush administration stood for. Although, he is slowly and quietly turning back to all those policies.

KickandSwimMom on January 29, 2010 at 11:42 AM

yes, the momentum is building.

The MA election results confirmed that this was a big issue. Feinstein called for a shift.

She’ a good bellweather for moderates.

AnninCA on January 29, 2010 at 11:43 AM

Time to fire Eric Holder.

Buy Danish on January 29, 2010 at 11:43 AM

I propose we move the civilian trial to any major population center that votes Republican.

Greater Boston comes to mind.

paul1149 on January 29, 2010 at 11:44 AM

I forgot Barry was black while he was putting NYC in danger.
– C. Matthews

angryed on January 29, 2010 at 11:44 AM

I propose we move the civilian trial to any major population center that votes Republican.

Greater Boston comes to mind.

paul1149 on January 29, 2010 at 11:44 AM


Not really.

Boston’s as stupid as ever. The people that woke up were from outside the city.

angryed on January 29, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Although, he is slowly and quietly turning back to all those policies.

KickandSwimMom on January 29, 2010 at 11:42 AM

Because it’s finally dawned on somebody in the White House that there was a purpose for those policies. Obama was ill-prepared for office. He likes the trappings and perqs of being President but he doesn’t like doing work of a President.

Byron York has an interesting take on this. Link

highhopes on January 29, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Hmmmmmm….

You would think that someone would have studied the effects of putting terrorists in our prison system by now.

Seven Percent Solution on January 29, 2010 at 11:52 AM

Good lord, does anybody in that inept administration have even the slightest clue?

rplat on January 29, 2010 at 11:56 AM

The three branches will have to fight for jurisdiction, which could make the entire process a decades-long mess, with some of the detainees expiring of natural causes before anything gets settled.

They wanted to give Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic a “fair trial” before the International Criminal Court, and he died unpunished after several years of legalistic dithering.

Neither KSM nor the Crotch Bomber are American citizens, and they tried to kill Americans, and don’t deserve American rights. How about trying them in Romania, where they could meet the same fate as Ceaucescu?

Steve Z on January 29, 2010 at 11:57 AM

So the administration’s CT strategy is to catch those terrorists who remain alive after an attack attempt, and then offer them eventual freedom for their part in targeting hundreds of civilians for mass murder?

Yay!, Obama 2012.

royzer on January 29, 2010 at 12:02 PM

The ultimate vindication of George W. Bush.

drjohn on January 29, 2010 at 12:04 PM

Move them to the Aleutians. If they can swim to Kamchatka, they get amnesty. One caveat – survivors get to shoot at them from boats. Sounds fair to me. Besides, sharks got to eat same as worms and pigs.

J.J. Sefton on January 29, 2010 at 12:07 PM

I propose we move the civilian trial to any major population center that votes Republican.

Greater Boston comes to mind.

paul1149 on January 29, 2010 at 11:44 AM

Moving the trial isn’t the point. They are still being tried in a civil court. I don’t care if it is lower Manhattan or Salt Lake City, the idea that these bastards get a civil trial is fundamentally wrong.

P.S. I especially liked the comment from one of the NY politicians that suggested the trial should take place at a military base. How about, US Naval Base Guantanamo- the one they are already at?

highhopes on January 29, 2010 at 12:09 PM

I heard Mayor Bloomberg(NYC) on the radio this morning trying to dance all around this issue. He doesn’t want to diss Obama but he’s taking heat for not objecting to the cost, the inconvenience, and the increased threat to the city. Mike must have been told that he might not get the 2oo million a year. Normally NYC will do anything for money. He offerred the idea that the trial should be held on a military base. Apparently he doesn’t realize that few military bases have maximum security prisons.

katiejane on January 29, 2010 at 12:10 PM

This being a serious forum, I should have added the /s flag.

But as for Boston, it barely went Crat this time. I figured adding in the “Greater” limiter would send it over the Red line.

paul1149 on January 29, 2010 at 12:11 PM

As others have commented: PLEA DEAL????? WTF!!!!

alwyr on January 29, 2010 at 12:12 PM

I’m hearing “move the trial”. To where? Chicago? San Francisco?

Knucklehead on January 29, 2010 at 10:59 AM

I’m thinking a small town in Texas.

VegasRick on January 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM

San Angelo TX is ideal. We already took care of the Polygamist from El Dorado!

Spinstra on January 29, 2010 at 12:20 PM

What is depressing is the fact we are all having to sit here and watch these crooks, thugs, Marxists, Communists, etc. destroy everything in this country and there seems to be nothing we can do about it. I know behind the scenes the Republicans are working at things such as defunding the trial, moving it, etc., but in the grand scheme of all the things this crew is doing (and God only knows all the things we don’t even know about) this seems like swatting at flies.

silvernana on January 29, 2010 at 12:28 PM

What a huge security blunder on the part of the administration. These are acts of war, not crimes. The military should have full jurisdiction. By the way, Cheney sure has been quiet lately. What’s up with that?

scalleywag on January 29, 2010 at 12:35 PM

Obama won’t fire Holder. We all have to fire Obama and unfortunately, that is going to take what seems like eons, while he heedlessly proceeds to do ever more grievous damage to our beautiful country.

Edouard on January 29, 2010 at 12:49 PM

No democrat should ever be elected to office ever again. Thanks Barry Soerto!

daesleeper on January 29, 2010 at 12:50 PM

I’m waiting for more of the “Grahmnesty’s a RINO” nonsense…

JetBoy on January 29, 2010 at 11:22 AM

Ironic that you try to hijack a thread that is quite directly related to trials for hichjackers!

JetBoy is the EunuchHighjacker!

DOOF on January 29, 2010 at 1:00 PM

DOOF on January 29, 2010 at 1:00 PM

Damn — someone highjacked my ability to correct typos.

DOOF on January 29, 2010 at 1:02 PM

I’m thinking a small town in Texas.

VegasRick on January 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM
Agreed, put’em on trial, after being found guilty, find a tall tree and short rope.

la.rt.wngr on January 29, 2010 at 11:18 AM

“Whiskey for my men, beer for my horses…” playing softly in the background

txmomof6 on January 29, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Feinstein called for a shift.

She’ a good bellweather for moderates.

AnninCA on January 29, 2010 at 11:43 AM

Feinstien?

Moderate?

Bwahaha!

Whatever you’re smoking, it must be really good.

cs89 on January 29, 2010 at 1:06 PM

He’s not a US citizen and has no constitutional rights.

Doughboy on January 29, 2010 at 11:40 AM

From my understanding, legal immigrants should enjoy Constitutional protection, whereas illegal immigrants should not, but they should probably FIRST be charged with illegal immigration before they are denied rights as an illegal immigrant.
This is why enforcing immigration laws is so important.
Bcs this will then give us absolute authority over a convicted illegal immigrant.
Round up the illegals, all of the ones that we can & get them the heck outta here.
Make them immigrate here legally.
Then if we have these terrorists coming here, we first convict them of entering our country illegally, & then they will automatically be denied any right to due process.

Badger40 on January 29, 2010 at 1:06 PM

Seriously folks, Congress is sooo dumb here. They have the power pursuant to the Constitution to establish the jurisdiction for the Judicial Branch (except for certain original jurisdiction in SCOTUS). Therefor, they can just eliminate jurisdiction for terrorists in federal court. Then Holder/Obama/the Executive branch has no ability to try them in federal courts.

txmomof6 on January 29, 2010 at 1:09 PM

I’m waiting for more of the “Grahmnesty’s a RINO” nonsense…

JetBoy on January 29, 2010 at 11:22 AM

I am guessing that you believe in AGW & that his stance on that is not RINOish in the least.
Since many Americans, who happen to be conservative, especially on HA, understand AGW to be the myth that it is, we most certainly will say that he is a RINO based on his capitulation to this ca-&-trade nonsense.
He is a weak supporter of AGW & therefore is a RINO.

Badger40 on January 29, 2010 at 1:09 PM

And by also further defining what we are at war with, ISLAM, all terrorists caught doing dastardly terrorist deeds on American soil who follow Islam will be tried by a military tribunal, since it is with these people we are at war with.
This PC nonsense is going to get thousands more Americans killed someday.
I pray that it doesnot.
But I remain a pessimist.

Badger40 on January 29, 2010 at 1:11 PM

Feinstein called for a shift.

She’ a good bellweather for moderates.

AnninCA on January 29, 2010 at 11:43 AM
Feinstien?

Moderate?

Bwahaha!

Whatever you’re smoking, it must be really good.

cs89 on January 29, 2010 at 1:06 PM

Ann isn’t smoking anything. She is the textbook “moderate” — a liberal who doesn’t want to admit it.

This is not to be confused with “Independent” — which refers to someone who waits to see which way the wind is blowing before they say how they feel about something.

DOOF on January 29, 2010 at 1:12 PM

Ann isn’t smoking anything. She is the textbook “moderate” — a liberal who doesn’t want to admit it.

This is not to be confused with “Independent” — which refers to someone who waits to see which way the wind is blowing before they say how they feel about something.

DOOF on January 29, 2010 at 1:12 PM

Agreed.
I would wager most people have trouble making up their minds about most things that are ‘difficult’.
They make me as sick as liberals do.

Badger40 on January 29, 2010 at 1:39 PM

I spent a few minutes wondering what Connecticut officials had to do with anything. Maybe “counter-terrorism” should just be spelled out?

Al in St. Lou on January 29, 2010 at 1:42 PM

It is about time to “reconsider” but this is a job for a military tribunal!!!

jgdp on January 29, 2010 at 1:56 PM

We should strap them to a chair in the middle of a Firehouse in Manhatten.

Close the shades and lock the door behind us.

Let the Firemen handle this.

tatersalad on January 29, 2010 at 1:59 PM

An earlier such legislative effort failed, but a spokesman for Graham said that the senator has been taking the pulse of his colleagues and that “momentum has been building.”

Grahamic opportunism. Such previous “predetermined to fail” legislative efforts will atleast provide continued political pressure.

midlander on January 29, 2010 at 2:34 PM

I had noticed the “change of heart” at MM while I was getting ready for bed. Another attempt for this regime to try to slip one by the American people?

My solution to the terrorists and enemy combatants in U.S. custody is simple.

Word Jumble!!

B*ck. Bull*t. H*ad.

madmonkphotog on January 29, 2010 at 2:34 PM

Try them in NYC.
Yup.
They want trials, give ‘em trials.
Time to Alinsky the Left.
Live up to your own rules, Donks. No terrorists, no jihad, no problem.
And no weasling by Holder.
If they have rights, go balls to the wall with those rights.
If not, cut the bullshit and send ‘em off to Gitmo.

Bruno Strozek on January 29, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Nooses at Gitmo.

Make a good movie.

More popcorn!

profitsbeard on January 30, 2010 at 1:28 AM