On November 22, I raised the issue of " Innocent Until Proven Guilty" as it relates to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) who the Obama Administration through Attorney General Eric Holder has decided to try in New York City in a civilian court with all of the attendant rights as prescribed by our Constitution to any citizen of the US.
NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and other Democrat politicians are beginning to "push-back" on that decision to try him in NYC and also on the decision to try him in a Civilian Court. Still, the Obama Administration continues to hold-the-line on this decision to try him as a citizen with Constitutional rights.
NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and other Democrat politicians are beginning to "push-back" on that decision to try him in NYC and also on the decision to try him in a Civilian Court. Still, the Obama Administration continues to hold-the-line on this decision to try him as a citizen with Constitutional rights.
In November, 2009, both President Obama and Eric Holder made statements that convicted KSM before his trial, thereby trampling on his rights, depriving him of being "innocent until proven guilty."
Now, in addition to Attorney General Holder and President Obama convicting him in the Press, President Obama's Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, convicted him openly on Sunday. Any good defense attorney will use these three statements to prove that a fair civilian trial could not be conducted because the Jury Pool has been polluted by three of the most powerful persons in the US, and the case could be thrown out; KSM would become a free man!
Surely, Obama, Holder and Gibbs are not stupid and naive on this point, which any viewer of "Law and Order" gets. So ... is their legal naivete intentional? To what end?
I cannot imagine any other reason, other than to provide "cover" for President Obama and Eric Holder with the far left -- as in;
"We tried to do the right thing and try these people as civilians, unlike the disastrous Bush Administration, who wanted them tried in Military Courts. But the politics of Washington and the recalcitrant Republicans got in the way and we were forced to take him back to Guantanamo and try him in a Military Court there. This is all Bush's fault! We had no choice!!"
Let's be factual -- the Democrats have been in control of Congress since 2006 and they currently have enough of a majority in both houses to pass anything they want; the Republicans cannot stop them.
Clearly, this issue of KSM and Civilian trials is owned by the Obama Administration and the Democrats in Congress are getting nervous. Further, closing Guantanamo is OK maybe, but what do you do with all the bad actors there?
Surely, Obama, Holder and Gibbs are not stupid and naive on this point, which any viewer of "Law and Order" gets. So ... is their legal naivete intentional? To what end?
I cannot imagine any other reason, other than to provide "cover" for President Obama and Eric Holder with the far left -- as in;
"We tried to do the right thing and try these people as civilians, unlike the disastrous Bush Administration, who wanted them tried in Military Courts. But the politics of Washington and the recalcitrant Republicans got in the way and we were forced to take him back to Guantanamo and try him in a Military Court there. This is all Bush's fault! We had no choice!!"
Let's be factual -- the Democrats have been in control of Congress since 2006 and they currently have enough of a majority in both houses to pass anything they want; the Republicans cannot stop them.
Clearly, this issue of KSM and Civilian trials is owned by the Obama Administration and the Democrats in Congress are getting nervous. Further, closing Guantanamo is OK maybe, but what do you do with all the bad actors there?
.
I can hear the states considered for prisoner relocation now: "We can create jobs by housing them in Illinois (NO), Ohio (NO), Pennsylvania (NO), Michigan (NO). Nevada -- they take nuclear waste; why not nuclear prisoners?"
"Today, Senator Harry Reid (D-Nevada) issued a statement regarding the proposal to re-locate Guantanamo detainees to Nevada:
"Today, Senator Harry Reid (D-Nevada) issued a statement regarding the proposal to re-locate Guantanamo detainees to Nevada:
"#/?*%<&>@way"
The only place left then is Alcatraz in San Francisco Bay. Thanks, Nancy. ☺
~~~
The only place left then is Alcatraz in San Francisco Bay. Thanks, Nancy. ☺
~~~
I predict that Attorney General Holder will find a reason to resign over this issue. The decision to try KSM in a Civilian court is questionable to any thinking person no matter what political stripe they may bear. It is also a symbol of the amateurish and inexperienced idealogues populating the Obama Administration that is crewed with good people, I am sure, but 93% have never worked in private industry and do not know how to create jobs, have never served in the military, and who believe that the way out of a recession is to spend money like a drunken sailor.
What do you do with a drunken sailor, What do you do with a drunken sailor, What do you do with a drunken sailor, Earl-eye in the morning!
Put him in the back of the paddy wagon, Put him in the back of the paddy wagon, Put him in the back of the paddy wagon, Earl-eye in the morning!
Throw him in the lock-up 'til he's sober, Throw him in the lock-up 'til he's sober, Throw him in the lock-up 'til he's sober, Earl-eye in the morning!
Way hay and up she rises, Way hay and up she rises, Way hay and up she rises, Earl-eye in the morning.
~~ "The Drunken Sailor" a traditional Sea Chantey
No comments:
Post a Comment