As The Ticket reported earlier today in this space, Atty. Gen. Eric Holder was on the Senate Judiciary Committee hot seat defending his decision to bring the alleged 9/11 terrorist masterminds onto U.S. soil for civilian trials instead of keeping them far away in Guantanamo Bay for a military tribunal.As I've observed the interactions between Attorney General Eric Holder and President Barack Obama I've become convinced that Obama is not in charge. Holder is clearly in charge and Obama is staying out of his way.Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, himself a former federal prosecutor, says he's amazed at Holder's simplicity claim and remains unconvinced that such a move, which could make New York City a target for potential new attack, makes any legal sense whatsoever.
Speaking of military tribunals, we went back into the video archives and found this C-SPAN tape below. Holder might want to watch it.
It contains his boss, Barack Obama, a brief member of that same Senate, in 2006 stating that a military tribunal was a perfectly fine way of handling such dangerous individuals as Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.
Obama said the fight against terrorism was "an extraordinarily difficult war" where terrorists could plot undetected from within our own borders.
The freshman Illinois senator was defending a legislative amendment and pointed out that a military tribunal for Mohammed seemed just fine to him.
"The irony of the underlying bill as it's written is that someone like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is going to get basically a full military trial with all the bells and whistles. He's gonna have counsel. He's gonna be able to present evidence to rebut the government's case.... I think we will convict him. And I think justice will be carried out."
As radical as Obama is, he's a piker compared to Holder. Holder would love nothing more than to put Bush and Cheney on trial as war criminals, but he knows he could never get away with that. So, what's the next best thing? Put the war on terror on trial via KSM and the criminal trial in NYC.
Why?
Holder has something on him. That's all I can figure. Is it the famous missing birth certificate? Pictures of Obama doing unspeakable things to small farm animals? His college records?
I don't know what it is, but Holder has Obama by the short hairs and he's not letting go.
Posts
4 comments:
"...this show trial that will cost upwards of $75 million..."
You do like those low-ball estimates, Rick.
The first person who ever spoke to me recommending Barack Obama as a presidential candidate is a lawyer. For a brief period, before I learned about Obama's abortion record as an Illinois State Senator, I actually considered the idea of voting for him. Abortion was the first red light that went off for me, and later of course it was many other things so numerous it would be hard to list them.
But what do you think I think about this lawyer now? I wouldn't hire him to litigate a conflict over the issuance of a dog license.
People who hitched their wagons to Obama's star ... well, I hope they're prepared for the embarrassments.
I was talking down Graham on climate change a day or so ago here at HolyCoast, but he's forgiven today!
Why can't Goober be like that with respect to the Gang of 14, or Cap & Trade, or immigration?
Yes, I also think this decision is a political suicide. And if it really is all lead by Holder without Obama's opinion implied there might be something true about the hypothesis of having something on him. Otherwise it just doesn't make any sense. Elli
Post a Comment