AG Holder Confronted by 9/11 Families

29 Comments

1. So, is the Ft. Hood guy going to have a military trial or a civilian trial? After all he killed and maimed civilians in his crowd of targets. Following Holder’s philosophy he should have the local jurisdiction try him with all the bells and whistles the ACLU can play.

   Also, if he is paralyzed by the lady cop’s bullets, shouldn’t he get rehabilitation therapy at Walter Reed?

   And, when Holder and Obama both say KSM is going to be convicted and executed, how do they expect to prevent the ACLU from dragging this KSM trial on forever in search of an unbiased jury pool? Barney Fife with the help of the Keystone Kops would be the dream team compared to these clowns.

   Comment by heliotrope — November 19, 2009 @ 9:00 am - November 19, 2009

2. I don’t see how this whole thing can shape up as anything but yet another OBAMA FAIL.

   Win or lose the trial, Obama and Holder make a mockery of the U.S. justice system. As a captured foreign combatant, who tried to attack the very essence and foundation of America’s civilian justice system as a combatant, KSM should not be given a trial in the civilian justice system (but rather, one in the military system as Congress has said). The very fact of KSM getting a civilian trial is -not right-. (pun intended, i.e., is not anything that -KSM- would possess a right to)

   Moving on to possible outcomes: If KSM wins, that will be a further travesty. If he loses (Obama-Holder “win”), that just gives al Qaeda an excuse to mock the U.S. justice system as a sham. In either outcome, Obama and Holder will now forever be “the fools who gave KSM a civilian trial.”

   Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 19, 2009 @ 9:50 am - November 19, 2009

3. Regarding this issue, one of the default arguments that has been expressed is that we should all just relax and assume that all of the legal, ethical, and national security concerns that we have raised have been exhaustively considered by Obama’s cracker-jack team of DOJ lawyers and that they wouldn’t be doing this if there were even a chance that it could go horribly wrong. Talking Points Tano, for example, expressed it this way:

   “I know you hate, with a passion, anyone and everyone who works in this administration, and that has a tendency to cloud judgement, but do you really think that the career lawyers in the DOJ would bring specific charges in a criminal court if they didn’t feel they had sufficient evidence – evidence that can withstand procedural challenges – in order to win their case? Like – maybe the people who do this for a living might have thought of the issues you raise?”

   Well, it would be nice to be able to place our faith in the purportedly “best and brightest” attorneys in Obama’s DOJ, but that is conclusively proven to be folly by the video linked below in which Lindsey Graham cross-examines the sh*t out of Eric Holder regarding the idiotic decision to bring these prosecutions to America’s criminal courts. Graham mops the floor with Holder and I HIGHLY RECOMMEND that everyone watch this video to see how profoundly incompetent and unqualified this administrations appointed cronies are:

   http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/18/graham-grills-holder-does-bin-laden-need-to-be-given-his-miranda-rights/

   Holder has been lauded as one of the greatest legal minds in our nation but this video demonstrates that Holder HAS NOT considered or analyzed the potential negatives of this plan in the least, and that his decision making is clearly driven by his liberal agenda with all other considerations (i.e. national security, justice for victims, etc.) being secondary at best. I have criticized Graham recently for his alliance with John Kerry on cap-and-trade legislation, but Graham redeems himself to a great extent by taking Holder to task in the video.

   Comment by Sean A — November 19, 2009 @ 10:18 am - November 19, 2009

4. They should have been treated as pirates were…a short quasi-judicial hearing to record their guilt, followed by a swift hanging at the end of a dock. The term “outlaw” originally meant that one was declared outside of the rights and protections of the law, and could be slain on sight.

   Priracy still has some extra-judicial standing under International Law, and some forms of terrorism should to.

   Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — November 19, 2009 @ 10:32 am - November 19, 2009

5. P.S. I forgot to note that although Graham admirably cross-examines Holder in the video above, he is hardly innocent in all of this himself because he is one of the 19 Republican Senators who voted in favor of Holder’s confirmation as Attorney General. I hope that Graham and his like-minded colleagues learn from this and start waking up to the fact that these McCain-esque efforts at appearing “bipartisan” and “moderate” are PURE FOLLY and lead no where but to them being complicit in leftist decisions like granting terrorists more constitutional rights than are enjoyed by our own soldiers.

   Comment by Sean A — November 19, 2009 @ 10:57 am - November 19, 2009

6. Karl Rove has written a good editorial about the Obama Administration’s excessive use of the “Friday news dump” tactic to avoid scrutiny and questions about decisions related to contentious issues. Rove makes the point that all administrations have used the tactic, but it should not have been used to announce the decision to give KSM, et al. civilian criminal trials.

   http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704204304574543670310106970.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

   Obama kicked off his Presidency with an Executive Order closing Gitmo and the MSM sold it as a triumphant policy coup to be celebrated with dancing in the streets, all the while diminishing necessary inquiry and criticism about the Order’s ramifications. Well, now we are seeing the stark reality of the decision to close Gitmo and Obama deals with it by making sure he’s safely on his way to Asia on Air Force One when the American people (and the families of 9/11 victims) find out about it. It’s disgusting, particularly in light of the fact that Obama used the “Friday news dump” for this bombshell during the SAME WEEK he attended the memorial service at Ft. Hood where he had to pretend that he gives a flying fu*k about dead soldiers, much less whether their deaths were precipitated by Islamic fundamentalism festering in our own country’s armed forces.

   Comment by Sean A — November 19, 2009 @ 11:34 am - November 19, 2009

7. Who wants to bet KSM will pull a Mark Rich? Or if somehow he does get convicted, Chairman Maobama pulls a lord BJ.

   Comment by ThatGayConservative — November 19, 2009 @ 11:45 am - November 19, 2009

8. Obama and Holder are making the claim that KSM is going to receive a fair trial, but also that it is foreordained that he will be found guilty, and even if he’s acquitted, he won’t be released from custody.

   How can a trial be fair when the outcome is predetermined? Does this make sense to anyone who isn’t stoned off their keister?

   Comment by V the K — November 19, 2009 @ 12:33 pm - November 19, 2009

9. One of these people has the moral authority

   Just like Cindy Sheehan, right? IOKIYAR strikes again.

   Comment by torrentprime — November 19, 2009 @ 12:36 pm - November 19, 2009

10. ‘One of these people has the moral authority…. ”

    Except there are others, with equal moral authority from the same reason, who agree with Holder.

    Comment by Tano — November 19, 2009 @ 12:41 pm - November 19, 2009

11. Just like Cindy Sheehan, right?

    Not really. Cindy Sheehan’s son was a volunteer — twice — who went in with the full knowledge of the risks they were taking.

    None of the 9/11 victims volunteered or knew that they were being targeted for death by al-Qaeda, although the liberal Obama Party and its puppets like torrentprime and Tano say they deserved to die because they were “little Eichmanns” whose “chickens had come home to roost” because they lived in “God damn America”.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 19, 2009 @ 1:37 pm - November 19, 2009

12. And as for Tano’s comeback, sure; there are people who accept money from Barack Obama to whore themselves for him. After all, Tano, you’re being paid by the government to support Barack Obama on websites.

    Tell us, Tano, doesn’t it bother you that you are taking money from the National Institutes of Health to promote your Barack Obama? Isn’t that taking money away from something people need for Barack Obama’s political agenda? Does that indicate that Barack Obama thinks paying leftists like yourself to troll websites is more important than peoples’ health?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 19, 2009 @ 1:39 pm - November 19, 2009

13. Whoa. Tano does the DNC’s work on *taxpayer* money?

    He’s lucky someone doesn’t track down his IP and report him. Because if it’s taxpayer money, maybe someone ought to.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 19, 2009 @ 1:45 pm - November 19, 2009

14. Yessir. Tano bragged yesterday that he was working on contract for the National Institutes of Health.

    When you notice that Tano repeats his talking points under different names on other blogs, what it makes obvious is that his whole point and for what he’s being paid by the government is to propagandize for Barack Obama.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 19, 2009 @ 1:51 pm - November 19, 2009

15. ND,
    I know this is futile, but I ask you pleasantly – please stop making sh*t up. If you disagree with me, then make your points. But your behavior has become truly pathological – and its hard for me to believe that even your friends here cant see through it.

    Comment by Tano — November 19, 2009 @ 2:22 pm - November 19, 2009

16. ILC,

    Sorry buddy, but no – I work in the private sector – thats what working for a contractor means, and I work from home, online, and make my own hours. So I do my blog commenting on my own time. Sorry to disappoint.

    Comment by Tano — November 19, 2009 @ 2:24 pm - November 19, 2009

17. Thanks for the clarification.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 19, 2009 @ 2:29 pm - November 19, 2009

18. But your contractor (employer) is taxpayer-funded, right? That’s what it sounds like.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 19, 2009 @ 2:32 pm - November 19, 2009

19. (The point there no longer being whether you do the DNC’s work on the taxpayer’s dime as such, but rather, the simple fact that your job comes from government spending.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 19, 2009 @ 2:35 pm - November 19, 2009

20. I know this is futile, but I ask you pleasantly – please stop making sh*t up.

    And what would that be?

    I have advanced degrees in biology and work for a contracter with the National Institutes of Health.

    So you are receiving taxpayer dollars to propagandize on websites like this one, especially — surprise! — related to pushing Barack Obama’s health care proposals.

    Meanwhile, you just made your hypocrisy more obvious, given your blabbering about this:

    As for Jesus and the dinosaurs, she does believe that – or something equivalent. Its in her book.

    So you accuse others of telling lies even as you yourself, paid by Barack Obama to make them. are proven to be spouting them off by the gallon yourself.

    But your behavior has become truly pathological

    Really? And what qualifies you to say that, Tano? Are you a psychologist or psychiatrist?

    If you are, then please provide your name so that the state board for where you hold your license can be provided with these posts as a demonstration that you are diagnosing a person who you have never met and who is not your patient for the sole purpose of discrediting them publicly.

    I’ll make the outcome of that one easy for you to understand; it means you will be stripped of your license to practice.

    If you are not, then you have no business making that determination and are demonstrating that you abuse “science” to support your leftist propaganda spreading, which neatly undercuts your claim to be either a rational or unprejudiced “scientist”.

    Now run away, coward, like you always do when confronted with examples of your lying.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 19, 2009 @ 2:43 pm - November 19, 2009

21. Thats right ILC, my job comes from government spending. Without getting into details, it is a function that the government provided, then later contracted out for, for the last 150 years or so – a core responsibility. So no, it doesnt matter to my livelihood whether there are Republicans or Democrats in power, tax cuts or spending increases. We will always do our work.

    Comment by Tano — November 19, 2009 @ 2:44 pm - November 19, 2009

22. Well, just to “trade”, my job is all-private. (The company takes no government contracts.)

    In my investing accounts, I profit from Obama’s policy mistakes – while calling them mistakes, loudly to anyone who will listen. In other words, I take certain defensive measures against Obammunism and they are financially successful… because I am basically right about Obama’s policies.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 19, 2009 @ 2:58 pm - November 19, 2009

23. my job comes from government spending. Without getting into details,

    Don’t you think in the name of openness and transparency, you should? And what other companies were allowed to bid for the contract?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — November 19, 2009 @ 5:01 pm - November 19, 2009

24. With any luck at all, KSM will not make the trip from Gitmo to NYC

    Comment by PatriotMom — November 19, 2009 @ 5:36 pm - November 19, 2009

25. “Don’t you think in the name of openness and transparency, you should?”

    I would be glad to share all that with you TGC.
    But then I would have to kill you.

    Comment by Tano — November 19, 2009 @ 8:41 pm - November 19, 2009

26. More likely, he’d die from boredom.

    Comment by The_Livewire — November 19, 2009 @ 9:17 pm - November 19, 2009

27. #26: LOLOLOLOLOLOL. Masterfully played, The Livewire.

    Comment by Sean A — November 19, 2009 @ 9:28 pm - November 19, 2009

28. More likely, he’d die from boredom.

    I’m hanging on by a thread already.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — November 20, 2009 @ 12:12 am - November 20, 2009

29. But then I would have to kill you.

    Is that the Community Agitator in Chief’s excuse?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — November 20, 2009 @ 12:24 am - November 20, 2009

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.