Check out some similar questions!

George_1950 · Nov 18, 2009, 11:18 AM

What an idiotic thing to say: "President Barack Obama predicted that professed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will be convicted and executed as Attorney General Eric Holder proclaimed: "Failure is not an option." Obama: Professed 9/11 mastermind will be convicted

Ah, the anointed one is sooooooooooo intelligent.

speechlesstx · Nov 18, 2009, 11:21 AM

Yes George, he really is a dufus. Ex, says that's progress.

excon · Nov 18, 2009, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Yes George, he really is a dufus. Ex, says that's progress.

Hello again:

Come on, Steve... Trying him is two steps forward. Proclaiming him guilty is one step back.

In answer to your question, George, it didn't make any difference in the Charles Manson trial when Nixon said he was guilty too. Manson even held up the headline to the jury, emblazoned with Nixon's guilty proclamation. He still got convicted...

excon

speechlesstx · Nov 18, 2009, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again:

Come on, Steve... Trying him is two steps forward. Proclaiming him guilty is one step back.

As I said in the previous discussion, if they've picked NY based on a predicted outcome and won't release him even if he's found not guilty that would make this faux pas the 3rd step backwards wouldn't it?

excon · Nov 18, 2009, 11:58 AM

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

in the previous discussion, if they've picked NY based on a a predicted outcome and won't release him even if he's found not guilty that would make this faux pas the 3rd step backwards wouldn't it?

Hello again, Steve:

I'm sure they've got 100's of charges that they're holding in abeyance, that they could levy, and WILL if he's acquitted. He will NEVER see the light of day, your scare tactics notwithstanding.

I, for one, am a firm believer in our ability to convict people.

excon

PS> For a tough guy right winger, you sound pretty scared.

speechlesstx · Nov 18, 2009, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by excon

I'm sure they've got 100's of charges that they're holding in abeyance, that they could levy, and WILL if he's acquitted. He will NEVER see the light of day, your scare tactics notwithstanding.

Pointing out the administration's mistakes and flip flops is a scare tactic? I thought that was doing the job the media should be doing.

PS> For a tough guy right winger, you sound pretty scared.

Maybe you need to clean your ears. I'm not scared, I'm dumbfounded by this administration's incompetence... but then again that IS kind of scary.

ETWolverine · Nov 18, 2009, 03:47 PM

Excon,

The thing about trying terrorists and POWs in a civilian court is that that the rules of evidence are much stricter in the courts than they are in military tribunals. Under those evidentiary rules, the prosecution HAS NO CASE because KSM was never marandized, no warrants were issued, and little evidence was ever collected. What evidence WAS collected violate the rules of civilian courts.

The sole piece of evidence is his own confession, and that came after he was waterboarded, which thanks to you and people like you, is going to be thrown out by the courts, despite the fact that waterboarding isn't actually illegal.

This is going to be true of all the "100's of charges they're holding in abeyance".

So... unless you are going to throw out the civilian justice system rules of evidence, KSM is going to walk.

And if we DO decide to throw out those rules, why bother with this charade in the first place? Just try them in military tribunals where the evidentiary laws don't apply in the first place and these problems all go away.

This is what I have been saying to you for the past 8 years... the civilian justice system cannot be applied to POWs. The circumstances of criminal cases and POW cases are too different for the rules of one to apply to cases of the other. But you wouldn't listen.

Now the lib's chickens are coming home to roost... unfortunately it's the rest of us who are going to have to suffer because of it.

When the Dems lose their majorities in the House and Senate next year, there is going to be a reason for it, and this is just one of many.

Elliot

earl237 · Nov 18, 2009, 03:58 PM

Obama showed very poor judgment with these comments and a lawyer of all people should know better. Their lawyers will now be able to argue that they won't be able to get a fair trial. It would be tragic to see them get off on a technicality.

excon · Nov 18, 2009, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

This is what I have been saying to you for the past 8 years... the civillian justice system cannot be applied to POWs.

Hello again, Elliot:

Well, it's like I told tom. If I had to choose between the legal arguments YOU make, and the ones our Attorney General makes, I'm going to go with him...

excon

George_1950 · Nov 18, 2009, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by earl237

Obama showed very poor judgment with these comments and a lawyer of all people should know better. Their lawyers will now be able to argue that they won't be able to get a fair trial. It would be tragic to see them get off on a technicality.

Obama is no lawyer, friend. His passion is community organizing and he's going to eat those words many times before this trial is over. Come to think of it: he may be a witness for the defense. Lol

George_1950 · Nov 18, 2009, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Elliot:

Well, it's like I told tom. If I had to choose between the legal arguments YOU make, and the ones our Attorney General makes, I'm gonna go with him...

excon

I'm looking forward to this AG fixing the messes his boss is making for the show trial, that may very well never take place.

George_1950 · Nov 18, 2009, 04:26 PM

Obama is tragically amazing; he conducts the office he holds as though he were on the playground, or Chicago ward politics. It ain't going to wash. I'm from Georgia and the most embarrassing POTUS of the USA is from here; I did not vote for him. Obama is going to replace Carter as the most incompetent of all presidents in our history. It's just a pattern of Democrat presidential politics: find the least known operative in the land, and push him/her as the greatest candidate. Bwe he he.

speechlesstx · Nov 18, 2009, 05:15 PM

Originally Posted by George_1950

Obama is no lawyer, friend.

Like I said in the other thread, if he ever worked a courtroom he would plead "present."

George_1950 · Nov 18, 2009, 10:07 PM

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Like I said in the other thread, if he ever worked a courtroom he would plead "present."

I've been there, too; they don't ask whether you are 'present'; they ask whether you are 'ready'. We have too many laws and too many regulations; and too few people concerned about individual freedom and liberty. Perhaps the nation is waking-up to the challenge.

tomder55 · Nov 19, 2009, 03:41 AM

Some one has to explain how this improves our world image (which the President professes to care so much about) by announcing a show trial and then assuring that not only will KSM be convicted ;but that the death penalty will be applied.

George_1950 · Nov 19, 2009, 06:42 AM

Originally Posted by tomder55

Some one has to explain how this improves our world image (which the President professes to care so much about) by announcing a show trial and then assuring that not only will KSM be convicted ;but that the death penalty will be applied.

This where progressives say, Don't judge me by the outcome, but judge me by my intentions.

excon · Nov 19, 2009, 06:47 AM

Hello again,

I agree when we have a leader who misspeaks, it DOES diminish us in the eyes of the world...

But, the world should NOT misunderestimate us.

excon

speechlesstx · Nov 19, 2009, 07:37 AM

Ex, Jonah Golberg has some more thoughts on how we're taking 2 steps forward with this...

How the KSM Trial Will Undermine the Law [Jonah Goldberg]

The ACLU loves that we're bringing these guys to civilian courts. They should be careful what they wish for. From an e-friend and lawyer with very relevant government experience.

Dear Jonah,

It is a really bad idea to have a trial where the accused is so vile and dangerous no jury or judge would ever let them off. The saying “bad cases make bad law” is a cliché for a reason. The judge in the KSM case will bend over backwards to make sure KSM is convicted. The appellate courts will do the same. No one wants to be the guy who let him off. The problem with that is that they will make all kinds of screwy and destructive rulings justifying the use of government power that will then be precedence for other criminal cases. Some day when a guy gets convicted on a two bit federal charge thanks to the KSM rules that will no doubt result from this trial, we will have Eric Holder and his liberal and libertarian enablers to thank. KSM and his case is like a virus that should be isolated from the civilian justice system.

No worries, right?

George_1950 · Nov 19, 2009, 07:41 AM

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Ex, Jonah Golberg has some more thoughts on how we're taking 2 steps forward with this...

No worries, right?

Not unlike the OJ Simpson case?

excon · Nov 19, 2009, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Ex, Jonah Golberg has some more thoughts on how we're taking 2 steps forward with this...

Hello again, Steve:

It's apparent that Goldberg (and you) have NO CLUE how the federal courts work.. In fact, MOST of the people yelling about this have NO CLUE how the federal courts work..

I do.

Besides that, he's not suggesting, is he, that the federal judges will be "empathetic" towards the government?? Even the ones the dufus picked?? DUDE!

excon