Obama’s Show Trial Two-fer: KSM and GWB at the Same Time

2009 November 15

Ever since Eric Holder made the announcement that the Justice Department was going to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a New York federal criminal court, the refrain from liberal columnists and TV hosts, administration flacks, and Democrat members of congress has been:

“We are going to show the world that we are better.”

Better than what? On Fox News Sunday, Senator Jake Reed, (D. RI) told Chris Wallace. “This is an opportunity to show that we’re better than the terrorists.”  Really? That’s in doubt?

But if you put the talking point in context of what Barack Obama has said every chance he has gotten, in forums all over the world, here is what must be left unspoken for now, to avoid the charge of politics:

We are going to show the world that we are better now that Barack Obama is in charge.  Now that we are no longer a warmongering rogue nation run by war criminals who were torturers and on the same moral level as the terrorists.

So, while Eric Holder is pretending his opponent in court is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, his political allies in the ACLU– or whatever radical group supplies the lawyers for the World Trade Center war criminals—will be putting the Bush Administration on trial.

Eric Holder and Barack Obama are making this possible. On purpose. In fact, as Rudy Gulliani pointed out on every Sunday talk show, they are going out their way to set this up, as other, far less important terrorists, are going to be tried by military tribunals.

When Eric Holder announced a few months ago that he was going to investigate the interrogators at the CIA, and anyone who gave them legal guidelines, it blew up in the Administration’s face—everywhere except MSNBC, that is.

The American people who love to cheer for Jack Bauer and Dirty Harry are not clamoring to have the people sworn to protect them persecuted for putting a wet washcloth on the face of a mass murderer in order to prevent the slaughter of more innocents.

With his big announcement on that, Holder single-handedly resuscitated the public career of Dick Cheney, whose polls jumped overnight as the President’s continued to slide.

So now, Eric Holder and Barack Obama area going to get Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to do their dirty work for them.

You don’t believe me?  Find one statement made by the Administration and its flacks that doesn’t beggar belief.

Since when do we have trials to make a statement?  What kind of legal precedent is that?  Holder claims it’s a legal tradition to have a trial in the same jurisdiction as the “crime.”

Really?  Then what does that phrase “change of venue” mean?  What is it for?  Are you really going to let this case be up to 12 people who are so stupid or mentally marginal that they have no opinion about the attacks on the World Trade Center?

(And the way this Administration leaks, you would have to find 12 very stupid or very brave people to want to be on this jury.  All they have to do is find the name of one juror who doesn’t want to be an al Qaeda target forever.)

White House ludicrously claims that Holder made the decision.  That is either a blatant lie, or further proof that Barack Obama doesn’t give a tinker’s dam about national security.

If a decision of this magnitude can be made at the Attorney General level, with its implications for national security, for intelligence gathering and sources—not to mention it will make New York City ground zero for al Qaeda once again—then the dithering over Afghanistan by this bunch of radical amateurs takes on a whole new light.

The ACLU is lauding this decision, because they see it as their prime opportunity to dismantle America’s security apparatus.

Otherwise, why would they not be howling at Holder’s Alice in Wonderland verdict first, trial later statements. Since when is the ACLU okay with announcing a prosecutor is seeking the death penalty, when exact charges have not been filed?  Is it a new ACLU practice to hail a prosecutor who brags about the jury pool being so tainted that he is confident of the verdict?

No, the ACLU is fine with all of this because they know this isn’t the real target of Holder and Obama in this show trial:

They know that THIS is.

And with those stakes, who cares about a little issue like this?

  • Share/Bookmark

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

17 Responses leave one →
  1. November 15, 2009

    What exactly are you afraid of? That the truth will come out?

  2. David Forsmark permalink
    November 15, 2009

    Yep, truth like intelligence sources and methods and other things you consider trivia next to making political points. Actually, the trial will be a huge benefit to conservatives and probably Republicans as this turns into a fiasco. Unlike you, I put the safety of my country ahead of such considerations.

  3. November 15, 2009

    Its interesting to note that Holder lets go Black Panthers who were intimidating voters at a polling booth in Philadelphia.

    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU&hl=en_US&fs=1&]

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU

    But he is willing to tear down our National Defense by going after the CIA and soon other innocent men and women who maybe have been involved with the capture and detention of the 9/11 conspirators. Watch how Obama will tap dance around ever calling Major Hasan a Jihadist, or someone who should be tried for hate crimes.

    I agree with David, Obama and Holder may get their wish now, but in the end it will be the Socialist Democratic party that suffers. Obama is becoming a true joker just like his picture. http://img.skitch.com/20090803-dia3jr11q88176ia1awmynjibq.jpg

    The world is laughing at the fool we now have in the White House. Not long ago French President Nicolas Sarkozy chastized Obama for his weak mindedness. Our enemies in Iran, Soviet Union, and other countries are seeing what a weak man Obama is. They will react to his weakness and America will be at great risk.

    not sure the U Tube embedding works here but the URL should work. Live and learn.

  4. John Davidson permalink
    November 15, 2009

    Ben, are you a cartoon character.

  5. victor permalink
    November 16, 2009

    This decision places every American at greater risk than they were before, especially New Yorkers. Think of the millions that will be spent needlessly so that our “Apologist in Chief” can tell the world that we even give terrorists civilian trials and protections. This O has never seen the forest for the trees since he became President. Military tribunals, used by Lincoln &FDR among others are even too good for them. They now have their propaganda stage to rally other jihadists. This is a potentially catastrophic decision that shows the world we aren’t serious about the War on Terror.

  6. shane comeback permalink
    November 17, 2009

    It amazes me that some still want to blame everyone for 911 except those who really did it. One thing I DO hope that ‘comes out’ is the leftist stupid PC nonsense that contributed to this attack on America.

  7. Paul Cooper permalink
    November 17, 2009

    David, just when I think I’m a pretty good writer I read your articles and am blown away. Excellent piece! This may be the best I’ve read on the topic.

  8. F. Swemson permalink
    November 15, 2009

    We already know the truth about these animals.

    They’re NOT entitled to be tried under the US system of jurisprudence. They’re WAR CRIMiNALS and should be tried in front of a military tribunal… Not in a public spectacle designed for the sole purpose of distracting the American public from the immoral and unconstitutional manner in which the Obamunist is intentionally destroy our country…

    Stop with your sophomoric leftist platitudes, and try to think for yourself for a change.

  9. November 15, 2009

    [Yep, truth like intelligence sources and methods and other things you consider trivia next to making political points. ]

    Like you just did? They can’t make classified information public in the trial without being approved by intelligence agencies or Obama. Republicans have a history of divulging classified security information for political purposes. You can’t say that about Democrats.

  10. November 15, 2009

    Yeah, that girl on the cell phone looks real intimidated. ;)

  11. November 16, 2009

    [This is a potentially catastrophic decision]

    It may be catastrophic for some in the Bush administration when the truth comes out.

  12. David Forsmark permalink
    November 16, 2009

    Thanks for proving my point. You do know that the word “Stalinist” regularly comes before “show trial,” right?

    Your average American, after hearing the stupid word “torture” bandied about by your ilk for 5 years is going to say, “Is THAT all you did?”

  13. In the Know permalink
    November 16, 2009

    Swemson,

    I figured it out. Ben actually has a computer that communicates to us from the past. In his dimension, GWB is the POTUS. That’s why, no matter what, his comments ALWAYS have a way of blaming GWB.

  14. In the Know permalink
    November 16, 2009

    You must be in a union. “What officer? Me and the boys were gonna play baseball after the meeting tonight; that’s why we all have these louisville sluggers. We didn’t even no about a secret ballet vote…sheesh”.

  15. jochang permalink
    November 17, 2009

    Ben

    Are you really that twisted, or are you just a big old put-on?

  16. F. Swemson permalink
    November 17, 2009

    He’s just a troll…

Trackbacks and Pingbacks

  1. How Does it Demonstrate the Moral Superiority of American Justice to Give the 9/11 Mastermind a Show Trial? « NewsReal Blog

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS