Patterico's Pontifications


From the Buried Lede Department: 75 to Be Held Without Trial

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:33 am

The Washington Post‘s lede:

The Senate on Tuesday rejected an attempt to bar using funds from a defense spending bill to build or modify prisons in the United States to hold detainees from Guantanamo Bay, a move that suggested congressional Democrats may be lining up behind President Obama’s vision for closing the military prison.

Gotcha. Hey, anything else going on? Let’s read on to paragraph 12 of the article, shall we?

Administration officials say they expect that as many as 40 of the 215 detainees at Guantanamo will be tried in federal court or military commissions. About 90 others have been cleared for repatriation or resettlement in a third country, and about 75 more have been deemed too dangerous to release but cannot be prosecuted because of evidentiary issues and limits on the use of classified material.

We told you about this category in earlier posts. The concept of holding people without trials was discussed by Obama in a May speech. In May, Karl fleshed out the details: some detainees will be held because we can’t try them — and some might even be tried and acquitted . . . and then held nevertheless.

Kinda makes KSM’s trial seem like a show trial, huh?

Hope and change, baby. Let’s all watch and see how other news organizations handle the news that Obama has identified 75 people that he plans to hold indefnitely without trial. Mention it in the 12th paragraph? Don’t mention it all? The options are unlimited, Big Media news editors!

26 Responses to “From the Buried Lede Department: 75 to Be Held Without Trial”

  1. Obams will say, but I did close Gitmo! But I never said that I would let the terrorists defendants go!

    Patricia (b05e7f)

  2. Why, Patterico! It makes all the difference when Obama makes the decision. Didn’t you get the memo?

    GWB: evil pawn of Darth Cheney, holding Muslims without trial and torturing them horribly to no good purpose.

    BHO: hip, intellectual hope and change from ethical Chicago, protecting America from terrorists and using soberly considered techniques, rarely and judiciously, to obtain information to help prevent terrorist attacks.

    See the difference?

    Eric Blair (bc43a4)

  3. So who, besides Jim Moran, is left that isn’t “un-American”?

    Dodd (fbfada)

  4. If Obama can just put those 75 to work, perhaps making license plates – 75 750 more jobs saved or created.

    Corwin (ea9428)

  5. I fail to see the upside to Obama’s position on the KSM “trial”.

    If the verdict is a forgone conclusion; then it truly is a “show trial”. Something the eeeevil Darth BushCheney never put on or wanted.

    If, God forbid, KSM is acquitted by some technicality; people will take to the streets. It would spark vast social unrest.

    What would Obama do in case of an acquittal? Release one of the 9/11 masterminds and the killer of Daniel Pearl? Hold a man whom a court has “acquitted”? Risk the appearance of double jeopardy with a military commission?

    And, ugh, what happens if the trial is attacked, or a juror’s family is threatened or harmed? How can KSM get a “fair” trail in NYC in the first place?

    Techie (217a89)

  6. Does KSM’s defense get to call witnesses? Attempt to issue subpoenas to or obtain affidavits from Afghani warlords?

    Does the defense get to cross-examine the intelligence officers who located him or the soldiers who captured him?

    Techie (217a89)

  7. Hat to burst your little bubble, Techie (well, not really, but I thought I’d be kind of nice about it), but….
    KSM & Co were being processed through the Military Commission system, and he had even pled guilty before his trial judge and requested the death penalty, before the entire process was put in abeyance because of the change in Administrations.
    So, once again, you are wrong on a point that you rest your belief system upon:
    GWB is Evil, and has never done anything good or right.

    Oh, BTW, KSM was arrested by the Pakistani’s in RawalPindi.

    AD - RtR/OS! (1397fe)

  8. Where did that …. “e” disappear to?

    AD - RtR/OS! (1397fe)

  9. Umm………. I think you miss my drift by a mile there.

    Techie (217a89)

  10. dirty socialists and their show trials… it never ends

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  11. here’s what Mr. Matt says today:

    Not sure if anyone heard this on Hannity last night but I found it interesting and potentially problematic for Holder and the Administration. Apparently, Holder’s prior firm represented a number of the Gitmo detainees and/or potential terrorist suspects. So first, we have a Attorney General who’s firm is in the business of defending the very people Holder is supposed to be locking away and second, whose prior firm stands to profit significantly from US criminal trials. Stateside criminal trials are much less succinct and more open to delay and showboating than a military trial. A criminal trial here obviously gives counsel for defendant’s significantly more fees the longer the trial goes on and encourages them to throw out whatever smokescreen they want to in order to defend their clients/scumbags. Plus, those lawyers, at the firm who Holder was a senior partner, will be paid by our tax dollars so Holder’s friends will stand to gain considerably.

    Conflict of interest? Ya think?*

    I do not know this “Hannity” person but I hope he doesn’t get himself in trouble. This sounds like a very dangerous line of inquiry.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  12. AD – I think Techie’s point and how you received it differ significantly. Techie is a good one.

    JD (236586)

  13. Mr. Danger would say “volleys down range” right about now I think. I kind of know what that means but not really. Volleys of what exactly he never says. It has to do with some kind of weapon maybe.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  14. oh. It basically just means when you shoot stuff in concert with other people what are shooting the same stuff. Doesn’t matter what you use to shoot as long as you’re shooting. Other than that it’s a very flexible word. Muskets are involved a lot more than you would have thought probably. And carbines.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  15. Comment by Techie — 11/18/2009 @ 9:28 am

    You’re right, my apologies.
    The ‘net is a hard place to be subtle.
    Needed that next cup of coffee evidently.

    As to Mr. Holders potential conflict of interest re his previous employment:
    Do we have any details on how he unwound his partnership position at this firm?
    Are there ongoing financial contingencies?
    Remembering the stink the Left created about VP Cheney’s on-going payments from Halliburton (even though it was money from a trust established prior to his swearing-in), and the lack of any mention of Holder’s connection to this firm by the SCM, leads me to believe that there is something to be found here that is of, at least, the significance of the Cheney/Halliburton connection, and that should be aired.

    AD - RtR/OS! (1397fe)

  16. I dunno but it’s a true true thing that Holder justice is vastly more lucrative for the defense.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  17. It’s difficult and dangerous to predict the future when dealing with apparent irrationality.

    On one hand we are concerned that when KSM and others are given a trial in a civilian court they will be set free on a dissmissal, or worse, somehow found innocent after a long trial exposing all kind of intel (like what did happen in ’95 with the “Blind Sheik”).

    Now, on the other hand, as alluded to as above, we have the opposite concern over what kind of rights will be taken away from US citizens. If we can say these folk need to be treated with the same rights as US citizens, then find a way to keep them incarcerated without a trial and without Miranda rights, then how is that not precedent for anyone, including US citizens, to be held without trial and without the rights we now assume, if deemed an “enemy of the state”, or whatever?

    This is what happens when the desire of an agenda overtakes the rule of law, policy turns into the chaotic whims of those with enough power to force their will upon others. Hello Tyranny!

    Along with the fact that Holder’s firm has been involved with defending the Gitmo gang, did you hear his revolting comments about how “justice will finally be served”, as if everything is right now that the one is in charge? Has he had a head injury that caused him to forget that nothing was done by the DOJ after the embassy bombings in Africa and the bombing of the USS Cole, while HE, Holder himself, was assistant AG or some such? Now HE wants to dump on the Bush Administration who were the ones who sought apprehend those responsible??

    Which is more comforting, to think we have a bunch of idiots running the country, or to think we have people who treat us as a bunch of idiots who are running this country?

    MD in Philly (227f9c)

  18. Hm, I am seeing my post #17 on this thread, but it says there are only 16 posts, and this hasn’t registerd on the new post section…

    MD in Philly (227f9c)

  19. What legal distinction, precisely, has been made between Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the others to be tried with him and the other poor war criminals at Gitmo who will get military trials or no trial at all? This president violates the Constitution like it’s his job. You can’t declare that some people, namely KSM, get trials in a civilian court, while other people, who have committed the same acts of war, get military trials or no trials at all. Either they all do or they all don’t. Obama has created a magical distinction out of thin air that has absolutely no Constitutionality to it whatsoever. Trying KSM was entirely up to Holder. No court, no jury, no legal process other than Eric Holder’s mind made this decision. Eric Holder, not a court of law, decided KSM and the other defendants to be tried in New York were more deserving of the rights contingent to a civilian trial than the 75 who will get no trial at all, and the rest who will presumably get military trials. This is precisely the kind of cavalier decision regarding rights that the Bush Administration was accused, wrongly, of displaying for years.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  20. OK, I don’t understand. If the Senate relents and the 75 too dangerous to release are brought to the US, won’t they have the right to habeas corpus? Then what?

    Strick (bee243)

  21. chaos – I agree with you in the big picture of what you wrote. You would have to be smoking some primo crack to think that Holder did this solo, without input/guidance/direction from Barcky and his minions. Not an ice cube’s chance in hell that they would outsource a decision of this magnitude, and if they did, it shows how freakin cowardly and feckless Dr Utopia/Global Jesus/Teh One is.

    JD (d606fc)

  22. I agree with JD on that one point, while we both agree with chaos on everything else.

    It is likely Holder gets to be the front man on this for “plausible deniablility”, directing blame away from Obama if things go bad. Of course, most people would agree that any president who truly leaves a decision of this magnitude considering national security to a subordinate is irresponsible/incompetant.

    “This is precisely the kind of cavalier decision regarding rights that the Bush Administration was accused, wrongly, of displaying for years.”

    Agree completely. The left accuses the right of things only the left thinks of, let alone does.

    MD in Philly (227f9c)

  23. […] is something I think is actually a huge story, but it is getting very little play. Patterico wrote about it, earlier today, and on his very well-trafficked site, it has attracted a whopping 22 comments so far. I mentioned […]

    Common Sense Political Thought » Blog Archive » Now that he has the actual responsibility for keeping America safe, President Obama is doing some of the same things for which he criticized President Bush (73d96f)

  24. The Hill has ridiculous piece on the KSM decision that has contributions by Glenn Reynolds (described as a blogger, not a law professor) and a John Birch member as “conservatives.” Then they have a bunch of lefties who think it’s a great idea. I gave up on The Hill and am giving up on Politico as they swing reliably left. Obama will regret this.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  25. A lawyer representing the 75 who will never be released or tried has issued a press release. He claims that all of his clients were water boarded: 30 were personally water boarded by George Bush; 30 by Dick Cheney; 5 by Rush Limbaugh; 5 by Glen Beck and 5 by a good looking Diva with a $150,000.00 wardrobe. He claims he has video and is prepared to meet with the Attorney General to discuss his concerns.

    Terry Gain (1664b9)

  26. […] And if they lose, they won’t let him go anyway. […]

    Patterico's Pontifications » KSM Show Trial Watch: The Evidence Mounts (e4ab32)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0777 secs.