Skip to content

Holder That Thought

05 April 2011 @ 14:04

Yesterday, ‘Attorney General’ Eric Holder announced that the trials of five Muslim terrorists, including 09/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, would not be held in civilian courts in New York City, as he and his President devoutly wished, but in Military Tribunals in the not-yet-closed-as-promised Guantanamo.

While it was obvious that Holder would not be happy having to reverse the decision he lobbied so vehemently for [‘it’s is a law enforcement matter!!!’], one didn’t expect him to whine so much about it in his announcement – then again, who expects any class or decorum from the arrested development types in this Administration. The Lonely Conservative has labeled his statement a ‘Hissy Fit’ and I think she’s dead solid perfect.

Some highlights from his official whine, er, statement:

Unfortunately, since I made that decision, Members of Congress have intervened and imposed restrictions blocking the administration from bringing any Guantanamo detainees to trial in the United States, regardless of the venue. As the President has said, those unwise and unwarranted restrictions undermine our counterterrorism efforts and could harm our national security. Decisions about who, where and how to prosecute have always been – and must remain – the responsibility of the executive branch. Members of Congress simply do not have access to the evidence and other information necessary to make prosecution judgments. Yet they have taken one of the nation’s most tested counterterrorism tools off the table and tied our hands in a way that could have serious ramifications. We will continue to seek to repeal those restrictions.

From the Fox News report:

Expressing his disappointment in no uncertain terms, the attorney general said that as a native New Yorker, he knows as well as anyone the federal court’s capacity to try the suspects. He added that he’s intimately familiar with the cases, much moreso than congressional members — or the public — who opposed allowing the cases to be held in the United States.
“Do I know better than them? Yes. I respect their ability to disagree but they should respect that this is an executive branch function, a unique executive branch function,” Holder said in a press conference.

Ah…Eric, we operate here under a system of checks and balances – the Congress determined that your actions harmed our national security and acted accordingly. You see, there’s this thing that you ignore called The Constitution Of The United States Of America and, unlike you, we believe it is the supreme law of the land. In your world, everything is relative, I know, but, you see, most of us live in the Real World. You’re an utter and total disgrace. And what an arrogant little shit you are.

I like William Teach’s idea:

Perhaps Holder should be called up to Capital Hill for a grilling by the GOP controlled House over how our governmental system works.

He won’t listen, but it would be nice to watch the rat bastard squirm before the cameras and record it for posterity [and for use in some ads in 2012 – are you listening RNC doofuses?].

More from the statement:

Since I made the decision to prosecute the alleged 9/11 conspirators, the effectiveness of our federal courts and the thousands of prosecutors, judges, law enforcement officers, and defense attorneys who work in them have been subjected to a number of unfair, and often unfounded, criticisms. Too many people – many of whom certainly know better – have expressed doubts about our time-honored and time-tested system of justice. That’s not only misguided, it’s wrong. The fact is, federal courts have proven to be an unparalleled instrument for bringing terrorists to justice. Our courts have convicted hundreds of terrorists since September 11, and our prisons safely and securely hold hundreds today, many of them serving long sentences. There is no other tool that has demonstrated the ability to both incapacitate terrorists and collect intelligence from them over such a diverse range of circumstances as our traditional justice system. Our national security demands that we continue to prosecute terrorists in federal court, and we will do so. Our heritage, our values, and our legacy to future generations also demand that we have full faith and confidence in a court system that has distinguished this nation throughout its history.

As Lee Casey and David Rivkin, who both served in The Justice Department under Presidents Reagan and Bush I, state:

Civilian trials in federal court for captured al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists were always unrealistic and inappropriate. These men are not simple criminal defendants but soldiers in a global war waged against the United States and its allies. They can and should be tried before military courts.

To fail to understand the difference is to deny reality. But, then again, that’s your MO, isn’t it: deny that the New Black Panthers committed any voter intimidation despite the testimony of witnesses and the video tapes, deny that white people can suffer from discrimination, deny that Islamic terrorists are soldiers in a war [that’s certainly how they see themselves]. Aren’t you just the perfect poster child for the race hucksters and the Leftist Mindset. [Can AG’s be impeached?]

And the capper from the statement:

Sadly, this case has been marked by needless controversy since the beginning. But despite all the argument and debate it has engendered, the prosecution of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-conspirators should never have been about settling ideological arguments or scoring political points….

As Stacy McCain commented:

…Holder accused his critics of using the KSM case for “settling ideological arguments or scoring political points.” Which is, of course, what Holder’s official statement was all about.

Ah…The Big Lie emerges once again from the bowels of this Administration.

I have to stop commenting now becauses I have to call 911 and get Holder a Waaahmbulance.

%d bloggers like this: