There's a clip being played about this morning's hearings where Jeff Sessions is questioning Attorney General Eric Holder, and I think Eric Holder gave a lovely smackdown. I can't find the shorter video (and this vid is from Sessions' YouTube account, I guess he's proud of it):
Go to 2:19:
Transcript:
Sessions: . . . I don’t think the American People are overreacting. I don’t think they’re acting fearfully. I think they think that uh, this is war, and that uh the decision you’ve made to try these cases in Federal Court, represents a policy or political decision. Wouldn’t you agree?
Holder: No.
Sessions: Well it’s a policy decision at least is it not?
Holder: It was a policy decision, it was a decision that was case driven. It was a decision based on the evidence that I know, it frankly some of the people who have criticized the decision don’t have access to. The decision I made was based on my judgment looking at all of the evidence, talking to the people who have gathered that evidence, and the determination made by me as to where we can best prosecute these cases, and come up with the best chances for success. There was not a political component to my decision.
You see that part I put in bold? That's what seems to be getting lost here. I find it funny that Republicans can justify all sorts of crap Bush/Cheney did because they "had access to information the rest of us didn't" but when Eric Holder does it, all of a sudden it's a big deal and a threat to the Constitution.
LOL, Sesssions just isn’t letting it go. If you watch the video, he continues to complain about the civilian trials. He doesn’t seem to understand "case by case" basis. Sessions then goes on to try to say it’s a political issue because Obama criticized Bush’s "war on terrorism" when he was running for President. Eric Holder holds his own in this back and forth, and I think Sessions came off looking a bit like an idiot.
There are ways to keep a trial from becoming a spectacle. Transcripts and court documents can be sealed.
Earlier Eric Holder pointed out that he's not scared of what may be said during the trial, and we shouldn't be either:
Holder said such concerns are misplaced, because judges can control unruly defendants and any pronouncements by Mohammed would only make him look worse.
"I have every confidence that the nation and the world will see him for the coward that he is," Holder told the committee. "I'm not scared of what Khalid Sheik Mohammed has to say at trial – and no one else needs to be either."
Holder said the public and the nation's intelligence secrets can be protected during a public trial in civilian court.
"We need not cower in the face of this enemy," Holder says. "Our institutions are strong, our infrastructure is sturdy, our resolve is firm, and our people are ready."
President Obama also weighed in during his interviews according to the AP:
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."
In one of a series of TV interviews during his trip to Asia, Obama said those offended by the legal privileges given to Mohammed by virtue of getting a civilian trial rather than a military tribunal won't find it "offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him."
Obama quickly added that he did not mean to suggest he was prejudging the outcome of Mohammed's trial. "I'm not going to be in that courtroom," he said. "That's the job of the prosecutors, the judge and the jury."
* * *
Obama said the American people should have no concern about the capability of civilian courts to try suspected terrorists.
I'm going to admit I don't like the death penalty language, but that's because I'm really on the far left when it comes to that issue. I don't support the death penalty under any circumstances. In fact, for the 9/11 planners, I think putting them to death is too kind.
I find that this entire debate about the prisoners at Guantanamo is ridiculous. I read something yesterday that made me smile:
Representative Jim Sacia of the state's 89th District accused Republicans in Washington -- including Senate candidate, Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill) -- of risking thousands of local jobs in their demagoguery of the detainee issue.
"My thinking on this is extremely positive," Sacia told the Huffington Post. "If we lose this opportunity. All I can think of is we literally are idiots. I mean that sincerely."
"I understand I'm on different pages of music with others in my party. First of all this should not be a partisan issue in anyway. If President Obama brings the detainees on U.S. soil and we sit here with a brand new state-of-the-art, max security prison, sitting vacant for the last eight years, and pass on an opportunity to sell it to the federal government, which we would fill it with 1,500 regular prisoners and 800 detainees, what is the problem? The building was designed to do that.
"The only reason we have rhetoric now is because of the closing of Gitmo," Sacia concluded. "It makes no sense at all. This is a tremendous opportunity and we would be idiots to waste it."
* * *
"I saw Mark Kirk making some comment about potentially a terrorist attacking Chicago," he said. "For Christ sakes. Chicago is 150 miles from Thomson... I'm very upset about [his rhetoric]. I understand people wanting to take a stand. But before you take a stand get the facts. I didn't make a comment on this until I sat through a three hour briefing yesterday."
"It certainly wouldn't be my position if I were running for [the Senate]," Sacia added.
And through it all, it looks like President Obama is well on his way to keeping his promise of closing Guantanamo within a year, even with all of the obstruction the haters are throwing in his way.
Also, I just heard the President say on CNN that he didn't pressure Holder in any way, and that the decision was totally up to him, but he would take responsibility if something somehow goes wrong because that's what President's do.
Update [2009-11-18 11:28:37 by Muzikal203]:: Oops, looks like I missed this from yesterday:
President Obama directly acknowledged for the first time Wednesday that the prison facility at Guantanamo Bay will not close by the January deadline he set, but he said he hoped to still achieve that goal sometime next year.
Obama refused, however, to set a new deadline.
In an interview in the Chinese capital with Major Garrett of Fox News, Obama said he was "not disappointed" that the Guantanamo deadline had slipped, saying he "knew this was going to be hard."
Okay, but he still plans to close it, and I think he will, and I think he will close it within the next year.