Lott: Supreme Court Decision Is ‘Ridiculous and Outrageous,’ Has Our Enemies ‘Laughing At Us’
Lott: Supreme Court Decision Is ‘Ridiculous and Outrageous,’ Has Our Enemies ‘Laughing At Us’
Appearing on Fox News this afternoon, Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) lashed out the Supreme Court, which ruled today that the Bush administration’s military commissions were illegal. Lott said the decision was “ridiculous and outrageous” and likely had our enemies “laughing at us.” Then he admitted he hadn’t read it. Watch it:
Transcript:
CAVUTO: President Bush says he will ask congress to keep them going. But it does make you wonder, are some enemies laughing at us? A concern by Republican senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, who joins us now. Senator, what do you think?
LOTT: I think some people are probably laughing at us. This is ridiculous and outrageous. Now in legal speak, let me say, I have not read the entire opinion, nor the dissents. But preliminarily my opinion is they probably didn’t even have jurisdiction. They shouldn’t have ruled the way they did. This is not a bunch of pussycats we’re talking about here. These are people that have made it clear in many instances that they would kill Americans if they got out. This is Osama bin Laden’s driver. And this is one other example of why the American people have lost faith in so much of our federal judiciary. This is a very bad decision in my opinion.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
124 Responses to “Lott: Supreme Court Decision Is ‘Ridiculous and Outrageous,’ Has Our Enemies ‘Laughing At Us’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Lott’s an ignorant hillbilly.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:25 pmThe key Lott statement says it all: “I have not read the entire opinion, nor the dissents.”
June 29th, 2006 at 4:27 pmwhat is it exactly with southern politicians? Here are two great examples of the difference in one democrat congressman and one republican congressmen.
first: The democrat: A Portrait of a Progressive Congressman
second: The republican: Westmoreland co-sponsors bill on the Ten Commandments and can’t even name them
June 29th, 2006 at 4:28 pmI’d be laughing at Lott if any it wasn’t so sad that “goofs’ like this are actually having an impact on the average citizen’s life..Sen Lott will likely be GOP Senate leader next year.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:28 pmCavuto looks like Eddie Munster:
http://www.freehomepages.com/munsters1/famtree/eddie.html
June 29th, 2006 at 4:29 pmOur Enemy has been laughing at us since Bush was elected in 2000!
June 29th, 2006 at 4:30 pmHe’s right. They are laughing at us. Every time they watch Bush’s speech with that “Mission Accomplished” banner which they replay for their friends each night.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:30 pmHow can these jerks make comments when they haven’t read the Supreme Courts opinions.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:31 pmredleg beat me to it.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:31 pmLet us suppose one had the mind of an imbecile. And also let us suppose one had the mind of a Senator.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:31 pmYet I repeat myself.
He looks like Frank Booth in Blue Velvet after huffing some gas…
June 29th, 2006 at 4:33 pmHey Mr. Lott, how’s that niggra’ outreach you promised going?
RIP
Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 Inf (Stryker)
KIA 03 Feb 05
Mosul, Iraq
Or As Tony Snow and The Reppuetcan’s would say:
June 29th, 2006 at 4:33 pm#1462
America hasn’t “lost faith in so much of our federal judiciary.” They’ve just been convinced by idiots like you that there is a problem with the federal judiciary. Most have lost faith in the whole government because of morons like you, Lott.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:35 pmI was just remarking that Sen. Grassley looks like a prototypical Lynch psychovillain.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:36 pmYou know, the Republicans seem awfully well prepared awfully quickly to go on to “sit and spin” at Fox. One wonders if they had a tip from Scalito and Thomas regarding the outcome of the case so that they could prepare their talking points and have them ready to go.
Thomas bring up the unitary executive bullshit right away in his dissent, so you can’t help but wonder if the communication between the justices and the administration goes both ways.
I know it can’t be proven, and they would obviously never admit to it, but my tin foil hat tells me they were talking to one another.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:37 pmSince he hasn’t read the opinion or the dissents, he must have gotten his preliminiary opinion from FOX? Why do I think that if this case had gone the way he assumed it would go, he wouldn’t be quibbling about jurisdiction?
June 29th, 2006 at 4:38 pmThese are people that have made it clear in many instances that they would kill Americans if they got out.
You mean like GWB, Rice and Cheney when said: Bring them on or Support the Troops.
This is Osama bin Laden’s driver.
If Osama is not that important, why would his driver?
I think some people are probably laughing at us.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:39 pmNobody laughs when people die.
Trent Lott looks like he’s having a stroke on camera…
June 29th, 2006 at 4:40 pmWhat a twit!
First off, nobody is saying that Hamden (sp?) should just be set free. To pretend otherwise is merely political rhetoric to spin this topic away from the reality of the situation and the truth.
Second, I can hardly believe that Senator Lott would be able to hold his head up high in church on Sunday if what he is really condoning here were looked at closely. Any good Christian would look at him like he was a worm.
SCOTUS was correct in pointing out that we must adhere to the Geneva Conventions. We signed that treaty and that means we must deal correctly and humanely with military prisoners no mather WHAT they’ve done, how angry we are, or how dangerous they might be. It is a matter of our honor and the law. No matter what, we cannot sink to become what we hate or America is no better than a banana republic.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:43 pmRedleg:
As a duly ashamed Mississippian, I can assure that Lott is not a “hillbilly”. He is what we here in the Magnolia state refer to as “coast trash”. My apologies to all those otherwise decent and honest coastal mississippi residents who are not Trent Lott.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:43 pm……”they don’t probably don’t have jurisdiction”……..scary.
Another example of the Sissy Rebublican Syndrome (SRS). These bedwetters are so scared that they would have the terrorists win by ignorning the Constitution.
The Supremes didn’t say these guys could not be tried, but that Congress would have to pass a supporting law first. The president overstepped his power by doing this without Congress.
Since Lott would prefer a King over a Consitution, he is upset. Lott should refund his salary to the taxpayers and go home.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:43 pmThey don’t read the bills they pass into law either, so it doesn’t surprise me that he hasn’t read the Supreme Court’s ruling. Pretty much the actions of a man who works 90 days a year for $168K.
We should lower the salary. It would attract people who really want the job rather than those who just want the paycheck and the perceived sense of authority.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:44 pmI will always remember Lott on some news program lamenting the loss of his cherished estate after Katrina……yes, Mr. Lott…we know you had it just as bad as everyone else…in that little Superdome in your head….
Here’s a good poll, Whcih is worse, AlJazeera, or Fox…….?
June 29th, 2006 at 4:44 pmAs Lott has rendered his expert legal opinion, I give you this excerpt from the Mississippi Code of Professional Responsibility. Rule 1.1 requires competence in legal representation.
“Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.”
. . .
“Thoroughness and Preparation. Competent handling of a particular matter includes inquiry into and analysis of the factual and legal elements of the problem, and use of methods and procedures meeting the standards of competent practitioners. It also includes adequate preparation. The required attention and preparation are determined in part by what is at stake; major litigation and complex transactions ordinarily require more elaborate treatment than matters of lesser consequence.”
It seems clear Lott is simply not competent to give an opinion.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:47 pmah, the WORLD is laughing at you Trott!
June 29th, 2006 at 4:48 pmOur enemies are laughing because we are letting this administration destroy the country - and our enemies don’t have to lift a finger - just as they planned.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:49 pmWhat American act, event, or law, exactly, does the Supreme Court of the United States of America NOT have jurisdiction over?
June 29th, 2006 at 4:50 pmThat’s totally in character with ole Trent; give an opinion whether you know the facts or not! I think senility is catching up with him. It seems lately that every time he opens his big mouth he ends up having to pull his foot out.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:51 pmGee, how else would a spokesman for the real party of treason, the Republicans, answer a charge that this criminal administration has once again overstepped the law so badly that even their own Kangaroo Court is voting against them!
June 29th, 2006 at 4:52 pmThis is just the beginning. W is spiraling downward…
June 29th, 2006 at 4:52 pm#28
It’s not senility. It’s arrogance.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:53 pmAnyone notice that not even the trolls have anything to say about this?
June 29th, 2006 at 4:54 pmAnd oh yes! Dig those fotos of him and Cavuto. Two neocons with different views: one looking on while the other breaks into tears!
June 29th, 2006 at 4:55 pm“In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”
Thomas Jefferson
June 29th, 2006 at 4:56 pm“A nation under a well regulated government, should permit none to remain uninstructed. It is monarchical and aristocratical government only requires ignorance for its support.”
Thomas Jefferson
June 29th, 2006 at 5:00 pm“A nation under a well regulated government, should permit none to remain uninstructed. It is monarchical and aristocratical government only requires ignorance for its support.â€
oops
Thomas Paine
June 29th, 2006 at 5:02 pm# 5 Eddie Munster is better looking!For that matter is was Herman! Cavuto looks mre like Grandpa to me.In real life the recently deceased Al Lewis(Grandpa) was a letie!!
June 29th, 2006 at 5:04 pmAl Lewis a leftie!!
June 29th, 2006 at 5:05 pmIt is crap like this clip that has enemies laughing…idiots like Lott going on an idiot network like Fox and showing the world how totally clueless and ignorant and hateful they all are.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:12 pmI sho’s loves to prove my allegiance to the white man.
Uncle Clarence Thomas
June 29th, 2006 at 5:15 pmIs GITMO an acronym? There’s no I in Guantanamo. Does FOX always refer to it as GITMO because they think that their audience can’t read/pronounce the word “Guantanamo”? It probably sounds too ‘foriegn’ to them!
June 29th, 2006 at 5:17 pmThe Bush/Cheney/Rove war gang are going to have to manufacture another domestic terrorist attack to reinstill fear and to point the blame at Democrats and the media.
They need to fill those gulags up with somebody.
-GSD
June 29th, 2006 at 5:19 pmGitmo is slang for guantanamo. It was dubbed gitmo by the military.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:19 pmDoes anyone really care what Trent Lott thinks or says? The real lesson from this decision is that the Bush appointees are showing themselves to be solid conservatives. At this time, Justice Kennedy is the only link to the four “liberal” justices that we have left on the court. There were two swing votes on the Court, now Kennedy is the only one left. We have to hope that George Bush does not have the opportunity to select another member of the Supreme Court which would lock in a conservative majority.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:22 pmAmerica won today.
Democracy won.
Liberty won.
Freedom won.
Humanity won.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:24 pmI am laughing at Lott’s ridiculous comments. I guess that makes me the enemy.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:25 pmGod bless the Honorable Supreme Court of the United States of America, and let the spirit of humanity be the compass for every ruling they make from this day forth.
Let freedom ring baby.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:25 pmWhen is Lott going to stop wearing that stupid rug on his head? He looks ridiculous.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:27 pmSorry Trent, baby, our enemies were laughing at us before this, and I’m laughing at you now. :-D
June 29th, 2006 at 5:28 pm44. Big Al
My fantasy is that the Democrats will take back the Congress this year, hold real investigations into election 2000, and determine that the repugs executed a criminal conspiracy to steal that election. In my fantasy, this would mean that both Bush appointees to the SCOTUS would have to vacate their positions, since they were in effect illegally nominated.
Oh yeah, and all the “legislation” he’s signed would be removed from the books as well. The thought of it keeps me warm at night.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:29 pmTrent Lott should stick to things he knows something about — such as giving speeches before white supremacy groups.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:30 pmCould somebody tell Klansman Lott that its the Federal “judiciary” doesn’t mean they’re Jewish. That may be his hang-up.
As for me, this is the proudest I’ve been of the Federal judiciary in a long, long time.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:31 pm> This is just the beginning. W is spiraling downward…
Yeah how long do we have to keep hearing about the beginning of the end? If US citizens actually took responsibility for their democracy he would have been out before he was installed by your supreme court of kingmakers.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:36 pmIt’s obvious that the GOP holds Marbury vs Madison in complete and utter contempt. What tthe fuck’s to stop the Bush Empire from simply ignoring the High Court’s decision?
In other news, Bob Herbert asks, “After all the sound and fury of the past few years, how is the U.S. doing in its fight against terrorism?”
Good fucking question.
You know where to go for the answer.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:39 pmNo trent the world may have upped some respect for America again.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:39 pmSo, what happened here today? Fox News heard that this decision came down from the Supreme Court and felt that they immediately had to get someone on the air to denounce it. So they grab the nearest Republican Senator they could find and ask him to comment on it. The Senator starts caling the decision all kinds of names and then admits that he didn’t read it (or the dissents upon which his opinion was based).
So why, Fox News, was it so important to get Senator Lott’s “reaction”? Why was his entirely uninformed opinion so important to get out on the air? Couldn’t they find a Republican who did read the decision, so they could get a (at least somewhat) informed opinion? Or does Fox News feel that giving the public a factually-based analysis is a bad way to run a network?
June 29th, 2006 at 5:42 pmOr does Fox News feel that giving the public a factually-based analysis is a bad way to run a network?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — June 29, 2006 @ 5:42 pm
Wayne - in their utter stupidity they do not realize that this is the reason they are losing veiwers!!
June 29th, 2006 at 5:45 pm#20 Big Johnnie:
Don’t worry… we know there are still good people left in Mississippi… after all… just look at a good man there named Congressman Bennie G. Thompson (D - 2nd District)
Regrettably, good guys like him are getting rarer and rarer there… like… (now ex-) Governor Musgrove.
God bless those good Mississippians… may their dying breed replenish soon!
June 29th, 2006 at 5:48 pm#1, Redleg, you forgot an adjective, it should be redneck hillbilly.
Hey republicans, how’s the stacked supreme working for you now??
June 29th, 2006 at 5:48 pmWhy do I think that if this case had gone the way he assumed it would go, he wouldn’t be quibbling about jurisdiction?
Comment by Zookeeper — June 29, 2006 @ 4:38 pm
Excellent point, Zoo! If jurisdiction was the issue, they should have been screaming about it long before this. (I don’t know if they did.) In fact, if jurisdiction was an issue for them, then why didn’t they just pass a law taking away the federal court’s jurisdiction in this cases? After all, that’s how the Republican Party feels you should deal with a loss in the courts. Make sure it can’t happen again by taking the court’s right to review it.
I don’t know how anyone with an IQ in the three-digit range can believe that the Republicans are the “good guys”.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:50 pmIf Strom Thurmond were President, we wouldn’t have all these problems.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:56 pm#45, Great post brother. Today was a blow for Lady Liberty.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:56 pmYou know people… Fox News is too far to the right… but they aren’t evil.
When they began in 1996, they wanted to counter the left-leaning media that had been established since the 1960’s. That was a respectible (if not formidable) goal.
However, since then, the media has become right slanted corporate nouthpieces for the GOP.
I’d say that, to revert to keeping things “Fair and Balanced,” Fox News needs to move starkly to the left.
In so doing, that would truly balance out the news media (and in so doing, get them their ratings back.)
June 29th, 2006 at 5:57 pm#61 - You’re scaring me, Wayne! Stop trying to think like them. Your brain will freeze like that!
Thank goodness we have IQs in the 3-digit range. ;)
June 29th, 2006 at 5:57 pmLOL Mr. Blue,
I would by in hysterics if I saw Bill O’Rieilly explaining to his dwindling audience, on why they should donate to the ACLU.
June 29th, 2006 at 6:06 pmThis is just the beginning. W is spiraling downward…
Comment by Todd — June 29, 2006 @ 5:36 pm
You know it.
Today was a landmark ruling that will open the door for Congressional investigation into the Bush administrations execution of their war on terror.
By directing that the President acted without authority states that he acted unlawfully.
He broke our laws.
They opened the floodgates today and there is no turning back now.
June 29th, 2006 at 6:10 pmThis just in….
Lott thinks Brown vs. The Board of Education was ‘ridiculous’ and has those damn bluebelly Yankees ‘laughing at us’.
June 29th, 2006 at 6:12 pm#64 MrBlueSky,
The problem with Fox News Channel is that they are not a news channel. They are nothing more than an opinion channel. Conservatives believe that the news delivered in your home each night must be “balanced” in order to be “fair”. But journalism has nothing to do with “balance”. Journalism is about “objectivity”, and if the facts make someone look bad, then it’s probably because that someone is bad. It’s not because the news has a “liberal slant”. And the news only has to be “fair” to the viewers by being objective, not balanced. You don’t need to hear “both sides” of a story of you know damn well that one of the sides is going to be lying. And the reporters covering the story should tell viewers the very objective fact that someone is lying.
Facts have no left-right bias, only the spin on them does. And Fox News Channel is almost entirely spin, not objective news. If “balance” is what you’re looking for, then don’t look to the news for it. It has no place there.
June 29th, 2006 at 6:12 pmLott hasn’t read the decision and Frist is waiting for the DVD release before commenting.
June 29th, 2006 at 6:14 pmHey, I agree with Redleg that Lott’s ignorant but no way he’s a hillbilly,
June 29th, 2006 at 6:18 pmthere’s no hills in Mississippi and he doesn’t look the way the hillbilly’s
from my area (southern Missouri) look. He’s just an ignorant cracker
They have juristiction, says so in the Constitution
Lott obviously needs a trip to Gitmo as a tenant, along with the rest of his Republican Criminal buddies. The Geneva Convention is the LAW OF THE LAND. I know that conservatives don’t pay attention to law, so it’s understandable that he wouldn’t know
June 29th, 2006 at 6:18 pmLott, your boy Bush handpicked the Court to make it more consternative… thank HIM!
June 29th, 2006 at 7:04 pmAnd thinking America is laughing at Trent Lott.
June 29th, 2006 at 7:10 pmLott is sucking up to BushCo because he wants to take over for Frist in case the Republicans retain control of the senate.
Fox News = fact free TV!
I’ll guarantee the media types who reported the story didn’t read the decision either. It isn’t necessary to read the whole thing to make a comment on the basics. Find something a little less snarky over which to criticize Lott. Maybe being a former Klan member! Oh, that’s right. That was sheets Bird. Never mind.
June 29th, 2006 at 7:24 pmHe’s senile.
June 29th, 2006 at 7:35 pmI hope that this SCOTUS ruling puts the skids on BusHitler’s drive to dictatorship. As for Lott, I don’t give a wombat’s shit what he thinks.
June 29th, 2006 at 8:13 pmGood Gravy!
eddy munster has a show on fox!
June 29th, 2006 at 9:06 pmLott on this issue is like Frist on Schiavo. Posturing and Stupid.
SCOTUS main point was that the way (procedural) the military tribunals have been set up are illegal in that they violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and the Common Article 3 of the Third Geneva Convention. The bottom line is simple: the military commissions, as set up by the President, violate the principle of due process. The proper way to try these guys is through the courts-martial process,,which at minimum require both the presence of the accused at their trial, as well as both the accused and his/her attorney being privy to the evidence against them. In other words, NO SECRET TRIALS. The only way that the Congress can give any kind of green light to Bush is if 1) they change the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and 2) withdraw the U.S. from the Geneva Convention treaties.
I’m all for trying and convicting those who would harm us (in fair trials). Those who are being held in military prisons in Gitmo and other places should have swift (like immediate) administrative reviews to determine if they should be charged. If not, they should be released. If charged, they should be tried with all due process. What this government can do to the “already found guilty without trial” in Gitmo, etc. they can do to anyone…including U.S. citizens that dissent.
June 29th, 2006 at 9:46 pmreading court opinions is for surrender monkeys.
June 29th, 2006 at 10:04 pm.
Sen. Lott is a self-serving opportunist. His ‘motivation is his desire to have his old post back. The uproar over his ‘remark’ angered BushCo, so they pressured him to step down, and gave the post to Sen. Frist. Sen. Lott has made a few snarky comments about BushCo, but for the most part has stayed below the radar. Until now. He sees a chance to score some points, and he is going for it. Pathetic, but soooo predictable. Vulture.
June 29th, 2006 at 10:40 pmMy guess is our enemies - a growing number by the way - could care less about what we do to prisoners. Our allies, however, - a reducing number by the way - might actually think there are still a few sane people in our country. Most importangly, holding people without charges isn’t the America as I understand it.
June 29th, 2006 at 10:49 pmMy guess is our enemies - a growing number by the way - could care less about what we do to prisoners. Our allies, however, - a reducing number by the way - might actually think there are still a few sane people in our country. Most importangly, holding people without charges isn’t the America as I understand it.
June 29th, 2006 at 10:49 pm#58 MrBlueSky
Congressman Thomspon is my representive MS-02! There were a lot of blue counties in MS in 2004, especially in my area (NW MS aka “the delta”). every western county in ms went for kerry (predominately african american, plus hinds cty home of jackson our capital city). musgrove was good, william winter and bill waller, too. Mike Moore took on big tobacco and may run for senate. gene taylor represents the coast in congress and he’s pretty good, too. yeah, mississippi is okay by me.
#70 merckx
there are hills in mississippi, in the east/northeastern part of the state. pretty country, just that lott’s not from there. he’s from the coast.
Both Lott and our other senator Thad Cochran, I’m sure you all know, were cheerleaders at Ole Miss. Both of them.
June 29th, 2006 at 10:51 pmYeah, he’s right…… look at the world news, they can’t believe it.
June 29th, 2006 at 10:53 pmTrent Lott represents the country’s best and brightest…
…how else could he hold such a prestigious office…
…in a country so great?
…kill it (politically) before it grows…
…they (sh*t eating conservative scum) are YOUR neighbors, YOUR family and YOUR friends…
…and they’re destroying YOUR country…
June 29th, 2006 at 11:20 pmThey’re laughing at that silly rug on his head.
June 30th, 2006 at 12:34 amThe supreme Court ruled that the President acted outside of the Constitution and without Constitutional Authority.
That means it was unConstitutional, which is synonomous, with Unlawful.
The Constitution is the LAWS by which the President is governed.
June 30th, 2006 at 1:19 amA law “authorizes” you to do something, and sets restrictions.
For instance, a speed limit gives you the “Authority” to go as fast as the number on the sign.
If I’m travelling down the road at 50 miles per hour, and I get pulled over, if I can show the cop a sign which gave me the “authority” to go 50 miles per hour then everythings cool.
But if I cannot find such a sign, then I acted “outside of my authority”, and I am therefore guilty of committing a crime, the severity of which will be classified by predetermed factors.
June 30th, 2006 at 1:20 amTo the right wingers in here to whom this is confusion, don’t worry.
There well be plenty of CNN Legal Analysts explaining it all to you shortly.
Then it will all make sense.
June 30th, 2006 at 1:31 am# 19: SCOTUS was correct in pointing out that we must adhere to the Geneva Conventions. We signed that treaty and that means we must deal correctly and humanely with military prisoners no mather WHAT they’ve done, how angry we are, or how dangerous they might be. It is a matter of our honor and the law.
Typical liberal BS.
June 30th, 2006 at 1:43 amWhen did the people we are fighting sign the treaty… Oh that’s right they didn’t. It would not fit in with their plan to intimidate and terrorize. Should we give them the same rights as real Americans?… NO.
They be-head their prisoners after beating them half to death, remember those people are American children their beating. Uh just a little worse than a little humiliation with barking dogs and fake wires don’t you think. They hide among the general population in the country they are occupying and wear no uniforms to again hide behind the innocent. Doesn’t the Treaty say something about that?…YES. They kill innocent people with road side and car bombs with no regard for innocent Iraqis. They should not be considered military prisoners if they are not in their countries military. They are the occupiers. These people don’t want another Democracy to be formed in the Middle East they just want to have their power back and to make the U.S.A look bad. They care nothing about the welfare of the people in Iraq.
Um, Troll Piper,
The “terrorists” have won when we abandon our Democratic priciples such as those great old canards,
Guilty until proven innocent
Tried by a jury of one’s peers
The right not to self-incriminate
The right to due process
The right to legal counsel
The right to face one’s accusers in a court of law
If you’re ready to toss our Democratic principles out the window because you’re afraid of a small group of religious fanatics half-way across the world, then I pity you, I really do.
June 30th, 2006 at 1:58 am#89: Beheadings started after Abu Ghraib. Think those Geneva conventions were there for a reason?
June 30th, 2006 at 2:52 am#89 “They care nothing about the welfare of the people…”
Were you speaking about the “insurgents” in Iraq or the Republicans here?
June 30th, 2006 at 3:13 amSure the Terrorist didnt know that the US would actively seek to track terrorist funds.
June 30th, 2006 at 6:43 amIts not like there were TV programs and documentories showing the US doing just that.
bad news for america = good news for the libs
June 30th, 2006 at 8:44 am94 janitor
June 30th, 2006 at 8:49 amHaven’t you cleaned this comment out of your closet enough times already? How many you got in there?
the truth hurts
June 30th, 2006 at 8:58 amThe smackdown of King George…
Call it a liberal fantasy if you want, but the Supreme Court’s legal smackdown of the Bush White House’s monarchical terror “war” was the first real hint of the return of oversight and sanity in at least some quarters of American government and jur…
June 30th, 2006 at 10:02 amsmackdown of the Bush White House’s monarchical terror “war†was the first real hint of the return of oversight and sanity in at least some quarters of American government and jur…
Trackback by ReidBlog
As long as you think so. The fact is this nonsense by the over reaching black robed robbers won’t stand in the light of day once congress gets involved. Where is it written in the US Constitution that the Judicial Branch has any say how a war is prosecuted or prisoners of that war handled? Bush can ignore the ruling and probably will.
June 30th, 2006 at 10:09 amthe truth hurts
Comment by the janitor
Duh… Obviously! The SCOTUS just informed the Administration that the “truth” is, they have been acting outside of the law - the law as defined by the Constitution. Play outside of the law and it does hurt when you get caught. I am sure it hurts every criminal we send to prison when they get their sentence handed to them.
June 30th, 2006 at 10:22 amComment by I-RIGHT-I — June 30, 2006 @ 10:09 am
I can see you….
June 30th, 2006 at 10:57 amHE IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. If only we could focus the damage of this decision towards liberals. You pigs deserve to wallow in the consequences of setting free ten of the most vicious terrorists in America.
This ruling is uniting the right-wing base again. Liberals and their lap dogs in the Democratic Party have reminded us why we do not trust them to fight the WOT. Thank you.
June 30th, 2006 at 11:22 amIt’s just a matter of time before ALL the born-again jesus freaks out there start talking about killing these judges. Because it’s the godly thing to do, don’t ya know?
June 30th, 2006 at 2:08 pm94 “bad news for america = good news for the libs ”
this comment is so doltish it hardly merits a response. But I take this BS about liberals somehow being separate from the USA pretty damn seriously.
I’m liberal and an American. There are plenty of liberal Americans. Being an American does not require that you support GW Bush–or any political party. I don’t understand these right wing fantasies that liberals rejoice when bad things happen to the US (not that upholding basic principles of due process and separation of powers is “bad news”). You know what, we live here too. So do our families and friends. We want the best for America. You may disagree with our views, but you don’t get to decide who is American.
June 30th, 2006 at 2:08 pm101 “HE IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. If only we could focus the damage of this decision towards liberals. You pigs deserve to wallow in the consequences of setting free ten of the most vicious terrorists in America.
This ruling is uniting the right-wing base again. Liberals and their lap dogs in the Democratic Party have reminded us why we do not trust them to fight the WOT. Thank you.”
what in god’s name are you talking about???? this decision sets free absolutely zero terrorists. what the Court said is that the President has to obey the Constitution, even during war time. The President’s conduct is subject to the limitations of statute and treaty–this is what we mean by the rule of law. The military commissions the President ordered are impermissible because they do not comply with the Uniform Code of Military Justice or governing treaties we signed. All we need to do — all the president and Congress need to do — is order the establishment of tribunals that follow the UCMJ and applicable treaty.
even us crazy liberals have no interest in freeing terrorists. we would like people to get a fair hearing. if we are holding someone at G Bat or elsewhere who has done nothing wrong, they should be set free. That’s not freeing terrorists. That’s justice.
I don’t trust the current administration to fight the nebulous, ill defined “war on terror”. instead of focusing all our resources on getting Bin laden and his followers, we invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. That is rank incompetence.
June 30th, 2006 at 2:32 pm98 “Bush can ignore the ruling and probably will”
wow, I hope not. The rule of law means everyone, even the President, respects and defers to what the courts decide, especially the Supreme Court, which has the last say in our system.
That’s the rules of the game. If you think the President can ignore a SCt decision, even if it is incorrect, then you are rejecting our constitutional democracy.
June 30th, 2006 at 2:42 pm[…] As an example of Congressional wisdom and clear thinking, here is Senator Trent Lott’s view on Hamdan (emphasis added; h/t Think Progress): I think some people are probably laughing at us. This is ridiculous and outrageous. Now in legal speak, let me say, I have not read the entire opinion, nor the dissents. But preliminarily my opinion is they probably didn’t even have jurisdiction. They shouldn’t have ruled the way they did. This is not a bunch of pussycats we’re talking about here. These are people that have made it clear in many instances that they would kill Americans if they got out. This is Osama bin Laden’s driver. And this is one other example of why the American people have lost faith in so much of our federal judiciary. This is a very bad decision in my opinion. […]
June 30th, 2006 at 3:27 pmThat’s the rules of the game. If you think the President can ignore a SCt decision, even if it is incorrect, then you are rejecting our constitutional democracy.
Comment by eblair #105
eblair,
…pig fu*kers like IRI…
…reject humanity and civilized behavior…
…they suffer from “beastial impulsivity”…
…and having been raised on Crackkker privilege in southern pig pens…
…have no capacity to grasp the concept of right and wrong…
…or “law and order”…
June 30th, 2006 at 4:09 pmAmazing that Trent thinks we should pick and choose which laws and treaties we’ll honor just like Bushco cherry-picked the intelligence they leaked to lie us into an unnecessary war. I should have expected it. These folks are blind in their thirst for revenge at any cost. They don’t care and if we become less American in the process, so be it. I’d rather see real justice served up fairly and have a country worth being proud of.
Unfortunately, the Right is focused primarily on the political battle available on any issue. Their mantra is “must win - must rule” rather than give any thought to the country’s honor or the value of the Constitution.
I’m sick of how “Christian” they claim to be when they would treat humans as less than dirt. That the Republicans and this administration would battle for the right to torture and degrade people makes me ill. I don’t care who the prisoners are or what they did, America doesn’t have to behave like rabid animals in response. A little self-control would be nice - and perhaps acting like the civilized beings we claim to be.
Adhering to the rule of law even in adversity is what lends us credence and is the real reason to be proud of who and what we are as a nation - we’d be wise to remember that. The whole world is watching.
June 30th, 2006 at 4:46 pm“our enemies “laughing at us.†”
and laughter scares Bush N company.
“These are people that have made it clear in many instances that they would kill Americans if they got out.”
- if you had any evidence against them they would have never gotten out.
June 30th, 2006 at 4:51 pm- the three guantanamo prisoners killed last week or so by “suicide” must of had alot of evidence against them because we never took them to trial
- and of course the “one or two” innocents which were unavoidably picked up in the sweeps
and held under torture for three years outside of the law with no hope to make it out alive or see their family again, they have no good reason to embrace our policies of carpetbombing, ‘unavoidable collateral damage’, and “we dont do body counts”.
“our enemies “laughing at us.†”
and laughter scares Bush N company.
“These are people that have made it clear in many instances that they would kill Americans if they got out.”
- if you had any evidence against them they would have never gotten out.
June 30th, 2006 at 4:53 pm- the three guantanamo prisoners killed last week or so by “suicide” must of had alot of evidence against them because we never took them to trial
- and of course the “one or two” innocents which were unavoidably picked up in the sweeps
and held under torture for three years outside of the law with no hope to make it out alive or see their family again, if they do make it out of course they have not a single good reason to embrace our policies of torture, bombing cities, ‘unavoidable collateral damage’, and “we dont do body counts”.
in fact no doubt scalia gave cheney a heads up on this
June 30th, 2006 at 5:07 pmso the halliburton built and supplied guantanamo
could slip in and visit any innocents who made the double mistake
of both surviving three years of torture and promising
their torturers they would be taking them to court the minute they got out
(foolishly believing american justice would save them in time)
from glenngreenwald.blogspot.com:
”
The Supreme Court held [Sec. VI(D)(ii) of the court’s opinion] that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions applies to all detainees captured in military conflicts, including Al Qaeda members or other “enemy combatants,” and not merely (as the Administration asserted) to soldiers who fight for established countries which are signatories to the Conventions.
Article 3 requires that detainees be tried by a “regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples,”
”
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/ 2006/ 06/ significance-of-hamdan-v-rumsfeld.html
June 30th, 2006 at 5:23 pm“AW HELL, THIS WOULD’NA HAPPENED IF STROM THURMOND WERE PRESODENT!”
June 30th, 2006 at 6:21 pm“AW HELL, THIS WOULD’NA HAPPENED IF STROM THURMOND WERE PRESIDENT!”
June 30th, 2006 at 6:21 pm“AW HELL, THIS WOULD’NA HAPPENED IF STROM THURMOND WUZ PRESIDENT!”
June 30th, 2006 at 6:21 pmENEMIES LAUGHING AT YOU TRENT? I’DA THUNK YOOD BE USED TO IT BAH NOW.
June 30th, 2006 at 6:24 pmSupreme Court Decision Is ‘Ridiculous and Outrageous,’ Has Our Enemies ‘Laughing At Us’
You might want to look at the foreign press, they are.
June 30th, 2006 at 10:32 pmwhat’s your point umbra? even if foreign press is laughing (and you give no examples), so what? does the US allow its actions and views to be dictated by what foreign countries–or foreign press–thinks?
June 30th, 2006 at 11:00 pmAs long as you think so. The fact is this nonsense by the over reaching black robed robbers won’t stand in the light of day once congress gets involved. Where is it written in the US Constitution that the Judicial Branch has any say how a war is prosecuted or prisoners of that war handled? Bush can ignore the ruling and probably will.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — June 30, 2006 @ 10:09 am
At least they are not “Jack booted”. So have you finished cleaning all the windows and restrooms in your “office building” you claim to own? See ya in Montrose this weekend.
June 30th, 2006 at 11:20 pmTo comment on #103.
I”m a ‘Jesus’ Freak if that means I believe in Him.
However, I very much applaud the Supreme’s Court decision and listened to the entire oral argument TWICE via http://www.c-span.org. I think the bible has a lot to say about treating the prisoners right and I think our founding fathers, who WROTE the constitution, were godly men.
Not all of us ‘Jesus’ freaks are mindless or Republican. After 18 years of being a Republican, I am now ‘unaffiliated’ officially.
THanks
July 7th, 2006 at 1:12 amNow that time has passed and this decision has be thoroughly read I think it is clear that Lott was absolutely right. The ruling was absurb and totally political.
July 10th, 2006 at 8:38 amFreddie
I will dream of your poetic words tonight.
March 24th, 2008 at 8:33 pmGay Sex Gay Teen Gay Men Having Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 28th, 2008 at 10:01 pm