Yoo: Court Rejection Of Bush Detainee Policy Is An Effort ‘To Deny What Happened On 9/11′
Yoo: Court Rejection Of Bush Detainee Policy Is An Effort ‘To Deny What Happened On 9/11′
Appearing on Fox News’ Journal Editorial Report this weekend, former Bush Justice Department official John Yoo, a primary architect of the administration’s detainee policies, attacked a recent court decision barring the indefinite detention of civilians by the military as an effort “to deny what happened on September 11.”
Using that claim as his premise, Yoo disingenuously attacked the legal reasoning of the decision while also arguing that the court decision is not a rejection of Bush administration policy. Watch it:
In his attempt to discredit the court’s rebuke of President Bush’s detainee policy, Yoo makes several false and misleading claims that undermine his argument:
Claim #1 — Osama bin Laden would be treated “like any other criminal” in the U.S.: The Fourth Circuit Court specifically limited the ruling to those who are in the U.S. legally, have established connections here, and are citizens of countries that enjoy good standing with the U.S. Bin Laden is neither a citizen of a country friendly to the U.S. nor would he ever be allowed to enter this country legally. Thus, his detainment would not be barred under this ruling.
Claim #2 — The “decision is an outlier and doesn’t represent a rejection” of Bush’s policies: In 2006, the Supreme Court ruled that the original military commissions set up by the administration “were unauthorized by federal statute and violated international law.” Two weeks ago, two separate military judges ruled that the revised military commissions set up by the administration have no jurisdiction over any of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay. The ruling is only the latest in a series of blows to the Bush administration’s detainee policy.
Claim #3 — These judges “have been putting up resistance to the war on terrorism for many years”: The Fourth Circuit Court, which made the ruling, is actually one of the most conservative appellate courts in the nation. The same court previously ruled that American citizens captured in “a zone of active combat in a foreign theater of conflict” can be held as “enemy combatants.” One of the judges who supported the recent decision, Roger Gregory, was appointed by Bush.
As ThinkProgress has noted before, Yoo has a history of extreme positions in his legal advice. He has previously argued that interrogation isn’t torture unless it results in organ failure or death, Bush didn’t need to ask Congress before invading, Iraq and that the Geneva Conventions don’t apply to detainees.
Transcript:
GIGOT: Welcome to the Journal Editorial Report. I’m Paul Gigot. A federal appeals court in Virginia ruled an alleged al-Qaeda agent being held in U.S. custody cannot be detained as an enemy combatant.
Ali Al-Marri was identified by 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed as part of an al Qaeda sleeper cell. And investigators believe he came to the United States to prepare for a second wave of terror attacks.
A native of Qatar, Al-Marri was in the U.S. legally when he was arrested in Illinois in December 2001. He was held in prisons in Illinois and New York before being deemed an enemy combatant by the Bush administration and transferred to a navy brig in South Carolina where he has been held for the past four years.
This week’s decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal said Al- Marri can no longer be held there and should be given a criminal trial in a civilian court.
John Yoo was a chief architect of many of the Bush administration’s post 9/11 legal policies. He is now a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
Welcome to the program, John Yoo.
JOHN YOO, FORMER BUSH ADMINISTRATION JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Thanks for having me on.
GIGOT: What do you think of the Al-Marri decision?
YOO: I think it is an effort by this court to deny what happened on September 11. It basically holds that we cannot be at war with some organizations that are not a state. So we can capture people in Afghanistan, we can capture people in Iraq. Those people would be enemy combatants. Any al-Qaeda member that makes it the United States have to be given a criminal jury trial, Miranda, lawyers. This is exactly the framework of the law that existed on September 10, 2001.
GIGOT: It carves out a special procedure, a civilian-criminal court procedure for al Qaeda members who are captured on U.S. soil as opposed to those in Afghanistan and Iraq? What’s the justification for that, legally?
YOO: According to this court — which I don’t really agree with — according to this court, the justification is, by definition, we can’t be at war with a non-state. So anyone who is captured trying to hurt the United States, who doesn’t fight on behalf of another country, is, by definition, a criminal.
So just to take an example, if we had managed to get one of the airliners down on September 11, and capture some of the people or suppose we captured Usama bin Laden with a weapon of mass destruction in downtown New York City, according to this court, we would have to give them a jury trial just like any other criminal we caught in the United States.
The fact that they are fighting on behalf of al-Qaeda, that they want to use weapons of mass destruction or airliners in driving their planes makes no difference to the court.
GIGOT: Some critics say look, this fellow has been in prison now for four years and there is no prospect of a trial for him. Why should any administration be able to hold somebody indefinitely given the fact that we really don’t know how long this war on terror is going to go on. And he could be held for decades even.
YOO: The first thing is, under the laws of war, any nation has a right to hold members of the enemy who it captures for as long as the conflict goes on. Simply because the war might go on for a long time — I wouldn’t say indefinitely, just a long time — doesn’t mean suddenly you give up that right.
Just like, in wartime, you have the right to kill members of the enemy. That doesn’t mean, if we have a long war, you have to give that right up too.
The second thing is there are procedures, there is a chance for someone, like Al-Marri, to have a chance to have a hearing, to go to the second most important federal court in the country, the D.C. Circuit and require the government to explain why we think he is an enemy combatant.
But the most important thing here is that those procedures are carefully balanced to protect the security interests of the country, to protect the way we found out about Al-Marri, to protect us from having to disclose intelligence means and operations in open court.
GIGOT: How well do you think this decision will hold up on appeal? It could go to the entire Fourth Circuit. They call it on bond hearing by the entire court. This was just a two to one decision by a panel of that court, or to go to the Supreme Court. Will it survive on appeal?
YOO: I think that the entire Fourth Circuit is likely to hear the case and overrule it because it is inconsistent with the same court’s earlier decision to allow the government to hold Jose Padilla in military custody without a trial.
It is hard to see why Padilla, who you tried to sneak into the United States in the Chicago airport in order to launch attacks in the United States for al Qaeda, is any different factually than this Al-Marri fellow.
And if the Fourth Circuit doesn’t overrule the case entirely, I would think the Supreme Court would definitely hear the case.
GIGOT: I want to read something, broaden this out a little bit and read you a quote this week from the Wall Street Journal, a news story that said that, The U.S. administration’s effort to create a separate legal system for the war on terror may be foundering because of court rulings against the government. As a result the approach promoted by President George W. Bush may not survive his presidency. What do you think about that assertion?
YOO: I think that this one decision is an outlier and doesn’t represent a rejection of the Bush administration’s war on terrorism policies.
The first thing to keep in mind is these are policies that Congress has ratified by huge majorities in the Military Commissions Act passed last October. Congress said there are enemy combatants in the war on terrorism, fighting on behalf of organizations like al-Qaeda against us. So this is a situation where I think you have a few judges and they have been putting up resistance to the war on terrorism for many years. Every time they have, Congress and the president together have overruled them.
So I think that the war on terrorism demands that we have these kinds of procedures because of the need to protect intelligence information and ongoing operations in the middle of a real conflict.
And I think you’re going to see, if the courts don’t fix themselves, the president and Congress, the elected branches of the government, will do it for them.
GIGOT: How much of this legal architecture and these institutions, like military commissions or the right to name enemy combatants, how much of that will be likely to survive the end of the Bush presidency? Will a new president sustain those policies?
YOO: I think any president, once they see the kind of threat the country is under, the kind of enemy we are fighting, would still need to have these options available.
Let me give you one example. If we went back to the way things were on September 10, every al-Qaeda operative we captured would have to go undergo a trial, just be like Zacarias Moussaoui. His one trial threw the courts into fits for five years and never even went to a real trial.
Think about that every single al-Qaeda operative would put you in the same position and would you have opportunity to get intelligence information from them because they would all get lawyers and Miranda rights. And that’s really the most important thing, is that the next president have these tools so they can get intelligence about any pending attacks on the United States.
GIGOT: All right, John Yoo thanks so much for being with us.
YOO: Thank you.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Perhaps w/ luck, someday we will get to declare Yoo an enemy combatant, and then we’ll just have to waterboard him until we get the answers we want…
“Why do Consevatives hate America so?”
June 18th, 2007 at 2:04 pmAnd here’s another little turd I’ve come to detest personally. His view of presidential authority is a treasonous assault on the Contstitution.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:07 pmheehee Z…
June 18th, 2007 at 2:07 pmHowz my POpStar(tm) today?
Isn’t it time for UC Berkeley to consider removing its name from behind Yoo’s overinflated head? Is he speaking for the university?
Tying his reputation to the university’s may work for him, but it works against the university.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:08 pmHey whitey,
I’m great! Hanging out at my son’s apartment in Portland while he’s at work. :)
How are you?
June 18th, 2007 at 2:09 pmthe Law doesn’t matter to these people – just terror, terror, scare scare scare.
But, the Constitution is not just a mere “suggestion,” it’s the law.
There’s nothing in the Constitution which authorizes the government to do what Yoo wants it to do.
period.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:09 pm“Secret Trials Endanger Security”
http://www.populistamerica.com/secret_trials_endanger_security
Too bad this 4th circuit ruling is going to be gutted by the en banc panel.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:12 pmGood one Lady Z, I second that….Can we prosacute this little traitor as well, please..Read a little about this scum bag and it was not healthy for america to let him run free..
Are you still in Portland.? How’s the weather there today.? Still grey, rainy and cold here. Yuck!….Blessings
June 18th, 2007 at 2:13 pmI’m great! Hanging out at my son’s apartment in Portland while he’s at work. :)
How are you?
Comment by Zooey — June 18, 2007 @ 2:09 pm
Mcmeniman’s… mmm.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:13 pmFollowing up with #5… God, I’ll bet Berkley really doesn’t like those 20 little reminder about where this petty, Constitution-shredding authoritarian currently teaches.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:14 pmJust missed the Portland post….Sorry.
Damn I forgot this little traitor was teaching at Berkley…Sad indeed….Blessings
June 18th, 2007 at 2:17 pmYoo’s a stain on Boalt Hall, the UC Berkely College of Law.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:19 pmMcmeniman’s… mmm.
Comment by TerrytheTurtle
Let me guess…..beer!?
June 18th, 2007 at 2:20 pmWhy would it be bad to treat bin Laden like any other criminal? Can someone explain that to me? It couldn’t be because of all the embarrassing stories from the 80ies he could tell, right?
June 18th, 2007 at 2:21 pmHerr Professor Doktor Yoo is a war criminal. He is the banal bureaucrat who’s legal opinions – since thrown out by his authentically conservative legal successors in John Ashcroft’s Justice Department – purported to authorize torture and legitimize the fantasy that the Constitution under which Mr. Bush was elected contains no limits to his authority.
It is Mr. Yoo who is the illegitimate outlier. Existing law, pre-John Yoo, would have adquately protected us against violent criminals, and will do so again, after Mr. Bush and his plaything Alberto Gonzales are removed from office. What our legal system would not do – witness the March 2004 threats of resignation of thirty of the Justice Department’s top lawyers – is support Mr. Bush’s claim to dictatorial powers in a constitutional democracy.
That Mr. Yoo has gone from Berkeley to Yale is a testament to the freedom of speech and tolerance that Mr. Yoo so ardently wants to rend asunder. Yale’s tenure committee has serious work ahead of it.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:21 pmYoo’s statement is an effort to deny what happened in 1786.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:22 pmWith all due respect, WHO IS THIS JACKASS?? Everytime I look around, Yoo is there speaking this totally UNAMERICAN bullS^%$!!!
June 18th, 2007 at 2:22 pmGood morning Great Lady,
The weather has sucked since I got here, but it’s supposed to clear up — the day I leave.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:22 pm“It couldn’t be because of all the embarrassing stories from the 80ies he could tell, right?
Comment by christian h. — June 18, 2007 @ 2:21 pm”
Exactly…….
Just like the courts would not allow any information about Padillia’s torcher in his court case…. We don’t want the Amercian sheeple to know about this stuff….
Let them eat their grass in peace and let them keep their minds busy with American Idol…..
June 18th, 2007 at 2:23 pmYoo’s just a lawyering Yang Galbo 양갈보!
June 18th, 2007 at 2:24 pmYoo’s statement is an effort to deny what happened in 1786.
Comment by Art — June 18, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
Good one.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:25 pmAccording to Woo, there are three branches of goverment – the executive branch, the executive branch and the executive branch.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:26 pmYoo’s a good man. He’s one of Der Leader’s favorite enablers.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:28 pmDon’t be too suprised when Darth and BushCo run this assface for the next AG. You heard it here first!!
He might even make Gonzo look normal!!! Now, THAT”S scary!!!!!
June 18th, 2007 at 2:28 pm#22: You’ve got it. That’s the way it should be.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:29 pmJohn Yoo: “Osama bin Laden would be treated “like any other criminal†in the U.S.:
Actually he seems to be treated somewhat better than a criminal in the US.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:29 pmAll family members were flown out of the US shortly after 9/11, he was allowed to escape into a nation allied with the US, pursuit was called off, the task force assigned to go after him was dismantled, and he now lives, if even he is still alive, totally unmolested.
I’ve declared Yoo an enemy combatant to the constitution. Please feel free to perform a citizen’s arrest at anytime.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:31 pmDeport his ass to Gitmo and torture him until he learns something. This s a worthless asshole.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:32 pmFor more on Yoo’s central role in the Bush administration’s unprecedented expansion of wartime presidential powers, see:
June 18th, 2007 at 2:32 pm“Yoo Da Man.”
Berkeley? I thought he graduated from ‘Flock Yoo’
with all the other wingnuts, sheeple.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:33 pmBetter than McMennimens – the Academy Theater on SE Stark – great beer, cheap movies and Flying Pie Pizza.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:34 pmActually he seems to be treated somewhat better than a criminal in the US.
All family members were flown out of the US shortly after 9/11, he was allowed to escape into a nation allied with the US, pursuit was called off, the task force assigned to go after him was dismantled, and he now lives, if even he is still alive, totally unmolested.
Comment by heyzeus
Yes, he certainly served his purpose well, now did he not?
June 18th, 2007 at 2:35 pmthe other flaw in his reasoning is his claim that our flexible legal approach to non-US citizens prior to 9.11 (i.e. due process for all, even “enemies”) was one of the causes of 9.11. he completely changed the terms in the equation…..and in other words, he is wrong.
yoo is just crazy….
June 18th, 2007 at 2:37 pmallowing all humans due process, even bin laden, would demonstrate to the world that we are not superior.
listen to this: does bin laden have a right to attack the united states? serious. answer this question. i mean, face it, we have been attacking his land and people for how long now? i’m not condoing what he does, but i am trying to make sense out of it.
having said that, if we caught him, bin laden should be able to defend his actions (cole, 9.11, etc) because we are able to defend ours (near military occupation of entire region for 50 years)…..
agreed?
June 18th, 2007 at 2:42 pmI think it is an effort by this court to deny what happened on September 11.
Right. This court ruling is an effort to deny that a faction within our own government killed American citizens in order to justify stripping away civil liberties and invading 2 sovereign nations.
This court ruling is an effort to deny that there was absolutely no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11.
This court ruling is an effort to deny that 9/11 ushered in an authoritarian dictatorship in the United States of America.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:42 pmBreaking News!
Presidential hopeful and frontrunner, Rudolph Giuliani has chosen John Yoo for his running mate in 2008!
Two numbskulls for the price of 1!
June 18th, 2007 at 2:43 pmhey Yoo – we didn’t give up our democratic system on 9/11!
June 18th, 2007 at 2:43 pmSounds like John Yoo is denying what happened on July 4th 1776 and
June 18th, 2007 at 2:45 pmin Spet. 17th 1787.
WTF is THIS buffoon doing at UC Berkely? comic relief?
June 18th, 2007 at 2:48 pmwhy print anything from such? it only enables them. if the world survives until the next election, big changes come.
minimize such, it isn’t news that is fit to print, IMO, of course.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:50 pmYoo Who?
Why should we worry about how OBL might be treated since we are no longer (ever?) trying to capture him?
June 18th, 2007 at 2:51 pmwow… and at that most liberal of universities also…
you’d think those words behind him would’ve melted
the foxbots’ teevee screens!
and faux is grinning because they get to show them…
“see, fair AND balanced.” …
uh huh…
June 18th, 2007 at 2:52 pm#25.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:52 pmWoo believes in almighty power for the president – as long as that president is a republican.
Isn’t it time for UC Berkely grads to start withholding all financial donations to that university as long as Yoo remains employed there?
June 18th, 2007 at 2:52 pmYoo Whoo ?
Focks nooze will burn in the bowels of hell for eternity.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:53 pmMurdoch will soon be there as well.
As a member of the bar of the 4th Circuit, I got a HUGE laugh out of Yoo’s claim #3 above.
Trust me, there ain’t NOTHING the majority of 4th circuit judges would like better than to continue to support the war on terrah — oh, unless it’s something silly like continuing to support THE CONSTITUTION…
June 18th, 2007 at 2:53 pmYou Silly Demwits are kind of hard on that Liberal Professor from Berserkly .
June 18th, 2007 at 2:54 pmbut that is typical of Liberals . just like children striking out at anybody near them when they do not get what they want WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Strange how few Americans admit to being accessories after the fact.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:55 pmAfter many numerous and timely warnings of terror attacks coming in 2001, the Bush crime family just sat there and smirked. They could have ordered the FAA to immedately require the sealing-off locked cockpit doors in all domestic airliners to prevent possible hijackings, but nooo, they prefered just to sit on their hands and do nothing…
Mr. Yoo is a law professor at the newly renamed University of British Petroleum, formerly UC Berkeley.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:55 pmKeith H. Dream on you silly Demwit
June 18th, 2007 at 3:04 pmShocking that he would go on Fox “news” and make such a BS claim…
June 18th, 2007 at 3:06 pmMr. Yoo is a law professor at the newly renamed University of British Petroleum, formerly UC Berkeley.
Comment by james k. sayre — June 18, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
huh… i’m just back from there…
June 18th, 2007 at 3:08 pmi do recall seeing a lot of BP thereabouts…
katy
name one unbiased liberal news outlet , just one
June 18th, 2007 at 3:08 pmTruman,
June 18th, 2007 at 3:16 pmCan you name one unbiased conservative news outlet? Would it be so hard to stay on topic?
Yoo Hoo!
Take a look at this and see what a criminal enterprise you are at the center of:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw&mode=related&search=
and this:
http://plungerspeaks.blogspot.com
June 18th, 2007 at 3:17 pmAnd how long did the crime family search for a toadie who would sign onto their evil crimes and become a thug in the crime family…that is what this Yoo is, a paid toadie.
June 18th, 2007 at 3:21 pmI have never said that there was any unbiased news outlets . what you do is call fox biased while never mentioning the bias in liberal news outlets , which is wrong . its like politicians they all lie bush lies clinton lies even jimmy who said that he lusted only in his heart lied
June 18th, 2007 at 3:23 pmPlease try to keep the fiery rhetoric to a minimum, will ‘ya?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Yoo simply criticized the report.
Unless I missed the part where he stormed a printout with guns a-blazin’, perhaps this blog can help keep life in perspective, hmmmmmmmmm?
June 18th, 2007 at 3:25 pmkasinca you should try to defend your position , it is not accomplished by calling someone a toadie , troll or whatever , just because you differ in opinion
June 18th, 2007 at 3:26 pmHe is the Ann Coulter of Constitutional theory. Only someone who has such a craven outlook and sub-humanly low standards of decency would peddle those brutal power grab theories. I’d also add David Addington. Of course the VP had to request his quirky ideas be tested. How can one have such a formidable enemy to consider abusing our precious Constitution to protect us and not at the same time tell the American people in real factual terms who are our actual enemies?
June 18th, 2007 at 3:31 pmThe Republic of Stupidity if you are still online , perhaps with all of your insight and wisdom you may be able to convey in words that a troll can understand , just how a liberal would be able to extract usable information from a terrorist or for that matter seperate a terrorist from someone whom is not a terrorist . no name calling just how you would propose to do the job
June 18th, 2007 at 3:33 pmeLad in MO
You are wrong.
People in power are subverting the Constitution, sending Americans off to die for no good reason, slandering their political opponents, using tragedy for their own political gain, etc.
If this does not DEMAND fiery rhetoric, at the least, then there is no point trying to be a representative democracy.
June 18th, 2007 at 3:34 pmWhy would it be bad to treat bin Laden like any other criminal? Can someone explain that to me? It couldn’t be because of all the embarrassing stories from the 80ies he could tell, right?
Comment by christian h.
They are intent on changing the legal system, and setting new precedents, that will allow them to imprison American citizens, without legal representation.
http://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2157493
I just wish more people would open their eyes, and see where this is going.
June 18th, 2007 at 3:34 pmone unbiased liberal news outlet , just one
that’s too easy… there are many, but the most famous
is, of course, AirAmericaRadio !!!
TRUTH, JUSTICE and the AIR AMERICAN WAY!
…
June 18th, 2007 at 3:36 pmfly-man thats very simple for a person with a government school education . muslin extremist are our actual enemies some are foreign some are domestic
June 18th, 2007 at 3:43 pmYoo, another person with shit for brains.
June 18th, 2007 at 3:43 pmkaty you are a funny girl , try again airamerica is as unbialed as FreeRepublic
June 18th, 2007 at 3:44 pmThis man is despicable. The proof? From Wiki and many other sources:
“In explaining the Yoo Doctrine, Yoo made the following statements during a December 1, 2005, debate in Chicago, Illinois, with Notre Dame Law School Professor Doug Cassel:
Cassel: If the President deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no law that can stop him?
Yoo: No treaty.
Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo.
Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.[12]
Not just torture. But torture on the child of the suspect. There have been reports of ‘techniques’ being used on relatives of suspected terrorists. If Yoo is the original source of such legal opinions, he should be charged with a long list of war crimes and violations of the Geneva Conventions.
June 18th, 2007 at 3:49 pmNot cool, TP. You deleted my comment at #2.
June 18th, 2007 at 3:50 pmit amazes me to no end how liberals always think that a person with a different opinion has shit for brains but the liberal is never able to defend themselves or their opinion . that includes you Coffins draped with flags
June 18th, 2007 at 3:52 pm“Not cool, TP. You deleted my comment at #2.
Comment by Zooey — June 18, 2007 @ 3:50 pm”
I am not surprised……..
TP is almost like a gatekeeper……
They perform so much censoring that I am surprised anyone can actually post…..
Now watch my post will be deleted or I will be banned for saying this…….
Something as funny, and not offensive, as what you said was censored but the many comments by the trolls just keep on rolling……
Does anyone know if Murdock owns TP?
June 18th, 2007 at 3:56 pmyou liberals need to compare what you refer to as torture to what terrorist do as torture , then you would be shocked and shut up . but being know it all liberals you never bother to enlighten yourself with real knowledge you just spout that crap that comes from the heart like your mom does
June 18th, 2007 at 3:56 pm#70 Hairy Truman
And you say YOU support this man? If so, you obviously don’t support the US Constitution. This isn’t about opinions…. this is about the rule of law in this country.
June 18th, 2007 at 3:56 pmBut Osama bin Laden should be treated like any other criminal in the US system if he’s ever caught.
June 18th, 2007 at 3:57 pmHarry Truman, if fundamental Islam, taken to extremes, is so evil why do we worry about one or 2 guys trying to get a fair trial and not just kill as many of them as possible? I mean really if it’s that bad and this is all the administration has done by wrecking Iraq, shouldn’t we be citing them for failing to uphold the Constitution. Think about it, if we know who the real enemy is and as you mentioned a very specific group why shouldn’t we be eliminating them as fast as we can, here or abroad? Isn’t that the duty of our executive office holders?
June 18th, 2007 at 3:58 pmfly-man in this country there are no enemy combatants . ruling by the 4th court of appeals last week . we are killing them as fast as we can . they are coming from iran and syria . we know that and you know that . we are in no way after 1 or 2 guys . terrorist in this country are afforded the same rights and protections under the law as you are . that is stupid .
June 18th, 2007 at 4:04 pmfly-man you did an up right job at defending your position
June 18th, 2007 at 4:06 pmYoo is simply denying what happened in 1789
June 18th, 2007 at 4:10 pmfly-man do you believe that non citizens should be afforded the protection given citizens under the constitution ?
June 18th, 2007 at 4:12 pmits like politicians they all lie bush lies clinton lies even jimmy who said that he lusted only in his heart lied
fly-man thats very simple for a person with a government school education . muslin extremist are our actual enemies some are foreign some are domestic
Comments by Harry Truman
Yeah, Harry, all us politicians have to resort to lying. But I am the greatest liar of them all; I even make Nixon look like an amateur.
June 18th, 2007 at 4:15 pmBTW, boy, you are lying, too, by using the name of one of the finer presidents of the 20th century–someone my Daddy and I could never live up to. And I warned you to be more careful about spelling and punctuation and not to give yourself away as “michael” by denigrating public schools as “government school education.” I’m afraid Rove will be cutting your troll honorarium, mikey, my boy.
“do you believe that non citizens should be afforded the protection given citizens under the constitution ?
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 4:12 pm”
First……
The Constitution does not provide seperate protection to US or Non-US people….
The Constitution provides EQUAL rights to ALL…..
Only citizens get special rights, such as voting and other things…..
Your IGNORANCE of the Constitution is glaring…..
June 18th, 2007 at 4:15 pmHarry – non-citizens ARE afforded the protections of the Constitution, you twit. And I hope the real Harry Truman comes back to haunt you for abusing his name.
June 18th, 2007 at 4:20 pmDIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judge:
For over two centuries of growth and struggle, peace and war, the
Constitution has secured our freedom through the guarantee that, in
the United States, no one will be deprived of liberty without due process
of law. Yet more than four years ago military authorities seized
an alien lawfully residing here. He has been held by the military ever
since — without criminal charge or process. He has been so held
despite the fact that he was initially taken from his home in Peoria,
Illinois by civilian authorities, and indicted for purported domestic
crimes. He has been so held although the Government has never
alleged that he is a member of any nation’s military, has fought alongside
any nation’s armed forces, or has borne arms against the United
States anywhere in the world. And he has been so held, without
acknowledgment of the protection afforded by the Constitution, solely
because the Executive believes that his military detention is proper.
While criminal proceedings were underway against Ali Saleh
June 18th, 2007 at 4:25 pmKahlah al-Marri, the President ordered the military to seize and detain
him indefinitely as an enemy combatant. Since that order, issued in
June of 2003, al-Marri has been imprisoned without charge in a military
jail in South Carolina. Al-Marri petitions for a writ of habeas corpus
to secure his release from military imprisonment. The
Government defends this detention, asserting that al-Marri associated
Mcmeniman’s… mmm.
Comment by TerrytheTurtle
Let me guess…..beer!?
Comment by Zooey
Sorry TtT, I’ll make sure she doesn’t get anywhere near a McMenamin’s; don’t want to poison her on Portland. I’ll make sure she drinks the good stuff.
June 18th, 2007 at 4:26 pmyour ignorance of recent history is glaring if my memory is correctly it was fine for F.D.R. to hold germans as enemy combatants and not affort them protection under the constitution during WWII and Execute them so when this ruling makes it safer for foreign terrorist to operate within the bounds of this country you will be a little less safe .
June 18th, 2007 at 4:32 pm“your ignorance of recent history is glaring if my memory is correctly it was fine for F.D.R. to hold germans as enemy combatants and not affort them protection under the constitution during WWII and Execute them so when this ruling makes it safer for foreign terrorist to operate within the bounds of this country you will be a little less safe .
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 4:32 pm”
My knowledge of history is just fine……
WWII was a, now watch my lips, Declared W…A….R…
The current situation is NOT!!!! BIG DIFFERENCE!!!!!
Your worm infested skull just can’t comprehend that can it????
June 18th, 2007 at 4:35 pmHere’s what I dont understand. Why on earth would UC Berkeley give this torturer a position at their fine institution?
June 18th, 2007 at 4:39 pmYoo and his fascistic right wing brethren are forgetting what happened on December 16, 1773 and July 4, 1776.
June 18th, 2007 at 4:41 pmSorry TtT, I’ll make sure she doesn’t get anywhere near a McMenamin’s; don’t want to poison her on Portland. I’ll make sure she drinks the good stuff.
Comment by gummitch
Heh. Thanks for watching my back, gummitch. :)
June 18th, 2007 at 4:41 pmHe’s being duplicitous. On PBS, Yoo assumes a more centered tone and suggests that Bush’s executive powers are only as strong as our belief that the War on Terror is a real war.
June 18th, 2007 at 4:46 pmHere, presumably because he is on FOX, he is expressing a different attitude and seems to be showing his personal side.
Harry Truman, you are proving that the trolls are getting dumber by the hour. Go turn off FAUXNOIZ and that lard assed, drug addled, gas bag and read a book. Learn something.
June 18th, 2007 at 4:47 pmSorry TtT, I’ll make sure she doesn’t get anywhere near a McMenamin’s; don’t want to poison her on Portland. I’ll make sure she drinks the good stuff.
Comment by gummitch — June 18, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
Which is what? New Deal Vodka?
June 18th, 2007 at 4:48 pmComment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 4:25 pm
Ah Harry is identifying one of several cases where even prior to the MCA of 2006, which EXPLICITLY states that a legal resident can be held as infinitum as an ‘enemy combatant’ without recourse to habeas corpus, whereas the Constitution explicitly guarantees habeas corpus except in times of ‘invasion’ or I think ‘insurrection’. Maybe getting a green card is an act of war in the US these days, I don’t know.
June 18th, 2007 at 4:54 pmI can’t believe no one has said this yet:
F*ck Yoo.
June 18th, 2007 at 4:55 pm“your ignorance of recent history is glaring if my memory is correctly(SIC) it was fine for F.D.R. to hold germans(SIC) as enemy combatants and not affort(SIC) them protection under the constitution(SIC) during WWII and Execute them so when this ruling makes it safer for foreign terrorist(SIC–just one terrorist, or did you forget the “s”?) to operate within the bounds of this country you will be a little less safe .
Comment by Harry Truman —
Brain-dead Harry aka michael
June 18th, 2007 at 4:58 pmYour ignorance of the English language is glaring–not to mention your lack of knowledge of how POWs were treated by us Americans during WWII. Why does the first sentence above start with a quotation mark? Whom are you quoting? And if you are quoting someone, where does the quote end? (You didn’t put in a second quotation mark, Mr. Brain-dead.) Your troll honorarium has already been cut by Karl. If you keep on showing us neo-cons to be as illiterate as we actually are, you will be fired, as well.
“I can’t believe no one has said this yet:
F*ck Yoo.
Comment by ForTruth — June 18, 2007 @ 4:55 pm”
Well Zooey said…
Fook Yoo, but TP deleted it…..
You know, the great gatekeeper….
June 18th, 2007 at 4:59 pm“your ignorance of recent history is glaring if my memory is correctly it was fine for F.D.R. to hold germans as enemy combatants and not affort them protection under the constitution during WWII and Execute them so when this ruling makes it safer for foreign terrorist to operate within the bounds of this country you will be a little less safe .
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 4:32 pmâ€
Fascinating piece of revisionist history this. Hopefully Harry (since he was there) can tell us which Germans were executed without the protection of the Constitution (by which I expect that means without a trial). I’d be interested to learn something.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:01 pmFigures Zooey already said it. ;)
June 18th, 2007 at 5:05 pmTerrytT,
June 18th, 2007 at 5:06 pmHarry-wannabe is simply pulling lies out of a hat, like Harry Houdini with rabbits, hoping that nobody here will know the difference. He is one of the stupider trolls hired by my White House. I keep on telling Rove to do something about him.
President Bush 43 what was the lie . I am all ears print it out .
June 18th, 2007 at 5:08 pmUpholding our Constitution emboldens the enemy, gives them comfort, is a pre-9/11 mindset, and generally makes you a weenie. Right?
June 18th, 2007 at 5:09 pmYoo has bee suffering from organ failure, so he compensates by aquiring power.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:10 pmPresident Bush 43 what was the lie . I am all ears print it out .
Comment by Harry Truman
Too many lies to print here, Brain-dead Harry/michael. And I told you to desist with the run-on sentences and learn to punctuate. You’re really making us neo-cons look as illiterate as we actually are. Your troll fee is being cut again. Bye, for now; I have other business to attend to. Well, actually I’m going to the gym for a workout.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:14 pmFigures Zooey already said it. ;)
Comment by ForTruth
It was the #2 comment!
June 18th, 2007 at 5:16 pmhere you go terry but don’t let this interfere with your revisionist history , since you never learned any real History .
http://www.gigfoot.net/lol/facts/1313.html
http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq114-2.htm
The eight were tried before a Military Commission, comprised of seven U.S. Army officers appointed by President Roosevelt, from July 8, to August 4, 1942. The trial was held in the Department of Justice Building, Washington, D.C. The prosecution was headed by Attorney General Frances Biddle and the Army Judge Advocate General, Major General Myron C. Cramer. Defense counsel included Colonel Kenneth C. Royall (later Secretary of War under President Truman) and Major Lausen H. Stone (son of Harlan Fiske Stone, the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court).
All eight were found guilty and sentenced to death. Attorney General Biddle and J. Edgar Hoover appealed to President Roosevelt to commute the sentences of Dasch and Burger. Dasch received a 30-year sentence, and Burger received a life sentence, both to be served in a federal penitentiary. The remaining six were executed at the District of Columbia Jail on August
June 18th, 2007 at 5:17 pmPerhaps Patrick should invest in the Child sized Testicle Crusher company. It’s sure to take off.
Isn’t freedom great?
June 18th, 2007 at 5:18 pmyou see when I say something I can back it up , I don’t just say something and hope that you believe it . Can anybody give me the section and clause in the Constitution where it says everybody is afforded protection under the Constitution ?
kasinca name calling does not serve you well perhaps you can find some webpages to disprove what I provide as evidence .
June 18th, 2007 at 5:23 pmPresident Bush 43 I see of all those lies you cannot come up with just 1 . as I thought you are unable to defend you position . that is truly sad .
June 18th, 2007 at 5:25 pmand my name is not Michael , it is David .
June 18th, 2007 at 5:26 pmI am still waiting for that section and Clause from one of you Constitutional Scholars
June 18th, 2007 at 5:29 pmwhen you make a statement please have some proof to back it up and nothing from your heart will do . web pages only please
June 18th, 2007 at 5:30 pmyou people are sooooo easy
June 18th, 2007 at 5:31 pm“I don’t just say something and hope that you believe it . Can anybody give me the section and clause in the Constitution where it says everybody is afforded protection under the Constitution ?
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 5:23 pm”
Here you go…
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall
Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial
Please note that it does NOT say CITIZEN, unlike the following:
Amendment 14 – Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868. Note History
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States
Amendment 15 – Race No Bar to Vote. Ratified 2/3/1870. History
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not
Amendment 19 – Women’s Suffrage. Ratified 8/18/1920. History
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied
Now…… Read and LEARN!!!!
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
June 18th, 2007 at 5:32 pmJohn Yoo truly has Nazi-like aspirations. He is a sick little freak. If I was one of his colleagues at Berkeley I would have to restrain myself from punching him in the face every time I saw the puke.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:33 pmPresident Bush 43 I am still waiting for you to disprove these Lies that I pulled out of my Hat .
WWII – Europe – Germany – Operations
WORLD WAR II. Germany. Operations Against the United States and the United … See also, Louis Fisher, Nazi Saboteurs on Trial: A Military Tribunal and …
intellit.muskingum.edu/wwii_folder/wwiieurope_folder/wwiieurgermany_folder/wwiieurgerops.html – 15k – Cached – Similar pages
Did you know? 1313 – LOL Facts – Web Software & Hosting
During World War II, six German saboteurs who secretly entered the United States on a mission to attack its civil infrastructure are executed by the United …
http://www.gigfoot.net/lol/facts/1313.html – 19k – Cached – Similar pages
Federal Bureau of Investigation – FBI History – Famous Cases
On September 1, 1939, World War II opened in Europe with the invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany. The United States remained neutral until drawn into the …
http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/famcases/nazi/nazi.htm – 42k – Cached – Similar pages
German Espionage and Sabotage Against the U.S. in World War II
German Espionage and Sabotage Against the United States during World War II. … in World War II: George John Dasch and the Nazi Saboteurs (FBI Handout) …
http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq114-2.htm – 14k – Cached – Similar pages
NAZI SABOTEURS ON TRIAL: A MILITARY TRIBUNAL AND AMERICAN LAW
His retelling of the 1942 incident involving the German saboteurs should renew … To date, the United States intends to use military courts to try three …
http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/lpbr/subpages/reviews/fisher-louis2.htm – 17k – Cached – Similar pages
Ex parte Quirin – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After the declaration of war between the United States and the German Reich, …. Upon the capture of the Quirin saboteurs, President Roosevelt issued an …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Quirin – 51k – Cached – Similar pages
Herbert Hans Haupt – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Washington, D.C., USA, August 8, 1942) was a German-American United States citizen executed as an enemy agent for the Germans in World War II. …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Hans_Haupt – 23k – Cached – Similar pages
[ More results from en.wikipedia.org ]
Amazon.com: Germany’s Spies and Saboteurs: Books: David Allen Johnson
The little known spy war in the United States in WWII., October 29, 2005 … The received view about German saboteurs in US and in UK is that they were all …
http://www.amazon.com/Germanys-Spies-Saboteurs-David-Johnson/dp/0760305471 – 110k – Cached – Similar pages
Amazon.com: Saboteurs: The Nazi Raid on America: Books: Michael Dobbs
*Starred Review* Dobbs’ full-scale account of the eight German saboteurs ….. United States. i.e., each book must be in subject 1 AND subject 2 AND . …
http://www.amazon.com/Saboteurs-Nazi-America-Michael-Dobbs/dp/1400030420 – 145k – Cached – Similar pages
[ More results from http://www.amazon.com ]
TheHistoryNet | World War II Book Reviews | World War II Book Review
German saboteurs on the lam from the authorities. … Silent Wings: The American Glider Pilots of WWII , $24.95 Plus FREE shipping! …
http://www.historynet.com/wwii/reviews/wwiireview0105-1 – 54k – Cached – Similar pages
Saboteurs
Eight German saboteurs were dispatched across the Atlantic by U-boat, … and their links to a network of Nazi sympathizers in the United States. …
http://www.culver.org/students/academics/library/Sept2004%20New%20Books/saboteurs.htm – 11k – Cached – Similar pages
Nazi Spies In America – Features on thehistorychannel.co.uk
http://www.thehistorychannel.co.uk/site/features/nazi_spies_in_america.php – Similar pages
Timeline of World War II: Information from Answers.com
14: All German and Italian assets in the United States are frozen. …. 8: In Washington, DC, six German would-be saboteurs are executed (two others were …
http://www.answers.com/topic/timeline-of-world-war-ii – 255k – Cached – Similar pages
Ronald D. Rotunda on POWS & Geneva Convention on National Review …
The United States did not treat the saboteurs as POWs. Instead, it treated them as “unlawful combatants,” tried them by military tribunal, and executed most …
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-rotunda012902.shtml – 23k – Cached – Similar pages
Bench & Bar of Minnesota
In a series of cases, the United States Supreme Court upheld those …. 3 In the summer of 1942, German submarines put saboteurs ashore on American beaches. …
www2.mnbar.org/benchandbar/2002/feb02/commissions-1.htm – 20k – Cached – Similar pages
AII POW-MIA InterNetwork
Ex Parte Quirin (1942): In a case involving eight German saboteurs who came to …. AIIPOWMIAI is not associated in any capacity with any United States …
http://www.aiipowmia.com/inter24/in040501roosevelt.html – 18k – Cached – Similar pages
Chicago’s Nazi Saboteurs
1, 1939, WWII opened in Europe. The United States remained neutral until the … the first group of four saboteurs left by submarine from the German base at …
chicago.about.com/cs/historycharacters/a/cs_nazi_spies.htm – 25k – Cached – Similar pages
The Supreme Court Historical Society
Determined to see these would-be saboteurs executed, President Franklin …. The saboteurs entered the United States in military attire, then changed into …
http://www.supremecourthistory.org/04_library/subs_volumes/04_c17_i.html – 45k – Cached – Similar pages
In Time of War: Book Reviews
His account of the German saboteurs is also dense with legal maneuvering and …. The eight saboteurs, all of whom had spent time in the United States and …
http://www.intimeofwar.org/reviews.htm – 52k – Cached – Similar pages
WorldNetDaily: Tracking down the enemy within
On August 8, six were executed in a D.C. jail, buried in unmarked graves. … and be put to death quickly and in secret, as were those German saboteurs. …
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25087 – 33k – Cached – Similar pages
Previous
June 18th, 2007 at 5:35 pm1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Next
Who do you represent, Harry Truman? Certainly you place allegiance to party before country.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:35 pmlollypops! lollypops! gosh darn lollypops! lolly lolly lollypops!!!
- yoo, coming off a bender in late ‘05
June 18th, 2007 at 5:35 pmPresident Bush 43 perhaps you have left the forum so as not to put your foot in your mouth again
June 18th, 2007 at 5:36 pmPresident Bush 43 and yes your grasp of History is indeed Glaring .
June 18th, 2007 at 5:38 pmHarry Truman is one of those trolls who kids himself that he is winning over converts with his pseudo-legal garbage, when all he is doing is bringing shame upon himself by arguing against basic human rights and common law.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:39 pmComment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
Nice try Harry, but your cheap ad homimem just makes you look petty.
The 1942 Germans were accorded rights under habeas corpus (representation and prompt trial – even if by military tribunal) and the Supreme Court heard the case with respect to FDR’s executive order calling for a trial by military tribunal. To the extent that the US Constitution handled this case in 1942, it did OK.
Now before you go off and justify Guantanamo on the back of this, in 1949 the US signed the Geneva Conventions, which muddy the waters of the Quirin precedent. Oh and has as already been pointed out, the Quirin prosecution was under an Declaration of War under the Articles of War and Guantanamo, is just a joint resolution which deals mainly with Iraq for some reason.
Better luck next time.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:41 pmOh….
And the number of times that citizen(s) is mentioned…. Now compare it to the number of times it is NOT mentioned….
Article. I. – The Legislative Branch Note
Section 2 – The House
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States
Section 3 – The Senate
No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States
Article. II. – The Executive Branch Note
Section 1 – The President Note1 Note2
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States
Section 2 – State citizens, Extradition
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
Amendment 11 – Judicial Limits. Ratified 2/7/1795. Note History
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
Amendment 14 – Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868. Note History
Amendment 15 – Race No Bar to Vote. Ratified 2/3/1870. History
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Amendment 19 – Women’s Suffrage. Ratified 8/18/1920. History
The right of citizens of the United States
Amendment 24 – Poll Tax Barred. Ratified 1/23/1964. History
1. The right of citizens of the United States
Amendment 26 – Voting Age Set to 18 Years. Ratified 7/1/1971. History
1. The right of citizens of the United States
It looks to me like there are MANY Amendments that are missing with the defining of citizens in them…… So that means that those Amendments are NOT only for Citizens or they would have specified that in them like they did for these Amendments…..
It’s like shooting fish in a barrol!!!
June 18th, 2007 at 5:42 pmno VerbalKint that is what you and yours do everyday . you defend emboden and aid terrorist with every antiwar demonstration . you defame and libel the troops that you so prowdly profess to support and their leaders . you speak of yourselves
June 18th, 2007 at 5:43 pmVerbalKint You are for PEACE at any Cost .
June 18th, 2007 at 5:44 pm#123, #124 And your support for these accusations is what?
June 18th, 2007 at 5:49 pmHarry…..
CHIRP….. CHIRP….. CHIRP…….
I provided my evidence….
Now YOU show me where in the Constitution it states that ONLY Citizens are afforded the protection of the Constitution????
Show me where it SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT!
June 18th, 2007 at 5:53 pmRemoveBush your saying something does not prove a thing . give me the section and Clause . if it is as easy as shooting Fish in a Barrel that should not be a problem . it was simple enough for me to give you the information on the 8 executed germans . try googling it : )
June 18th, 2007 at 5:54 pmno VerbalKint that is what you and yours do everyday . you defend emboden and aid terrorist with every antiwar demonstration . you defame and libel the troops that you so prowdly profess to support and their leaders . you speak of yourselves
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
Yawn…. the ’stab us in the back’ theory – that’s so 1918.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:56 pmNay My Brother the proof fall on you . you made the statement you provide the Section and Clause .
June 18th, 2007 at 5:58 pm“RemoveBush your saying something does not prove a thing . give me the section and Clause . if it is as easy as shooting Fish in a Barrel that should not be a problem . it was simple enough for me to give you the information on the 8 executed germans . try googling it : )
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 5:54 pm”
I ALREADY DID!!!!! IDIOT!!!!
#113
“I don’t just say something and hope that you believe it . Can anybody give me the section and clause in the Constitution where it says everybody is afforded protection under the Constitution ?
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 5:23 pmâ€
Here you go…
Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall
Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial
Edited…
Please note that thos do NOT say CITIZEN, unlike the following:
Amendment 14 – Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868. Note History
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States
Amendment 15 – Race No Bar to Vote. Ratified 2/3/1870. History
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not
Amendment 19 – Women’s Suffrage. Ratified 8/18/1920. History
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied
Now…… Read and LEARN!!!!
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
Comment by RemoveBush — June 18, 2007 @ 5:32 pm
June 18th, 2007 at 5:58 pmUgh. Why must my Alma Mater sully it’s name with this ass wipe. He should be at Stanford.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:00 pmBy the way Harry…..
Please note the intro to the Constitution…..
Preamble Note
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Notice that it DOES NOT SAY “We the Citizens”!!!!
June 18th, 2007 at 6:06 pmI say that we release the detainees into the general population of some of the luxurious state facilities in the US. We will have to explain to the other prisoners, however, that the new arrivals are alkaida, so that they are not discriminated against if they have an accent.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:07 pmI think it was made up by the 4th court of apeals like the right to abortion was made up by the Supreme Court
June 18th, 2007 at 6:07 pmHarry from June 12th: FDR chose Harry Truman as V.P. because the democrat party was against our envolvement in WWII before Pearl Harbor .
I think Harry must have slept through his WW2 history class…. today’s thread is really convincing me that he may have nodded off during his US Constitution class too. Did you get a high school diploma Harry?
June 18th, 2007 at 6:08 pmStill waiting on your proof Harry……
Now YOU show me where in the Constitution it states that ONLY Citizens are afforded the protection of the Constitution????
Show me where it SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT!
June 18th, 2007 at 6:09 pmI think that they should be turned loose in New York City , L.A. ,Seattle San Fransisco and a few true and Blue states . : )
June 18th, 2007 at 6:10 pmI think it was made up by the 4th court of apeals like the right to abortion was made up by the Supreme Court
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
And now some clutching at strawmen…… well that’s it for this thread.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:11 pmFunny watching the troll piss all over itself. In this thread he demands proof for everything, yet ignores what is given. Then he gloats over some imaginary rhetorical victory. Then he makes three unsubstantiated and false claims about me: that I am for peace at all costs (I supported the first Gulf War and Afghanistan), that I embolden the terrorists with anti-war demonstrations (I have never participated in one), and that I defame the troops (absolutely false).
June 18th, 2007 at 6:11 pmCome on Harry…….
Let’s see where in the Constitution you claim ONLY Citizens are entitled to the protection of the Constitution……
I showed you MY PROOF, now show me where the Constitution states ONLY Citizens are afforded the protection…..
Stop avoiding the question…..
June 18th, 2007 at 6:12 pmYoo on this dumbass…. 8=>
June 18th, 2007 at 6:13 pmMan alive, what a bedwetter.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:14 pmWell Saddam got a trial didn’t he? The verdict was just wasn’t it? Well, why have an assumption that OUR Government will prevail and either not worry about it or just kill the future defendant before he’s arrested?This stretch and release of the Constitution is unwarranted.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:19 pmTerrytheTurtle cute perhaps you missed the lesson.
WWII – Europe – Germany – Operations
WORLD WAR II. Germany. Operations Against the United States and the United … See also, Louis Fisher, Nazi Saboteurs on Trial: A Military Tribunal and …
intellit.muskingum.edu/wwii_folder/wwiieurope_folder/wwiieurgermany_folder/wwiieurgerops.html – 15k – Cached – Similar pages
Did you know? 1313 – LOL Facts – Web Software & Hosting
During World War II, six German saboteurs who secretly entered the United States on a mission to attack its civil infrastructure are executed by the United …
http://www.gigfoot.net/lol/facts/1313.html – 19k – Cached – Similar pages
Federal Bureau of Investigation – FBI History – Famous Cases
On September 1, 1939, World War II opened in Europe with the invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany. The United States remained neutral until drawn into the …
http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/famcases/nazi/nazi.htm – 42k – Cached – Similar pages
German Espionage and Sabotage Against the U.S. in World War II
German Espionage and Sabotage Against the United States during World War II. … in World War II: George John Dasch and the Nazi Saboteurs (FBI Handout) …
http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq114-2.htm – 14k – Cached – Similar pages
NAZI SABOTEURS ON TRIAL: A MILITARY TRIBUNAL AND AMERICAN LAW
His retelling of the 1942 incident involving the German saboteurs should renew … To date, the United States intends to use military courts to try three …
http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/lpbr/subpages/reviews/fisher-louis2.htm – 17k – Cached – Similar pages
Ex parte Quirin – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After the declaration of war between the United States and the German Reich, …. Upon the capture of the Quirin saboteurs, President Roosevelt issued an …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Quirin – 51k – Cached – Similar pages
Herbert Hans Haupt – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Washington, D.C., USA, August 8, 1942) was a German-American United States citizen executed as an enemy agent for the Germans in World War II. …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Hans_Haupt – 23k – Cached – Similar pages
[ More results from en.wikipedia.org ]
Amazon.com: Germany’s Spies and Saboteurs: Books: David Allen Johnson
The little known spy war in the United States in WWII., October 29, 2005 … The received view about German saboteurs in US and in UK is that they were all …
http://www.amazon.com/Germanys-Spies-Saboteurs-David-Johnson/dp/0760305471 – 110k – Cached – Similar pages
Amazon.com: Saboteurs: The Nazi Raid on America: Books: Michael Dobbs
*Starred Review* Dobbs’ full-scale account of the eight German saboteurs ….. United States. i.e., each book must be in subject 1 AND subject 2 AND . …
http://www.amazon.com/Saboteurs-Nazi-America-Michael-Dobbs/dp/1400030420 – 145k – Cached – Similar pages
[ More results from http://www.amazon.com ]
TheHistoryNet | World War II Book Reviews | World War II Book Review
German saboteurs on the lam from the authorities. … Silent Wings: The American Glider Pilots of WWII , $24.95 Plus FREE shipping! …
http://www.historynet.com/wwii/reviews/wwiireview0105-1 – 54k – Cached – Similar pages
Saboteurs
Eight German saboteurs were dispatched across the Atlantic by U-boat, … and their links to a network of Nazi sympathizers in the United States. …
http://www.culver.org/students/academics/library/Sept2004%20New%20Books/saboteurs.htm – 11k – Cached – Similar pages
Nazi Spies In America – Features on thehistorychannel.co.uk
http://www.thehistorychannel.co.uk/site/features/nazi_spies_in_america.php – Similar pages
Timeline of World War II: Information from Answers.com
14: All German and Italian assets in the United States are frozen. …. 8: In Washington, DC, six German would-be saboteurs are executed (two others were …
http://www.answers.com/topic/timeline-of-world-war-ii – 255k – Cached – Similar pages
Ronald D. Rotunda on POWS & Geneva Convention on National Review …
The United States did not treat the saboteurs as POWs. Instead, it treated them as “unlawful combatants,†tried them by military tribunal, and executed most …
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-rotunda012902.shtml – 23k – Cached – Similar pages
Bench & Bar of Minnesota
In a series of cases, the United States Supreme Court upheld those …. 3 In the summer of 1942, German submarines put saboteurs ashore on American beaches. …
www2.mnbar.org/benchandbar/2002/feb02/commissions-1.htm – 20k – Cached – Similar pages
AII POW-MIA InterNetwork
Ex Parte Quirin (1942): In a case involving eight German saboteurs who came to …. AIIPOWMIAI is not associated in any capacity with any United States …
http://www.aiipowmia.com/inter24/in040501roosevelt.html – 18k – Cached – Similar pages
Chicago’s Nazi Saboteurs
1, 1939, WWII opened in Europe. The United States remained neutral until the … the first group of four saboteurs left by submarine from the German base at …
chicago.about.com/cs/historycharacters/a/cs_nazi_spies.htm – 25k – Cached – Similar pages
The Supreme Court Historical Society
Determined to see these would-be saboteurs executed, President Franklin …. The saboteurs entered the United States in military attire, then changed into …
http://www.supremecourthistory.org/04_library/subs_volumes/04_c17_i.html – 45k – Cached – Similar pages
In Time of War: Book Reviews
His account of the German saboteurs is also dense with legal maneuvering and …. The eight saboteurs, all of whom had spent time in the United States and …
http://www.intimeofwar.org/reviews.htm – 52k – Cached – Similar pages
WorldNetDaily: Tracking down the enemy within
On August 8, six were executed in a D.C. jail, buried in unmarked graves. … and be put to death quickly and in secret, as were those German saboteurs. …
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25087 – 33k – Cached – Similar pages
Previous
June 18th, 2007 at 6:19 pm1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Next
sorry, it’s supposed to be why NOT have an assumption…
June 18th, 2007 at 6:20 pmRemoveBush are you trying to imply that the Constitution applies to every person on the Planet ?
June 18th, 2007 at 6:21 pmif so you are stupid . I am still waiting for that Section and Clause . but you can not produce it because it does not exist
June 18th, 2007 at 6:23 pm“RemoveBush are you trying to imply that the Constitution applies to every person on the Planet ?
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 6:21 pm”
It applies to ANYONE in the US or in US custody!!!!
If you think otherwise, then show me where in the Constitution it DENIES these rights to these people…
June 18th, 2007 at 6:24 pm“I am still waiting for that Section and Clause . but you can not produce it because it does not exist
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 6:23 pm”
HEY MORON!!!!
I have provided it THREE times now!!!!
LEARN TO GOD DAMN READ!!!!!!
June 18th, 2007 at 6:25 pmThese 3 specifically say it all…..
Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall
Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial
June 18th, 2007 at 6:27 pm#
Come on Harry…….
Let’s see where in the Constitution you claim ONLY Citizens are entitled to the protection of the Constitution……
I showed you MY PROOF, now show me where the Constitution states ONLY Citizens are afforded the protection…..
Stop avoiding the question…..
Comment by RemoveBush — June 18, 2007 @ 6:12 pm
June 18th, 2007 at 6:28 pm#
Come on Harry…….
Let’s see where in the Constitution you claim ONLY Citizens are entitled to the protection of the Constitution……
I showed you MY PROOF, now show me where the Constitution states ONLY Citizens are afforded the protection…..
Stop avoiding the question…..
June 18th, 2007 at 6:28 pmwhat I would like to know by what reason of sanity would you want Terrorist afforded the protection of the Constitution since they want you dead , and by your reasoning should we have not arrested Adolph Hitler ?
June 18th, 2007 at 6:28 pm“what I would like to know by what reason of sanity would you want Terrorist afforded the protection of the Constitution since they want you dead , and by your reasoning should we have not arrested Adolph Hitler ?
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 6:28 pm”
Answer the damn question…
Let’s see where in the Constitution you claim ONLY Citizens are entitled to the protection of the Constitution……
I showed you MY PROOF, now show me where the Constitution states ONLY Citizens are afforded the protection…..
Stop avoiding the question…..
June 18th, 2007 at 6:30 pmThe Constitution must be outdated, ay Harry….
You know you think that, just admit it. I bet most of the pukes secretly think this, but know its political suicide to admit it.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:30 pmThis guy is a law professor, yet he floats straw men as arguments for his policy. He must be the worst lawyer at Berkeley.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:31 pmRemoveBush that is fine it works for Criminals
Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall
Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial
we are not talking about shoplifters , we are not talking about purse snatchers or simple murders . we are talking about Enemy Combatants that are trained overseas trying to commit mass murder on a scale of 911 proportions . the above does not apply
June 18th, 2007 at 6:34 pmComment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
Saw the ‘lesson’ – I understood it, you didn’t.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:37 pm“the above does not apply
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 6:34 pm”
Provide the proof that the Constitution does not apply!!!!!
Show me where it limits the protection for anyone in the US…..
Provide the line and section that states this……
I have read the Constitution MANY times and have YET to find that line…..
Please enlighten me where I missed that line at!!!
Show me where…….
The Constitution is NOT just to fit your needs…… It applies in ALL situations, unless stated otherwise….. Show me where that clause is…..
June 18th, 2007 at 6:37 pmHarry, I am waiting for your proof of the false allegations made against me in posts #123 and #124. Usually I don’t push the trolls this hard for proof (because everyone here knows they don’t have it), but I am making a special exception for you in light of your ridiculous behavior on this thread in which you demand proof again and again, then ignore it when given. My strategy is to make you look like a hypocrite and an idiot. Because, after all, you are.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:39 pmwe are talking about Enemy Combatants
Trouble is that pesky Constitution and those pesky Geneva Conventions force you to find out for sure before you deny them habeas corpus or string them up….. damn laws….
From your Louis Fisher link:
“In Chapter 4, Fisher reviews the manner by which the U.S. Supreme Court had become involved in the case of the German saboteurs. After the district court had rejected the request to review whether the military court was properly constituted, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on July 29 and 30. The next day, July 31, 1942, the Court issued a short per curium opinion upholding the constitutionality of the proclamation. ”
Oops, stood on your d*** there, eh, Harry?
June 18th, 2007 at 6:42 pmyou think that terrorism should be fought in a Criminal Justice Mannor like Bill Clinton did with the below terrorist attacks
1975
Jan. 24, New York City: bomb set off in historic Fraunces Tavern killed 4 and injured more than 50 people. Puerto Rican nationalist group (FALN) claimed responsibility, and police tied 13 other bombings to the group.
1979
Nov. 4, Tehran, Iran: Iranian radical students seized the U.S. embassy, taking 66 hostages. 14 were later released. The remaining 52 were freed after 444 days on the day of President Reagan’s inauguration.
1982–1991
Lebanon: Thirty US and other Western hostages kidnapped in Lebanon by Hezbollah. Some were killed, some died in captivity, and some were eventually released. Terry Anderson was held for 2,454 days.
1983
April 18, Beirut, Lebanon: U.S. embassy destroyed in suicide car-bomb attack; 63 dead, including 17 Americans. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.
Oct. 23, Beirut, Lebanon: Shiite suicide bombers exploded truck near U.S. military barracks at Beirut airport, killing 241 marines. Minutes later a second bomb killed 58 French paratroopers in their barracks in West Beirut.
Dec. 12, Kuwait City, Kuwait: Shiite truck bombers attacked the U.S. embassy and other targets, killing 5 and injuring 80.
1984
Sept. 20, east Beirut, Lebanon: truck bomb exploded outside the U.S. embassy annex, killing 24, including 2 U.S. military.
Dec. 3, Beirut, Lebanon: Kuwait Airways Flight 221, from Kuwait to Pakistan, hijacked and diverted to Tehran. 2 Americans killed.
1985
April 12, Madrid, Spain: Bombing at restaurant frequented by U.S. soldiers, killed 18 Spaniards and injured 82.
June 14, Beirut, Lebanon: TWA Flight 847 en route from Athens to Rome hijacked to Beirut by Hezbollah terrorists and held for 17 days. A U.S. Navy diver executed.
Oct. 7, Mediterranean Sea: gunmen attack Italian cruise ship, Achille Lauro. One U.S. tourist killed. Hijacking linked to Libya.
Dec. 18, Rome, Italy, and Vienna, Austria: airports in Rome and Vienna were bombed, killing 20 people, 5 of whom were Americans. Bombing linked to Libya.
1986
April 2, Athens, Greece:A bomb exploded aboard TWA flight 840 en route from Rome to Athens, killing 4 Americans and injuring 9.
April 5, West Berlin, Germany: Libyans bombed a disco frequented by U.S. servicemen, killing 2 and injuring hundreds.
1988
Dec. 21, Lockerbie, Scotland: N.Y.-bound Pan-Am Boeing 747 exploded in flight from a terrorist bomb and crashed into Scottish village, killing all 259 aboard and 11 on the ground. Passengers included 35 Syracuse University students and many U.S. military personnel. Libya formally admitted responsibility 15 years later (Aug. 2003) and offered $2.7 billion compensation to victims’ families.
1993
Feb. 26, New York City: bomb exploded in basement garage of World Trade Center, killing 6 and injuring at least 1,040 others. In 1995, militant Islamist Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and 9 others were convicted of conspiracy charges, and in 1998, Ramzi Yousef, believed to have been the mastermind, was convicted of the bombing. Al-Qaeda involvement is suspected.
1995
April 19, Oklahoma City: car bomb exploded outside federal office building, collapsing wall and floors. 168 people were killed, including 19 children and 1 person who died in rescue effort. Over 220 buildings sustained damage. Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols later convicted in the antigovernment plot to avenge the Branch Davidian standoff in Waco, Tex., exactly 2 years earlier. (See Miscellaneous Disasters.)
Nov. 13, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: car bomb exploded at U.S. military headquarters, killing 5 U.S. military servicemen.
1996
June 25, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia: truck bomb exploded outside Khobar Towers military complex, killing 19 American servicemen and injuring hundreds of others. 13 Saudis and a Lebanese, all alleged members of Islamic militant group Hezbollah, were indicted on charges relating to the attack in June 2001.
1998
Aug. 7, Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: truck bombs exploded almost simultaneously near 2 U.S. embassies, killing 224 (213 in Kenya and 11 in Tanzania) and injuring about 4,500. 4 men connected with al-Qaeda 2 of whom had received training at al-Qaeda camps inside Afghanistan, were convicted of the killings in May 2001 and later sentenced to life in prison. A federal grand jury had indicted 22 men in connection with the attacks, including Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden, who remained at large.
2000
Oct. 12, Aden, Yemen: U.S. Navy destroyer USS Cole heavily damaged when a small boat loaded with explosives blew up alongside it. 17 sailors killed. Linked to Osama bin Laden, or members of al-Qaeda terrorist
What did it get us ?
2001
Sept. 11, New York City, Arlington, Va., and Shanksville, Pa.: hijackers crashed 2 commercial jets into twin towers of World Trade Center; 2 more hijacked jets were crashed into the Pentagon and a field in rural Pa. Total dead and missing numbered 2,9921: 2,749 in New York City, 184 at the Pentagon, 40 in Pa., and 19 hijackers. Islamic al-Qaeda terrorist group blamed. (See September 11, 2001: Timeline of Terrorism.)
what the below sections and articles cover are protection for people whom have committed misdemeanors and felonies not acts of War against our Country
Amendment 4 – Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall
Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial
Terrorism is not a Criminal Justice Matter .
June 18th, 2007 at 6:43 pm#156 Yoo was some kind of flavor of the month in legal circles, but his phony brand of law, styled after the Nazis, will wither away as soon as the Bush gang is out of power (and hopefully locked up). Things will only go downhill for him and eventually he will reach the status of pariah when Americans come to fully understand what has happened in this country.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:43 pmTerrytheTurtle they were put to death
June 18th, 2007 at 6:44 pmIt’s official, Harry peed his pants.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:45 pmTerrytheTurtle you should work for the state department you are quite good at aiding and defending the enemy
June 18th, 2007 at 6:45 pmCrap, Harry give it a break – you’re an idiot and we all know it already. You don’t have to prove over and over and over again that you are an idiot, WE KNOW ALREADY.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:46 pm#162 The sheer idiocy of this reasoning is appalling. Traditional law enforcement methods have broken up many terrorist cells and have prevented major attacks. European police have accomplished a lot in this regard. The Bush approach of attacking countries that don’t support terrorism (Iraq didn’t) and that are no threat to us has been an utter failure, not to mention simply being dumb. The Bush approach of letting uber-terrorist Osama bin Laden go free is insane. Remember, Harry, Bush said he doesn’t even care about catching bin Laden!
June 18th, 2007 at 6:47 pmHow about disbarring every one of these Bush-NeoCon supporter. These people are dangerious to the country.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:49 pmVerbalKint are you trying to tell everybody that F.D.R. the Greatest Democrat to Ever walk the Face of the Earth was a Nazi because he had Nazi saboteurs executed ? the Gray Panthers will be coming after you .
June 18th, 2007 at 6:50 pmTerrorism is not a Criminal Justice Matter .
Comment by Harry Truman
FUNNY how George H.W. Bush PARDONED the INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST Orlando Bosch in 1992.
Bosch sits in Miami to this day, protected by the Bush WAR CRIMINAL Family.
Obviously, WAR CRIMINAL Bush 41 thinks it IS a “criminal justice” matter and PARDONED an INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST.
June 18th, 2007 at 6:55 pmEasyRider if you guys had your way there would be no country , hell you are posed to elect another Clinton , the last time there was a Clinton in the white house we had 7 terrorist attacks in 8 yrs. and the only time the Army was used for Military operations was the awesome Campaign against the Branch Davidian Compound in Waco, Tex.,
June 18th, 2007 at 6:56 pmEasyRider if you guys had your way there would be no country , hell you are posed to elect another Clinton.
“harry truman”:
If YOU and WAR CRIMINAL TRAITOR Bush had YOUR way, the USA would CEASE to BE a democracy.
P.S. I hope they KILL Libby in jail. A warning to TRAITORS like Bush & YOU
June 18th, 2007 at 6:58 pmBush Goes To Hell well at least he waited till the guy was convicted unlike Bill Clinton when it came to Mark Rich , hell the guy was a fugitive living in the swiss alps , but a donation to the Clintom Library and maybe something else from Rick’s pretty wife and he was Pardoned
here is the Proof you may be too young to remember .
President Clinton’s eleventh-hour pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich has sparked a firestorm of controversy, launching investigations in both houses of Congress and igniting fierce protest from both Democrats and Republicans. The U.S. House and Senate have issued a rash of subpoenas calling for witnesses as well as financial records, as the House Government Reform Committee continued its hearings and the Senate Judiciary Committee geared up for its own proceedings.
Thursday, the controversy took another step forward — no, we’re not at impeachment yet, but it’s been suggested — when federal prosecutors in New York officially opened a criminal investigation into whether Rich did indeed buy his pardon with his ex-wife Denise’s pointed largesse to the First Couple and the Democratic party.
That prompted Dan Burton, chairman and lead Clinton-hunter on the House Government Affairs Committee’s ongoing investigation into the matter, to put on hold his request to the Justice Department to give Denise Rich immunity in exchange for her testimony. Rich has already declined to testify, citing her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
As with almost everything relating to the former president, the Marc Rich pardon case raises a lot of questions. Some answers will surface only after all the Capitol Hill witnesses are heard and the U.S. Attorney’s office does its thing. Others, happily, we can answer here and now.
First of all, what does it mean to be “pardoned” by the President?
In legal terms, a pardon in an exemption from punishment for a criminal conviction. Presidential pardons are granted unilaterally and cannot be reversed.
So what’s the point of all these hearings?
Some are calling the inquiries a field day for die-hard Clinton-haters. But most see this as a source of bipartisan outrage. Republicans and Democrats alike were dumbstruck by the Rich pardon. The federal prosecutors who indicted Rich are especially livid, particularly because, by definition, Rich appears to be ineligible for a pardon: He never took responsibility for his actions or served any sentence.
The congressional panels were called to investigate the path to Rich’s pardon — which, as various documents seem to indicate, did not follow usual channels. In testimony Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, U.S. pardon attorney Roger Adams says when the White House sent over Rich’s name for pardon consideration — only a few hours before the President was due to leave office — there was never any mention of Rich being a fugitive. There is also suspicion that donations made to Clinton campaigns and to the Clinton presidential library by Rich’s ex-wife, Denise, could be a quid pro quo for the pardon.
There are other questions looming: Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, asked whether Clinton even had time to sign all of the paperwork required to seal Rich’s pardon before he left office — raising the possibility that the pardon may not be valid. Specter has also floated the idea of a constitutional amendment giving congressional oversight to presidential pardons.
Will Clinton be brought in to testify about the pardon?
It doesn’t look like it. Senator Orrin Hatch, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has indicated he’s interested in having Clinton appear to “clear the air,” but says he doesn’t believe the former president should be forced to testify.
How does President Bush feel about the Rich pardon inquiries?
Bush has been quoted as saying he thinks “it’s time to move on,” and by all accounts has little interest in pursuing any investigation that keeps his predecessor in the national spotlight.
What was Marc Rich’s alleged crime?
In 1983, Rich was indicted in federal court of evading more than $48 million in taxes. He was also charged with 51 counts of tax fraud and with running illegal oil deals with Iran during the hostage crisis.
So does the pardon mean that if Rich leaves Switzerland (where he’s been living for 17 years and seems quite happy to stay) and comes back to the U.S., that he won’t face any legal proceedings at all?
Possibly. He’s free of any criminal charges in connection with the case, but Rich can still be charged in civil court on, say, tax evasion charges. In fact, when Clinton finally signed off on Rich’s pardon, the President stipulated that Rich waive the statute of limitations normally placed on as yet unspecified civil charges.
Rich has been living in Switzerland for almost 20 years now. Is he still a U.S. citizen?
That’s one of the major questions connected with this case. And the answer, legally, anyway, appears to be yes. While Rich’s lawyers can’t seem to decide if their client is a citizen — sometimes he is, sometimes he isn’t — and Rich himself reportedly considers himself a citizen of Israel and Spain, a federal appeals court ruled in 1991 that Rich had not actively renounced his U.S. citizenship, and therefore he was subject to U.S. law.
Why does his citizenship matter?
If Rich is, in fact, still a U.S. citizen, he’s liable for taxes, no matter where he lives. So the IRS wants to know if Rich filed taxes for 17 years he spent abroad — and the congressional panel is investigating whether Rich’s money made it back to Bill and Hillary Clinton; non-citizens are not permitted to make political contributions.
What does Denise Rich have to do with all this?
Marc Rich’s socialite ex-wife has donated an estimated $1 million to Democratic causes, including $70,000 to Hillary Clinton’s successful Senate campaign and $450,000 to the Clinton presidential library fund. She also lobbied heavily for Marc’s pardon. Investigators want to know if Denise’s contributions led to a direct quid pro quo exchange for her ex-husband’s pardon. Clinton has denied any connection, saying he relied solely on the information provided by Jack Quinn (former White House counsel and Rich’s current lawyer) when he was weighing the pardon request.
What happens to Denise Rich now?
Last week, when she was called to testify before the congressional panel, she took the Fifth (the amendment to the Constitution that allows potential witnesses to decline testimony out of fear that they might incriminate themselves). Now the same House panel wants to offer Rich immunity in order to discuss her ex-husband’s case. House Republicans want approval from Attorney General John Ashcroft before granting immunity. Ashcroft is currently “considering” the request.
What about Washington Democratic fund-raiser and socialite Beth Dozoretz, whose name has come up in connection with the case?
Beth Dozoretz, fund-raiser and FOB, was, according to TIME, skiing when she heard that Clinton was “impressed” by Rich’s case for a pardon. Dozoretz eagerly told skiing partner Denise Rich about the development, who called Marc Rich’s supporters in Israel, then Washington. Dozoretz is also a big contributor to the Clinton presidential library fund. As in Denise Rich’s case, congressional investigators want to know if there’s a trail leading straight from Dozoretz’s bountiful checkbook to Clinton’s signature on Marc Rich’s pardon.
Sphere Related Blogs & Articles
* |
* AddThis Social Bookmark Button
* |
* Add RSS Feed
Related Links
* Fortune.com: Living Rich
* CNN: Senators Hear Details of Clinton’s Last-Minute Pardon of Rich
Top Stories
* Surge Architect: More Time Needed
* No Tsunami Victory for Sarkozy
* ING Direct’s Man on a Mission
Most popular
* 1. Who Killed the Americans in Karbala?
* 2. The Psychology of Fatherhood
* 3. Surge Architect: More Time Needed
* 4. Google vs. eBay: Round One
* 5. The Courage Primary
* 6. No Tsunami Victory for Sarkozy
* 7. The Quiet Gay Revolution
* 8. When the Ultimate Fighter Is a Woman
* 9. Where Jesus Spent His Old Age
* 10. N.C. Panel Disbars Duke Prosecutor
Features
| Click arrows to view more features
More features
Well that was easy enough
June 18th, 2007 at 7:01 pm#170 ummm, no, what makes you think I might be trying to say that? By the way, is it possible for you to write ANYTHING to me that isn’t an obvious strawman, or otherwise just pulled out of your ass?
June 18th, 2007 at 7:03 pmYou will see that one again whenyou all are howling about the Scooter Libby Pardon : P
June 18th, 2007 at 7:03 pmDemocrats , Criminals and Terrorist BF4E or is it BFFE I can’t keep up with the lingo of you kids today.
June 18th, 2007 at 7:05 pm#174 Later on, pathetic freak. Try not to bomb the thread with too much cut-and-paste, and hurry up and clean out your pants, for goodness’ sake.
June 18th, 2007 at 7:05 pmwell I am going to back out of here and let you kids pat each other on the backs and have some fun . I need to water my tomato plants
June 18th, 2007 at 7:07 pmVerbalkink I hope one comes to your Town , I really do
Exclusive: Suicide Bomb Teams Sent to U.S., Europe
June 18, 2007 4:45 PM
Brian Ross Reports:
Exclusive_suici_mn_2 Large teams of newly trained suicide bombers are being sent to the United States and Europe, according to evidence contained on a new videotape obtained by the Blotter on ABCNews.com.
Teams assigned to carry out attacks in the United States, Canada, Great Britain and Germany were introduced at an al Qaeda/Taliban training camp graduation ceremony held June 9.
A Pakistani journalist was invited to attend and take pictures as some 300 recruits, including boys as young as 12, were supposedly sent off on their suicide missions.
Photos: Inside an al Qaeda/Taliban ‘Graduation’
The tape shows Taliban military commander Mansoor Dadullah, whose brother was killed by the U.S. last month, introducing and congratulating each team as they stood.
“These Americans, Canadians, British and Germans come here to Afghanistan from faraway places,” Dadullah says on the tape. “Why shouldn’t we go after them?”
The leader of the team assigned to attack Great Britain spoke in English.
“So let me say something about why we are going, along with my team, for a suicide attack in Britain,” he said. “Whether my colleagues, companions and Muslim brothers die today or tonight, every drop of our blood will invigorate the Muslim (unintelligible).”
Video: Watch the Taliban’s ‘Graduation’ Ceremony
U.S. intelligence officials described the event as another example of “an aggressive and sophisticated propaganda campaign.”
Others take it very seriously.
“It doesn’t take too many who are willing to actually do it and be able to slip through the net and get into the United States or England and cause a lot of damage,” said ABC News consultant Richard Clarke, the former White House counterterrorism official.
Watch Brian Ross’ full report on “World News With Charles Gibson.”
Do you have a tip for Brian Ross and the Investigative Team?
June 18th, 2007 at 7:18 pmPresident Bush 43 I see of all those lies you cannot come up with just 1 . as I thought you are unable to defend you position . that is truly sad .
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 5:25 pm
and my name is not Michael , it is David .
Comment by Harry Truman
David/fake-Harry/howsad,
June 18th, 2007 at 7:26 pmI told you I had work to do (or a work-out), so I left this thread for a while. I trusted other people could deflate your lies about the Constitutional rights afforded (or in your words, “afforted”) to non-aliens, and they did. But you still haven’t learned English spelling, punctuation or grammar. You give my paid trolls a bad name.
TerrytheTurtle they were put to death
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 6:44 pm
Yeeesss, so what? I asked you to provide proof that Germans were executed duribng WW2 without respect to the Constitution – you have failed completely. The Supreme Court upheld FDR’s Military Tribunal as Constitutional under the War Powers articles.
You failed about as completely as you failed to demonstrate that Truman was appointed Vice President because Democrats were against the war.
And we know you failed because? Because all you have left was this petty ad hominem and a bunch of cut-and-paste plagiarism – having trouble making your own arguments now?
“TerrytheTurtle you should work for the state department you are quite good at aiding and defending the enemy
Comment by Harry Truman — June 18, 2007 @ 6:45 pm”
ROTFLMAO, try again anytime.
June 18th, 2007 at 7:35 pm“It doesn’t take too many who are willing to actually do it and be able to slip through the net and get into the United States or England and cause a lot of damage,†said ABC News consultant Richard Clarke, the former White House counterterrorism official.
comment by David-fake Harry Truman/howsad
Funny you quote Richard Clark. That’s the guy whose warnings about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda Condi and I wouldn’t listen to before 9/11. Since I’m lazy, let me quote from wikipedia:
June 18th, 2007 at 7:41 pm“Many of the events Clarke recounted during the ()/11 Commission) hearings were also published in his memoir, Against All Enemies. Among his highly critical statements regarding the Bush Administration, Clarke charged that before and during the 9/11 crisis, many in the administration were distracted from efforts against Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda organization by a pre-occupation with Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Clarke had written that on September 12, 2001, President Bush pulled him and a couple of aides aside and “testily” asked him to try to find evidence that Saddam Hussein was connected to the terrorist attacks. In response he wrote a report stating there was no evidence of Iraqi involvement and got it signed by all relevant agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the CIA. The paper was quickly returned by a deputy with a note saying “Please update and resubmit”.[2] After initially denying that such meeting and request between the President and Clarke took place, the White House later reversed its denial when others present backed Clarke’s version of the events.[5][6]”
Cheney and I, along with our GOP ass-lickers, have been trying to slander Clarke ever since.
“TerrytheTurtle you should work for the state department you are quite good at aiding and defending the enemy
Comment by Harry Truman
Brain-dead Harry/David/howsad,
June 18th, 2007 at 7:43 pmDo you mean my State Department, headed by my devoted Condi, is full of people aiding and defending the enemy? You are really going too far with that one.
Bush Goes To Hell well at least he waited till the guy was convicted unlike Bill Clinton when it came to Mark Rich –”harry truman”
Gee, wasn’t Marc Rich’s a Rapeublican with a LAWYER named SCOOTER LIBBY? Yup, I definitely see the CRIMINAL CONNECTION now…
Didn’t Ford PARDON Nixon the TRAITOR before ANY TRIALS?
And the fact that you CONDONE Bush 41 PARDONING an INTERNATIONAL TERROIST like Bosch, while claiming that TERRORIST SUSPECTS DON’T HAVE RIGHTS TO TRIAL is amazing (not surprising from YOU, though)…
And John Dean, counsel to TRAITOR Nixon says that if Cheney was involved in the EXPOSURE of a CIA COVERT SPY specializing in WMD,
then TRAITORS Bush and Cheney would be guilty of OBSTRUCTION to cover their OWN azzes.
Fitzgerald has FIVE YEARS to close his investigation, and HAS NOT YET DONE SO, because he says there is a “cloud” over Cheney…
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20070601.html
June 18th, 2007 at 7:53 pmdead thread? … still though:
The Constitution must be outdated, ay Harry….
You know you think that, just admit it. I bet most of the pukes secretly think this, but know its political suicide to admit it.
Comment by ForTruth — June 18, 2007 @ 6:30 pm
that’s twice today i’ve witnessed the right’s low regard of the
the Constitution of the United States of America…
earlier on the “parts of the w.h.” thread:
“We’ve already got good and decent people who aren’t thinking of the Constitution as a suicide pact.” Comment by GOPcurious @ 3:20 pm
thinking of the Constitution as a suicide pact.
???
whatever could THIS latest meme be about???
a suicide pact??? … the actual birth certificate
is now thought of as a death sentence???
whoa… new depths of delusion…
.Comment by katy — June 18, 2007 @ 3:25 pm
go figure…
June 18th, 2007 at 10:11 pm.
I and hundreds of others of lawyers would like to see this man disbarred and then his head displayed on a pike.
Shame on Boalt Hall for giving this man a platform.
June 18th, 2007 at 11:53 pmWhat maroons! It’s a shame you all buy into the spin without any intellectual scrutiny.
Claim # 1 is incorrect. Woo said Bin Laden would be treated like any other criminal in the US. In the US is the paramount consideration and Bin Laden was in the country he would have to be treated like a criminal.
Claim #2 is incorrect. Al-Marri v. Wright does not follow the precedent of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and as such it will be overturned by an en banc hearing or an appeal to the Supreme Court; because, keep reading …
Claim #3 is incorrect because it was decided by 2 Clinton appointees, the dissent was written by a Bush appointee who did in fact correctly apply Hamdi v. Rumsfeld!
So before you all go rabid over the decision and the absolutely ignorant rant that started this post, perhaps you should educate yourselves as to the facts!
June 19th, 2007 at 12:01 am>with the lingo of you kids today -HT
hahahah. hi jake…. moved out of your moms basement yet?
anyone want to wager on this En Banc thing? has the court even agreed to hear it En Banc yet, or are you flaghumper terrormongers just fantazizing?
ps… any of you clowns have any idea of how much more likely it is that an american will take your life than it is that a foreigner does so?
June 19th, 2007 at 6:24 am#19
Let them eat their grass in peace and let them keep their minds busy with American Idol…..
Comment by RemoveBush
Huh, And I always thought it was spelled:
American I-d-l-e
Go figure.
June 19th, 2007 at 9:03 amThis f..ker is so far gone, that he’ll never get back. His remaining life, as it is, should be on the front line in the middle east…ALONE. Torture becomes him.
June 19th, 2007 at 9:11 amI’ll see Yoo in hell. The bastard deserves worse, but even God has mercy, unlike those whom Yoo has enabled over the last few years.
June 19th, 2007 at 3:41 pmTerrorism is not a Criminal Justice Matter .
Comment by Harry Truman
Terrorism is a tactic employed for thousands of years whenever someone’s ideological imperative demands action over rhetoric, at times quite violent action. Since it often involves small groups working to thwart or damage a larger system or authoritative discourse, it has certainly historically been a matter of criminality. You can’t have a “war on terror” any more than you can have a “war on reason”, although I can fokkin see that Harry here believes you can have both.
The War on Terror is a code developed for all the Moonified reptile brains to cringe in fear and give up their basic Constitutional rights, which Harry and the other zealots are all to eager to do. What Harry means by War on Terror is, essentially, genocide based on race and religion.
June 19th, 2007 at 6:29 pm