in the wrong era. Soundly refuting
liberals online since 2000.
| James Petho. | Must-Read: Why the official 8.3 percent unemployment rate is a phony number |
0 |
| The Hill | This: Senate Republicans to challenge recess appointments in court |
0 |
| WIBC | 2012 Watch: Santorum Fails to Qualify for Indiana Ballot |
0 |
| AP | 0 | |
| Zero Hedge | Wow: Record 1.2 Million People Fall Out Of Labor Force In One Month, |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
Gaffetastic:
Vice President Joe Biden had his “oops” moment Wednesday speaking in a 49er-crazed SF when he told a crowd at a city political fundraiser that “the Giants are on their way to the Super Bowl.” - SF Chronicle, 1-18-12
Pat Leahy: We wouldn’t need to “interrogate” OBL if we caught him
Another Keystone cop strikes again:
If the U.S. captures Osama bin Laden, there’s no need to interrogate him, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Thursday.
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the chairman of that committee, said that arguments raised by Republican senators about whether bin Laden would be afforded Miranda rights if he were captured amount to a “red herring.”
“The red herring that my friend [Sen.] Lindsey Graham [R-S.C.] was covering is not realistic,” Leahy said during an appearance on “Washington Journal” on C-SPAN.
“For one thing, capturing Osama bin Laden — we’ve had enough on him, we don’t need to interrogate him,” Leahy added.
Graham had grilled Attorney General Eric Holder during a hearing on Capitol Hill on Wednesday on whether bin Laden should be afforded due process in courts if he were captured.
“The big problem I have is you’re criminalizing the war, that if we caught bin Laden tomorrow, we have mixed theories and couldn’t turn him over to the CIA, the FBI, military intelligence for an interrogation on the battlefield, because now you’re saying he’s subject to criminal court in the United States and you’re confusing the people fighting this war,” Graham said.
A senior Republican aide criticized Leahy, saying “it’s a good thing they kicked him off the intel committee in the late 80’s.”
I’ll say.
For all of Lindsey Graham’s faults – and there are many – major props for cornering Holder on this issue yesterday.
But back to Leahy, he’s defending Holder’s decison:
“We’re going to bring [KSM and other detainees] back to New York and prosecute them,” he said. “I think we ought to stand up and applaud that.”
RSS feed for comments on this post.
12 Responses to “Pat Leahy: We wouldn’t need to “interrogate” OBL if we caught him”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Island of Misfit Bloggers
Stats
I’m with dick cheney on leahy.
And why did they kick him (Leahy) off the intelligence committee (not a reflection of the members, obviously)? Seems to me he couldn’t wait to give classified documents to sympathetic reporters, if I remember correctly.
Back in the day that would have been enough for him to be kicked out of Congress, and prosecuted. But since Watergate, such things are the staple of donkey existence. That, and pork.
There IS a need to interrogate OBL!
Connect the dots…
POTUS has an obligation to protect citizens from terrorist acts of violence. OBL has information concerning terrorists networks. Prompt action on such information could stop future attacks.
Does OLB’s right to remain silent outweigh POTUS responsibility to protect individuals from violence?
Is it any wonder why the dems are so horrible at defending this nation??
Dear God.
Hey, everyone, it just occurred to me that Leahy did at least as good a job of explaining this as Hoof-in-mouth Biden!
These people scare me. Depends Leahy, is just too stupid to be anything in this world besides the village idiot. OBL has enough info that we could wipe out ALQ within a year. But here is yet another circumstance where a Dem, could careless regarding keeping America safe. – Lorica
They just keep saying to themselves, “There is no war on terror. There is no war on terror.” hoping that it’s true.
This is just another example of the do-nothing for fear of reprisal mentality of the liberal left. They really don’t care about our security in this case since they wouldn’t want to question Bin Laden. Would Holder interrogate the head of a drug cartel? I think he would. Would Holder interrogate the head of a mafia crime family? I am certain he would, but no, don’t ask him to interrogate the head of a world terrorist organization. Makes no sense.
Pat Leahy is a lawyer and the head of the Judiciary Committee. He’s looking at everything in terms of criminal law and crim procedure – and we do NOT need to interrogate OBL in order to have enough evidence for a slam-dunk conviction.
What he just doesn’t get is that that is NOT WHY we would be interrogating him!!! We’re looking for Intel on his organization, NOT a confession for his conviction!
I realize that you, good ST Readers, understand this. I just feel the need to shout it from the rooftops for my own sanity.
Maybe Barney Frank should start clicking his ruby heels together.
LC, I agree with you. Leahy thinks that we “torture” these guys to get them to confess, he is so stupid. He is one of the reasons I firmly believe that lawyers should be exempted from being able to run for public office. His belief that if you cut off the head of the snake it will die is sheer stupidity. This snake is a hydra, and even tho OBL is the main head of it, I am pretty certain he has been preparing for his death for some years. Unlike Leahy, OBL is not a stupid man. – Lorica
Barney can’t click his heels together – those ruby pumps are so fabulous he can’t IMAGINE scuffing them.
OBL must be in a Waziristani town / city of some size. His need for regular dialysis has GOT to have him somewhere more civilized than a cave, assuming he’s still alive. These guys are true believers. I’m willing to bet he’s ready for his 72 virgins.
And Lorica – your point about lawyers being banned from public office? YES!!!!!
The way I understand it, the way lawyers (judges) have interpreted what lawyers wrote (legislation) is that a specific group cannot be excluded from participating in our glorious experiment.
Kinda like convicted felons can’t vote, except in reverse.
Give the Dems another complete majority in the Congress and Presidency, and Felons will be able to vote, it’s what they want now. – Lorica