Comments on: Pat Leahy: We wouldn’t need to “interrogate” OBL if we caught him

By: Lorica

Lorica — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:33:29 +0000

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

By: Carlos

Carlos — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 16:38:36 +0000

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.

By: LC Gregory

LC Gregory — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:59:28 +0000

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!!!!!

By: Lorica

Lorica — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:04:44 +0000

They just keep saying to themselves, “There is no war on terror. There is no war on terror.” hoping that it’s true.

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

By: LC Gregory

LC Gregory — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:30:33 +0000

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.

By: Kate

Kate — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:43:30 +0000

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.

By: Lorica

Lorica — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:11:50 +0000

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

By: Carlos

Carlos — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:16:39 +0000

Hey, everyone, it just occurred to me that Leahy did at least as good a job of explaining this as Hoof-in-mouth Biden!

By: NC Cop

NC Cop — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:58:28 +0000

“For one thing, capturing Osama bin Laden — we’ve had enough on him, we don’t need to interrogate him,” Leahy added.

Is it any wonder why the dems are so horrible at defending this nation??

Dear God.

By: omapian

omapian — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:04:56 +0000

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?

By: Carlos

Carlos — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:50:40 +0000

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.

By: b. pocoroba

b. pocoroba — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:51:36 +0000

I’m with dick cheney on leahy.