The current Attorney General of the United States is a guy named Eric Holder. He was appointed by President Obama, he is the 82nd person to hold this job in America and is the first black man to do so.
The appointment is a political appointment, meaning that the person who holds this office is not hired, he is nominated by the current President and then confirmed by the United States Senate. He serves at the President’s pleasure, meaning that he can be fired by the President as well. He can also be impeached by the House of Representatives. He is a member of the President’s cabinet , but is I think the only one not holding the title of Secretary in the cabinet, currently. He seems to be generally a pretty smart guy, who looks likeable enough and is generally well spoken and articulate to some extent (He says Ah a lot, but may just be thinking, I don’t know.). He also appears to be well trained, is a working lawyer to the extent that a politician ever is a working anything, and is at least as informed as you would imagine, living and working in Washington DC.
Here is my problem with him, and why I think he is an idiot of the first degree.
He makes extremely bad, horrifically stupid asinine decisions that make no sense and he uses wavy backtracking butt sliding logic to explain it, as evidenced by the latest one to surface. And on this one he did not even consult with the President of the United States of America before making it. How important does the content and context of an issue have to be before it makes it onto this presidents radar screen? I am stunned that Obama never signed off on this before the announcement, and has really had no opinion since, except to express confidence in the Attorney General.
This kind of stupidity , ladies and gentlemen, is what got elected.
Yes we can (look like morons)
Yes we can (make stupid decisions)
Yes we can (screw up as bad as John Ashcroft did)
Oh hell yeah, YES WE CAN.
He is going to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (“KSM”), in a civilian , federal court for his part in 9-11 and the attacks on the United States.
Who is KSM do you say? Three links you may want to review to answer that question.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1114/p90s01-usju.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Sheikh_Mohammed
http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/profiles/khalid_shaikh_mohammed.htm
Here is a very good article in the Wall Street Journal about it.
You just have to click this one and read all about it. Click here, go ahead click it.
Eric Holder's Baffling KSM Decision
Pardon me, I have a question that I am sure anybody who knows enough about this to be in disagreement with me will also have to consider.
Just how in the hell does he propose to do that ?
For my two cents, I think that any decent defense attorney would be crapping all over himself to get this one.
Will this terrorist be given some kind of special status that does not yet exist for a criminal suspect?
· He is not an American citizen. What will his immigration status be?
· Will he be given the same rights, privileges and treatment that any other person charged with a federal felony would be given ?
· Could he be found not guilty and be let go? And if not, and he is found not guilty, how are they going to proceed criminally, with a case that began on a battlefield?
As to trial rules and procedures, will he be looked at the same way a federal judge would look at a case involving you or I?
· Was he read his rights?
· Was he denied a lawyer ? Was he told he had a right to an attorney?
· Was he told he had the right to keep silent?
· Was he told he has the right to a speedy trial?
· Will the evidence against him be exposed to the same methods and procedures that evidence is exposed to currently?
o Meaning will collection procedures be questioned?
o Will the defense have access to the stuff no one currently knows about? You know what I mean, the stuff being locked away by the CIA or carried around in the special briefcase by Super Secret Squirrel.
As to his detention and the interrogations he has had
· How can this information be used as evidence in a federal court if there are any of the issues in evidence as I’ve asked above?
· Is any statement he has made legally excluded because he wasn’t “mirandized”
· How are they going to keep “Secrets”, secret ?
And so on and so forth. How is this going to comport with the rule of Law in our country ?
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
WHAT THE HELL ?
They are going to have a trial under these rules , with these restrictions and these guarantees for this murdering , lying, terrorist bastard ?
This is why I think this guy is an idiot and is why I am pissed off about it.
It seems to me that any decent defense attorney who regularly gets pimps, pushers and murderer’s off by attacking trial and arrest procedure would have a field day with this one.
He can’t even explain himself. He can’t answer simple questions about it.
Hell, I’m not an attorney, with no legal training at all (unless you count thousands of hours of Law and Order and CSI as training.”), and I think these issues are kind of self evident don’t you?
How are they going to throw out the rules of law, evidence, conduct and charge and constitute an court to make this work without having the verdicts set aside upon review.
I just do not understand. This is pretty disingenuous and is dangerous precedent and is wrong and stupid and political. Not one thing about this sets right with me.
I have given him a new title. Instead of Attorney General , Chief Law Enforcement officer of the United States of America, he is now just Private Putz, attorney at law.
Reading the latest news about it, not one actual reporter has asked these questions.
The talking heads have repeated the news of his decision, yet not one has asked “How is this going to work?”
Seems like they would want to know.
I’m curious why they don’t.
Thankx for reading my rant !
bigmike
Visit my blog online at http://bigmikerant.blogspot.com/
I encourage you to leave your own comments or reactions to my rants (even if you don't agree with me) in the comments section on each post.
