Lindsey Graham Defends the Constitution, citizens, and Courts in front of Erik Holder

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTmLKUT817Y&feature=related[/ame]


Good for you Graham, i dont always like what you do but this time you nailed it dead on


I'm surprised Holder and Obama have decided to bring the enemy combatants to the united states without knowing the answers to such questions as Lindsey Graham presented to him.

Its a pretty sad state when we have incompetent fools like this running our justice department.

Watch and Listen.

short version

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG7lm8Sfbo4[/ame]

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

 

[saveliberty]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

You can't ignore legal precedent. This compounding a complex situation. The "fear" is restriction of interogating prisoners. You should have picked that up from the video. There must be some sense you can just change what the law means from moment to moment.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

You can't ignore legal precedent. This compounding a complex situation. The "fear" is restriction of interogating prisoners. You should have picked that up from the video. There must be some sense you can just change what the law means from moment to moment.

OMG! run. ruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuun! a typical neocon reply. When are you people going to stop being so scared of the great system we have in America? Why don't conservatives t-r-u-s-t America?

 

[rightwinger]

The terrorist menace has the right wing conservatives peeing in their pants.

Holding the trial in New York City, less than a mile from ground zero says "Fuck You" to the terrorists

Conducting a secret trial in a secret location is the work of cowardly pussies

 

[Xenophon]

Gramham finally got something right, amazing.

He's still a massive douche.

 

[Oddball]

Yeah, what he said.

 

[WillowTree]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

hey! haven't you heard? your DUmbasses have tainted the jury pool.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Gramham finally got something right, amazing.

He's still a massive douche.

Agreed

 

[Tech_Esq]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

You'd be scary if you actually knew what you were talking about. But, since you're talking out your ass (again), we'll excuse you.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The terrorist menace has the right wing conservatives peeing in their pants.

Holding the trial in New York City, less than a mile from ground zero says "Fuck You" to the terrorists

Conducting a secret trial in a secret location is the work of cowardly pussies

and more than a few scardy cat Dems too.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

hey! haven't you heard? your DUmbasses have tainted the jury pool.

I dont think dev actually listened to, watched, or read the Question and answer session.

The point being that in our criminal courts you have to have your miranda rights read to you at the time of detention and interrogation. If you did not have them read to you your case can be easily dismissed under the writ of habeas corpus.

Smooth move to try them in a constitional court system, giving them rights under the constitution, that were violated during their capture and subsequent detention and interrogation.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

hey! haven't you heard? your DUmbasses have tainted the jury pool.

SO again you admit to being scared and not trusting the American people to do the right thing in a serious situation like this one. We need a big daddy to protect us from ourselves?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

You'd be scary if you actually knew what you were talking about. But, since you're talking out your ass (again), we'll excuse you.

naw, it was liberal NYC that fought back after being bombed. they went right on with life. not as much as a whine that keps spilling off the lips of cons and more than a few Democrats

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

hey! haven't you heard? your DUmbasses have tainted the jury pool.

I dont think dev actually listened to, watched, or read the Question and answer session.

The point being that in our criminal courts you have to have your miranda rights read to you at the time of detention and interrogation. If you did not have them read to you your case can be easily dismissed under the writ of habeas corpus.

Smooth move to try them in a constitional court system, giving them rights under the constitution, that were violated during their capture and subsequent detention and interrogation.

what a wonderful lawyer you'd make...not.

 

[blastoff]

Not much of a Graham fan either but he's spot-on with this issue.

These trials will be a bigger circus than OJ's but with the unfortunate added bonus of diminishing our future dealings with other bad guys we apprehend.

With this fiasco all the fingers will be pointing directly at Obama and every Dimocrat who supports this b.s., but the damage will remain done.

Yep, change you can believe in alright.

 

[Tech_Esq]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

hey! haven't you heard? your DUmbasses have tainted the jury pool.

I dont think dev actually listened to, watched, or read the Question and answer session.

The point being that in our criminal courts you have to have your miranda rights read to you at the time of detention and interrogation. If you did not have them read to you your case can be easily dismissed under the writ of habeas corpus.

Smooth move to try them in a constitional court system, giving them rights under the constitution, that were violated during their capture and subsequent detention and interrogation.

And that has always been the point about subjecting what are essentially either "illegal combatants" (usually subjected to summary execution), or EPW (Enemy Prisoners of War) to "criminal" prosecution. If we are fighting a war, these people should never be prosecuted, unless we classify them as illegal combatants (which is what they look and act most like). In that case, we should do as we, and other nations, have always done with them. "Drum head" trials. With the agreement of three officers, they are executed immediately.

I'll give you libs a little insight from the people in the Pentagon (as this was being discussed this morning). If, since we are going to try these people, we have to Mirandize them upon capture and therefore cannot question them for immediate military intelligence, we have no benefit in capturing them at all. At least to the people who would do the capturing. And since it is usually a riskier proposition to capture than kill, guess what the orders of Company Commanders and Platoon Leaders to their men will be. "No need to try to capture anyone. Shoot to kill."

Perverse result to your criminalization of the war, huh?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

hey! haven't you heard? your DUmbasses have tainted the jury pool.

I dont think dev actually listened to, watched, or read the Question and answer session.

The point being that in our criminal courts you have to have your miranda rights read to you at the time of detention and interrogation. If you did not have them read to you your case can be easily dismissed under the writ of habeas corpus.

Smooth move to try them in a constitional court system, giving them rights under the constitution, that were violated during their capture and subsequent detention and interrogation.

And that has always been the point about subjecting what are essentially either "illegal combatants" (usually subjected to summary execution), or EPW (Enemy Prisoners of War) to "criminal" prosecution. If we are fighting a war, these people should never be prosecuted, unless we classify them as illegal combatants (which is what they look and act most like). In that case, we should do as we, and other nations, have always done with them. "Drum head" trials. With the agreement of three officers, they are executed immediately.

I'll give you libs a little insight from the people in the Pentagon (as this was being discussed this morning). If, since we are going to try these people, we have to Mirandize them upon capture and therefore cannot question them for immediate military intelligence, we have no benefit in capturing them at all. At least to the people who would do the capturing. And since it is usually a riskier proposition to capture than kill, guess what the orders of Company Commanders and Platoon Leaders to their men will be. "No need to try to capture anyone. Shoot to kill."

Perverse result to your criminalization of the war, huh?

"I'll give you libs a little insight from the people in the Pentagon (as this was being discussed this morning). " - I wouldn't put too much faith in that kind of talk.

 

[Tech_Esq]

What are you afraid of? Fear not. Liberal democrats will save the day again. We'll clean up the mess the scardy cat cons got us into...........again.

You'd be scary if you actually knew what you were talking about. But, since you're talking out your ass (again), we'll excuse you.

naw, it was liberal NYC that fought back after being bombed. they went right on with life. not as much as a whine that keps spilling off the lips of cons and more than a few Democrats

So fighting = ignoring?

So if someone killed your mother, the way you would fight back is by accepting it and moving on?

Well, that's a theory. You just do that then. But, don't bother us with your weird-ass ideas.

 

[Tech_Esq]

I dont think dev actually listened to, watched, or read the Question and answer session.

The point being that in our criminal courts you have to have your miranda rights read to you at the time of detention and interrogation. If you did not have them read to you your case can be easily dismissed under the writ of habeas corpus.

Smooth move to try them in a constitional court system, giving them rights under the constitution, that were violated during their capture and subsequent detention and interrogation.

And that has always been the point about subjecting what are essentially either "illegal combatants" (usually subjected to summary execution), or EPW (Enemy Prisoners of War) to "criminal" prosecution. If we are fighting a war, these people should never be prosecuted, unless we classify them as illegal combatants (which is what they look and act most like). In that case, we should do as we, and other nations, have always done with them. "Drum head" trials. With the agreement of three officers, they are executed immediately.

I'll give you libs a little insight from the people in the Pentagon (as this was being discussed this morning). If, since we are going to try these people, we have to Mirandize them upon capture and therefore cannot question them for immediate military intelligence, we have no benefit in capturing them at all. At least to the people who would do the capturing. And since it is usually a riskier proposition to capture than kill, guess what the orders of Company Commanders and Platoon Leaders to their men will be. "No need to try to capture anyone. Shoot to kill."

Perverse result to your criminalization of the war, huh?

"I'll give you libs a little insight from the people in the Pentagon (as this was being discussed this morning). " - I wouldn't put too much faith in that kind of talk.

We know. But you're a wackjob, so nobody pays too much attention to what you put faith in.