George Costanza
A Friendly Liberal
I am surprised not to find a thread on this latest bit of right wing lunacy:
"Questioning the loyalty of attorneys who represented detainees"?????
"Seeking the identities of the attorneys who represented detainees"?????
Lets first take up this matter of "questioning the loyalty" of the attorneys who represented the detainees. It simply boggles my mind how prominent, Republican figures can blatantly stand up in front of the entire nation, mouth junk that is totally inane (such as this) and expect people to accept it. What would Liz and her "Keep America Safe" morons do - have a criminal justice system where the accused is only entitled to counsel if he or she is popular with the majority of citizens? I guess, in Liz's world, only "good" defendants are to be afforded a defense.
On to the second issue - "seeking the identities" of the attorneys who represented detainees. For what purpose, Liz? Is your little group of right wingnuts going to hand out letters of commendation? Give them an award? Or, more probably, descend on their homes in the middle of the night with pitch forks and torches?
It doesn't matter whether the representation here was in a civilian or a military tribunal. Even in the military, an accused is entitled to counsel.
It goes without saying that an attorney who represents an accused, regardless of the crime, is merely fulfilling the obligation of his profession if he/she chooses to take on such representation. Defense lawyers do not endorse the crimes of which their clients are accused. Far from it. But they must represent them to the best of their ability, within the boundaries of ethical, professional conduct.
Apparently Liz and her buddies don't see it that way. And, of course, good old Fox News is referring to the attorneys here involved as "The Al Qaeda Seven."
The lunacy of the Right, in action again.
"Questioning the loyalty of attorneys who represented detainees"?????
"Seeking the identities of the attorneys who represented detainees"?????
Lets first take up this matter of "questioning the loyalty" of the attorneys who represented the detainees. It simply boggles my mind how prominent, Republican figures can blatantly stand up in front of the entire nation, mouth junk that is totally inane (such as this) and expect people to accept it. What would Liz and her "Keep America Safe" morons do - have a criminal justice system where the accused is only entitled to counsel if he or she is popular with the majority of citizens? I guess, in Liz's world, only "good" defendants are to be afforded a defense.
On to the second issue - "seeking the identities" of the attorneys who represented detainees. For what purpose, Liz? Is your little group of right wingnuts going to hand out letters of commendation? Give them an award? Or, more probably, descend on their homes in the middle of the night with pitch forks and torches?
It doesn't matter whether the representation here was in a civilian or a military tribunal. Even in the military, an accused is entitled to counsel.
It goes without saying that an attorney who represents an accused, regardless of the crime, is merely fulfilling the obligation of his profession if he/she chooses to take on such representation. Defense lawyers do not endorse the crimes of which their clients are accused. Far from it. But they must represent them to the best of their ability, within the boundaries of ethical, professional conduct.
Apparently Liz and her buddies don't see it that way. And, of course, good old Fox News is referring to the attorneys here involved as "The Al Qaeda Seven."
The lunacy of the Right, in action again.
Last edited:
