If they go through with this it will be the final nail in the liberal democrat congress coming to you in 2010.!!!
And if they are found guilty? Do you still think that it will be a final nail? Or a sense of satisfaction that our government is back on track?
Hate to bore, but recall the Obama response and the Nixon response:
"During a round of network television interviews conducted during Obama's visit to China, the president was asked about those who find it offensive that Mohammed will receive all the rights normally accorded to U.S. citizens when they are charged with a crime.
"I don't think it will be offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him," Obama told NBC's Chuck Todd.
Compare that with the following report, from Time magazine's Aug. 17, 1970, issue:
It was in Denver's Federal Building that President Nixon committed the startling gaffe of prejudging the case of Charles Manson. While complaining that the press had made Manson a glamorous hero, Nixon said: "Here was a man who was guilty, directly or indirectly, of eight murders without reason." For a lawyer who occasionally delivers homilies on legal propriety, this was a serious breach.
Attorney General John Mitchell, who was standing at Nixon's side, instantly recognized Nixon's error. "This has got to be clarified," he told Presidential Aide John Ehrlichman immediately afterward. Unhappily, what ensued was a series of errors compounded by instant communications. Startled reporters dashed to the pressroom, and within minutes, the bulletins were moving across the land. The statement was filmed and broadcast later on network television, with a clarification appended.
But the damage was already done. It was not until half an hour after Nixon spoke that Press Secretary Ron Ziegler reappeared before the newsmen. After some minutes of verbal fencing, Ziegler agreed that Nixon's words about Manson should be retracted. When Ziegler told Nixon what had happened, the President was surprised: "I said 'charged,' " he replied. During the 3½-hour flight back to Washington, Mitchell persuaded Nixon to put out a statement backing Ziegler up. It read in part: "The last thing I would do is prejudice the legal rights of any person in any circumstances. I do not know and did not intend to speculate as to whether or not the Tate defendants are guilty, in fact, or not."
Obama issued a Nixonian "clarification," as the Politico report notes:
When Todd asked Obama if he was interfering in the trial process by declaring that Mohammed will be executed, Obama, a former constitutional law professor, insisted that he wasn't trying to dictate the result.
"What I said was, people will not be offended if that's the outcome. I'm not pre-judging, I'm not going to be in that courtroom, that's the job of prosecutors, the judge and the jury," Obama said. "What I'm absolutely clear about is that I have complete confidence in the American people and our legal traditions and the prosecutors, the tough prosecutors from New York who specialize in terrorism."
But Obama's statement is considerably worse than Nixon's. Whereas Nixon merely opined that Manson was guilty, Obama prejudged the outcome of the trial and sentencing. Manson and his co-defendants were tried in state court, a venue where the president has no authority. By contrast, the prosecutors who will handle cases of KSM et al. ultimately answer to Obama.
Worse still, Obama was defending his own politically charged decision to try the defendants as civilians by offering the reassurance that the outcome is preordained. The president's claim amounts to an assertion that the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York is a kangaroo tribunal. If this is how the Obama administration views due process, heaven help any American who is charged with a federal crime."
The 'Diversity' Sham - WSJ.com
