Viva Russ Feingold, one of the few worthwhile Democrats left.

David, remember Obama telling the House members that they need to pass the Senate bill in order to ‘ensure a strong Presidency’? It’s the same message Holder will hear.

we have nothing to fear but fear itself

The trouble is its like to be a show trial… and if it’s not not a mistrial or an acquittal. I really can’t see how they can pin this on him since it’s likely he was not the planner but may have, like so many “terrorists” taken credit for things they didn’t do.

There’s plenty of evidence to show that it’s likely that others were involved and Al Qaeda or whomever we were told supposedly hijacked the planes were just patsies as part of a false flag operation.

The amount of weirdness in the official story makes almost none of it credible. So I find it hard to see what the evidence they have that this man planned those events. That will be very interesting to learn.

If the Administration turns their back on all of this, “cowardly” would be the most charitable description.

Gobsmacked at how inept (my most charitable description) Obama is in actually governing, vs. his rhetoric. Unless, of course, he’s really gone over to the dark side.

The relative timidity of virtually the entire Democratic establishment in the face of baseless and hypocritical Republican attacks laid the ground for this reversal.

Timidity? Being charitable again, eh?

Say it ain’t so!

…The relative timidity of virtually the entire Democratic establishment in the face of baseless and hypocritical Republican attacks laid the ground for this reversal. They still have a victim’s mentality on national security issues.

The Democratic mindset, particularly that of the Obama Administration and of the Senate Democrats (excluding the conscience of the Democratic Senate, Senator Feingold), is that it is always easier to do what the Repugs want than to fight them.

Yes, cowardly is a mere understatement!

Leahy has been absolutely useless on this as in so much else.

Kudos to Russ for coming out with this statement. I’m a big fan of Feingold’s and he has made two major mistakes this past week where he could really have further earned the nickname, “conscience of the Senate”:

1) recently, the Senate on a voice vote with no debate, extended onerous provisions of the Patriot Act that would have otherwise expired. Feingold should a) have asked for a vote which recorded everyone’s name and vote; 2) pulled a “Jim Bunning” and held up the extension vote (only 3 days of delay necessary to kill those provisions). Instead, Feingold (and all senators) did nothing.

2) Feingold was one of only 12 Democratic senators voting for a one-time, $250 relief payment to those on Social Security. Even though he told his constituents in a “listening session” in Park Falls, Wisconsin, days before the vote that he deplored the fact that senior citizens were getting no raise (COLA adjustment) this year, he voted against this measure which would have done just that. Two Hundred Fifty bucks ain’t a lot of money, but it is to those on fixed incomes and those near the poverty level. Feingold whiffed on this along with some other “progressives” like Levin and Bennett (and this issue should be used against him by his primary opponent in Colorado).

So in two cases where action (not press releases) were called for, Russ Feingold was MIA.

Sky is falling, let’s be helpless and wring our hands, build a campfire and sing Kumbya, sort of the gist of what I read in these posts. No acknowledgment of the gargantuan task handed to the President; just simple laments about not providing answers to complex problems.

Do I think it is wrong to have military tribunals rather than trials? Absolutely. In the larger picture of things, do I think this means squat? No, I don’t.

Two reasons why KSM will never see the inside of a civilian courtroom, and why he shouldn’t.
He could appear to be mentally damaged like Padilla and this will be much more in the news. It’s a higher profile case. They will blame it on the combination of mind altering drugs, enhanced interrogation, and revivals from fainting by the doctors in attendance. And with the world watching this is not the time to open up our torture dirty laundry.
Also, in civilian court we lose control over whether he might slip and say something that pointed towards 9 11 being an inside job. We neeed to control that so it doesn’t open up that old conspiracy theory junk.
In military court, the press can be held at bay and the transcripts can be controlled.
And for those among us who are a little squeamish that any political prisoner could be declared an enemy combatant and ‘enhanced’ and put in a military tribunal, get over it! Our criminal justice system does not have the tools to investigate and successfully prosecute criminal acts in this Couhtry that originate in and are directed from a lawless haven overseas. We haven’t yet developed a good ‘RICO’ set of laws to protect us from overseas directed terrorism.

The reason the NeoRight doesn’t want al Qaida trials in US courts is because convicted terrorists will not have the political value that enemy combatants currently do — especially if they are convicted by Obama’s Justice Dept.

do I think this means squat? No, I don’t.

It means squat to al qaida’s recruiting effort, if not to America’s own values and perception in the world.

“Convicts” have much less political value than “combatants” to al qaida too — just another instance where terrorists and NeoCons have mutual interests as well as tactics.

I’m all in favor of using the military tribunal strategy. The prosecution will lose and that will cause the Cheneys and the neocons to blame Obama for opting to ignore the Federal civilian trial method of prosecution. Two birds will be killed with one stone. The neocons will be discredited as will Obama’s relentless pursuit of “bipartisanship.” Let’s roll.

It’s quite obvious, as with Bush, the DOJ is not independant, and is taking orders from Washington. That’s not how it’s supposed to be, but. As far as the trials? When you sit down and honestly think about it, what does it matter? They are all guilty because the government says so. That’s all the evidence that will be allowed. This kabuki theater is more about how to kill them. Either or this isn’t justice, but the exact opposite. These people will never have the chance to legally defend themselves. Ever. This is a done deal.

In the larger picture of things, do I think this means squat?

Sure, we’ll be shredding the constitution, the rule of law, and convicting people with evidence obtained by torture, but in exchange maybe we’ll get some kind of subsidy for our health insurance premiums. Let’s not forget the big picture here, folks.

Exactly what country do you live in? Are you suggesting that KSM shldnt get a civilian trial bcz he might be found not guilty? Isnt that the point of our system of government? We cant tell people democracy is the best form of government on one hand, and on the other hand, dismiss democracy when it might hurt our cause. If our system is supposed to be a shining light then let it shine, dont change it or cover it up bcz you might lose a court case. PS The terrorist have done far worse in civilian trials than in military ones.

Hey Rob,

Yes you are right KSM would be convicted in a civil trial. But now the politicians are taking over the DOJ and a civil trial for KSM will never happen.
He got caught, but look at the terrible damage first.
The Republican argument is that a criminal trial is no deterrent against future Jihadist attacks. They just don’t care about getting caught. And we can’t penetrate the inner circle of the plotters, because if we have an asset who gets caught they skin him alive and send a video to our President.
Our criminal laws were established to protect society against criminal acts inside this Country committed by US citizens or legal immigrants. They never considered protecting us from conspiracies hatched in a remote cave in a nearly lawless wilderness. Maybe we should have new laws (like RICO) or maybe we should be determining through better detective work, who the foreign coconspirators are and we should be going after them if the host Country is unwilling or unable to turn them over.
I thouoght our President during the election campaign was committed to going after Osama. What ever happened to that?

The real problem with KSM was no NY D support. None.
Not just the people, the party. Too much money, too much madness, self inflicted wounds. Picture a NY Post Daily drip of snappy headlines and pretty photos right up to the November elections.
NY is already in shambles, this could have actually put it in play.

Political price? A benefit if he turns and fires.
Nobody gives a flying fig newton about KSM’s “rights”.
Get over it.

The overall problem for Obama? The image of weakness.
He needs to take credit for adopting the Bush hard line, or he gets battered from both sides. Right now, he has managed the weakest, worst position, from which there is no benefit. Promised this, did that. Here, a long list.

So now, He can either be on top of it, say “I meant to do that, here is why”, or get hammered. It is reality, own it.

FEINGOLD/KUCINICH 2012

We have to Primary Lyndon H. Rahm Obamabush and make him pay a price for his total sabatoge of the “change” he campaign on.

I can view the alleged terrorists in a fairly objective way and wonder whether it’s better for the nation, our legal system, our political system and America’s position in the world or I can sink down to the political realm and wonder if it’s good or bad for the Dems.

I’d prefer to take the high road and think a normal court process is best all around. To argue otherwise is to basically argue that our Constitution is bad, flawed and to be disregarded. I won’t do that.

Or, to quote Jim Bunning, “Tough shit.”

I think Feingold is right, and it’s disheartening that the administration might not have confidence in the civilian court system. Additionally, the reports upon which this article is based have yet to be substantiated. Having watched this, http://bit.ly/9Owhf6 it seems that while proponents claim the tribunal would be more effective, I’ve yet to see how.