Townhall.com The Blogspot for Political, Conservative and Republican Blogs and Bloggers

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

No Good, Either Way

Posted by: Carol Platt Liebau at 5:20 PM

An AP story reporting comments from the President highlights again -- as if more proof were needed -- why it's such a terrible idea to be trying terrorists in civilian court.

Apparently, President Obama had this to say about the trial of Khalid Sheik Muhammed:

Obama said those offended by the legal privileges given to Muhammed by virtue of getting a civilian trial rather than a military tribunal won't find it "offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him."

Oopsie. If I were a prosecutor, I'd be a little less than thrilled that the nation's chief law enforcement officer was insinuating that the outcome of a trial was preordained. That's the way jury pools get tainted and terrorists are able to make a case -- a good case -- that they're not able to get a fair trial, and that the presumption of innocence isn't being applied to them. And it's the way that terrorists who hate America can argue that the forum in which they're being tried is nothing more than a kangaroo court.

Of course, in this case, KSM doesn't deserve the presumption of innocence (and that's why he has no business in a civilian court). But that's what the President and the Attorney General have gifted him with, and his defense lawyers would be negligent not to try to take advantage of the President's rookie mistake.

The comment was so egregious, in fact, that the President was trying to walk it back almost immediately. The AP report continues:

Obama quickly added that he did not mean to suggest he was prejudging the outcome of Mohammed's trial. "I'm not going to be in that courtroom," he said. "That's the job of the prosecutors, the judge and the jury."

And this, in a nutshell, is why his decision to offer KSM the same rights afforded to American citizens is such a terrible decision. Which is it? Is there a possibility that after the "prosecutors, the judge and the jury" do their work, that KSM won't be convicted? Well, there must be -- unless the civilian trial Obama's offered KSM is nothing but a show trial with a preordained outcome.

(14) |

(0)

Friday, November 13, 2009

“If Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Is Acquitted, President Obama, Will You Release Him?”

Posted by: Meredith Jessup at 10:45 PM

This type of question is one ABC News' Jake Tapper has asked White House press secretary Robert Gibbs before. This is obviously an important question to address now that the Obama Justice Department has officially declared the trials of 9/11 conspirators will take place here in the States.

Tapper asked the administration about its policy back in June and, in true Gibbs fashion, the question was just dodged altogether. Props to Tapper and Fox News' Major Garrett for their willingness to press the White House on this issue:

TAPPER: Two questions about developments today. One regarding the Ghailani trial — him being flown to the United States — if any of the detainees who are brought to trial through the U.S. criminal courts, or even through military commissions — if any of them are found not guilty, will the administration let them free?

GIBBS: Well, I’m not going to get into hypotheticals about…

TAPPER: Forget the military commissions.

GIBBS: I’m not going to get into hypotheticals about the court cases either.

TAPPER: Well, this is an important part of — you’re talking about a credible justice system; bringing these people to justice. You’ve spoken at great length about this — the president has. If they are found not guilty, will they be found…

GIBBS: Well, let’s discuss that if it ever comes to fruition.

TAPPER: But isn’t that what is underlying a credible justice system? The idea that if you’re found not guilty, you’ll be free?

(54) |

(0)

Friday, November 13, 2009

Political Correctness over Protection

Posted by: Carol Platt Liebau at 3:27 PM

What a difference eight years makes. With the Obama administration's decision to bring 9/11 conspirators to American soil and try them in civilian courts, it sends a signal that it considers their actions on a par with, say, bank robbery.

It also requires those who would sit on the terrorists' jury to take a big risk. Will they be safe? Will the trial's venue make New York the focus of other terrorist attacks?

If the 9/11 hijackers are entitled to a trial in US civilian courts -- with, presumably, the full panoply of constitutional protections -- is there anyone who isn't? Wouldn't Adolf Hitler belong there, as well?

And what will happen if they claim that dissemination of classified information is necessary for their defense? If the judge happens to agree with them -- but also realizes that the information is too sensitive to be revealed -- does the US face a choice between dismissing the case or telling state secrets far and wide?

If anyone ever needed proof that the Obama administration doesn't take the war on terror seriously, here it is. Proof positive.

As my old boss, Senator Kit Bond, put it:

“The Obama Justice Department has prioritized political correctness over protecting the citizens of this country.”

Precisely.

(28) |

(0)

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Health Care and the Constitution

Posted by: Townhall.com Staff at 10:20 AM

Guest blog post from Rob Schwarzwalder with the Family Research Council

Family Research Council has several critical concerns with the Democratic health care legislation under consideration on Capitol Hill. The sanctity of human life, although safeguarded in the House version of the measure passed on Saturday, remains a live issue as the bill goes to the Senate. Rationing, costs, patient control of medical decisions, an increase in the size and scope of Washington’s power: These and other matters animate FRC’s active opposition to the Democratic approach to revising our system of medical care.

But there is another issue that we have raised and will keep raising as the debate goes forward: The constitutionality of the Democratic plans.

When Speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked recently at the introduction of her mammoth health care “reform” bill if the measure was constitutional, the usually glib Californian was caught off-guard. “Are you serious?” she asked. And, a second time, “Are you serious?” She then turned to another reporter without answering further.

At least House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer gives the Constitution a guilty nod. He says that the “general welfare” clause gives Congress the right to pass a massive health care bill full of mandates on businesses and individuals and higher taxes for all.
Read More...

(11) |

(0)

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Sessions Urges Colleagues to Oppose Obama Nomination of Radical Judge David Hamilton

Posted by: Garrett Murch at 4:07 PM

Yesterday, Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member, Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), sent a letter to his Senate colleagues urging them to look into the radical record of Judge David Hamilton and to oppose his nomination to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

Judge Hamilton's controversial decisions include:

ruling against public prayer in the Indiana State Legislature over "the use of Christ's name or title". Yet, a Muslim imam's prayer to "Allah" was seemingly okay to Judge Hamilton

opposing the placement of a menorah in the Indianapolis-Marion County Building

blocking the implementation of an informed consent law for 7 years

disregarding the prior conviction of a repeat drug offender, effectively ignoring a law requiring the Judge to sentence the convicted offender to life in prison

Many of Judge Hamilton's rulings were subsequently overturned by higher courts, sometimes with scolding rebukes of the Judge's decisions.

Click here to read Senator Sessions' letter to his colleagues.

More to come soon...

UPDATE: Word on the street is the Judge Hamilton nomination could come to the floor for a vote as early as next week. If you don't think this sort of behavior should be rewarded with an appointment to a circuit court, call your senators and let them know!

(14) |

(0)

Thursday, October 08, 2009

Join Jeb Bush and Senator Sessions at the 10th Annual Legal Reform Summit -- October 28th

Posted by: Townhall.com Staff at 3:28 PM

Guest announcement from the Institute for Legal Reform:

Please join the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform for our 10th Annual Legal Reform Summit on Wednesday, October 28, 2009, featuring:

Legislative Keynote Morning Address
by U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions, Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee

and

“Leading in a Climate of Change”
Keynote Luncheon Address
by Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida

In addition, Tom Donohue, President and CEO, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, will provide special remarks. The Summit will also feature distinguished panelists exploring a variety of timely legal topics, including:

Courting New Money: Third Party Financing of Litigation and its Consequences. Should Outside Investors Have a Stake? Academics will release new research and discuss and debate the growing trend of third parties financing lawsuits.
Climate Change Litigation: The New Mass Tort for the 21st Century? Panelists will speak to the legal theories and trends in climate change litigation as well as regulatory and legislative developments and their impact on the business community.
Judicial Selection: Best Practices in Nomination States. ILR will release a “best practices” guide to judicial selection in nomination states.
It’s Economics Stupid: Exploring the Relationship Between Lawsuits and Rising Healthcare Costs. Jeb Bush will facilitate a panel discussion on the economic impact of lawsuits on the practice of medicine and rising healthcare costs.
Trial Lawyer Crystal Ball: Predictions and Prognostications on the Road Ahead. We will host a discussion on the trial bar’s priorities.

In addition, we will honor the recipients of ILR’s 2009 Legal Reform Awards.

Registration will open at 7:45 a.m. The program will follow from 8:15 a.m. and run throughout the day until 4:30 p.m. which will include a post event reception.

Register online today! Receive half off a second registration when you register yourself for the Summit! (Expires October 16th)

(1) |

(0)

Tuesday, October 06, 2009

Preview on Major Religious Liberty Case at SCOTUS Tomorrow

Posted by: Townhall.com Staff at 12:16 PM

Guest post from the American Civil Rights Union's Ken Klukowski

On Oct. 7, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear a major religious liberty case. In Salazar v. Buono, an ACLU-backed Frank Buono is suing to have a war memorial torn down. This is a World War I memorial in the shape of a cross, which has been standing in the Mojave Desert since 1934, erected by the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW). But this memorial happens to be in a national park, so the militant atheists in this country have taken it upon themselves to destroy it by filing a federal lawsuit.

This case has now been through four rounds of litigation. Finally, when the ACLU and their client won before the Ninth Circuit, something amazing took place. The VFW offered to swap a parcel of land that the VFW owned—a parcel of equal value with the parcel in the national park on which the cross stands that the government owns. Congress, working with the Bush White House, actually passed a federal law ordering this land swap, which would result in the cross then being on private land at no loss to the taxpayer.
Read More...

(67) |

(0)

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Bette Midler Warns Glenn Beck Could Set Off a Rwanda-Like Civil War in U.S.; Faults Education System UPDATE: Beck Responds

Posted by: Greg Hengler at 12:00 PM

Here's Hollywood insight so stupid it required correction from Joyless Behar. Behar premiered her first CNN show with guest and fellow intellectual powerhouse Bette Midler on Tuesday to the delight of liberal Democrats all over America. Besides her crystal ball prediction regarding a U.S. Rwanda-like bloodbath, note where Midler puts the blame regarding all the imperfections in the U.S.

Midler's blaming educators for societal imperfections highlights the thinking of liberals: Everything can be fixed and perfected with 10-plus years of baptism in the waters of liberal brainwashing. My hope is that this and many other recent incidences of liberal brainwashing will slow the occurrence in which the stupid mantra of how great the teaching profession is, how important an education is, and how they are not paid enough; yada, yada, yada.

Ask yourself this: What kind of education are our kids receiving and from whom? Answers to both questions should chuck that old school slogan out the window. This ridiculous American notion that education is a value in itself and deserves all our respect and praise is very scary.

UPDATE: Liberals commenting appear shocked that I do not think education is a value in itself so I have a question for them: If our public schools were dominated by a conservative-Christian world view and not a liberal-secular one, would you still be shocked? Furthermore, an education can be incorrect, biased, or simply evil (see Nazi Youth, Mao's Cultural Rev, et al). Finally, if liberals truly value "diversity," shouldn't that value be represented in the world views of our educators?

In conclusion, I repeat: Education is not a value in itself.

UPDATE: Here's Glenn Beck on today's radio program:

(229) |

(0)

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Justice Ginsburg Goes To The Hospital

Posted by: Jillian Bandes at 8:16 PM

The day Sen. Byrd was released from the hospital, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was taken there after feeling ill from intravenous iron therapy, administered after part of her cancer treatment. After receiving therapy, she felt faint - a common side effect - but followed up with a stay in the Washington Hospital Center as a precaution.

Tags: Ginsburg

(5) |

(0)

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Third Strike for ACORN

Posted by: Matt Lewis at 7:32 AM

Over at FOXFORUM, Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski call on Attorney General Eric Holder to order a RICO investigation of ACORN:

Now that a third ACORN video has surfaced, a pattern emerges of ACORN workers willing to help people engage in prostitution, tax fraud, housing fraud, and even human trafficking. Under federal law, a RICO investigation is now warranted. Three strikes and you’re out, ACORN.

(37) |

(0)

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Holder's Politicized Justice Department

Posted by: Carol Platt Liebau at 3:14 PM

Remember the left's screaming about the Justice Department that had supposedly become so "politicized" under Alberto Gonzales?

Please. Gonzales had nothing -- and I mean nothing -- on Eric Holder.

AP is reporting that the corruption investigation of Obama ally Bill Richardson has been "killed" by top Justice Department officials.

Add that to the growing list of Holder's other political moves, including:

(1) Opinion-shopping to secure a politically "favorable" legal analysis of the constitutionality of DC voting rights;

(2) Dismissing the Black Panther voter intimidation case, overruling career attorneys in order to do so;

(3) Hiring manifestly unqualified (but politically loyal) -- or hyper-partisan -- officials to significant posts in the Department;

(4) Launching an investigation of the CIA.

No doubt President Obama knew what he was getting; Holder previously had been involved in the Marc Rich pardon and the pardon of Puerto Rican terrorists during his tenure at the Clinton Justice Department.

Given his record and his past, it's hardly a surprise that Holder is offering Richardson a pass. Richardson has been an Obama supporter, after all.

(40) |

(0)

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Another Obama Ally Off-the-Hook

Posted by: Meredith Jessup at 11:58 AM

Last month we saw Sens. Chris Dodd and Kent Conrad escape accountability for their Countrywide "VIP" home loan deals. Now, former New Mexico governor and failed Obama Commerce Secretary nominee Bill Richardson has had federal corruption charges against him dropped... by none other than Attorney General Eric Holder's Department of Justice--the same one who dismissed complaints against these guys.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and former high-ranking members of his administration won’t be criminally charged in a yearlong federal investigation into pay-to-play allegations involving one of the Democratic governor’s large political donors, someone familiar with the case said.

The decision not to pursue indictments was made by top Justice Department officials, according to a person familiar with the investigation, who asked not to be identified because federal officials had not disclosed results of the probe.

“It’s over. There’s nothing. It was killed in Washington,” the person told The Associated Press.

A federal grand jury began an investigation in 2008 into a possible pay-to-play scheme in which lucrative work on state bond deals went to a Richardson donor. The federal probe derailed Richardson’s appointment as commerce secretary in President Barack Obama’s administration.

Richardson withdrew his nomination in January, saying the investigation would have delayed his confirmation although he said expected to be cleared.

Haha, I'm sure he did.

(15) |

(0)

Thursday, August 06, 2009

Closing Remarks on the Sotomayor Nomination

Posted by: Garrett Murch at 3:00 PM

An important message from Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) on Sotomayor, the president's "empathy" standard and the Constitution

(9) |

(0)

Monday, August 03, 2009

McCain Votes Nay on Sotomayor: She Lacks "Common-Sense Limitations on Judicial Power"

Posted by: Greg Hengler at 4:12 PM

The National Journal writes that "McCain voted against Sotomayor's nomination to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in '98, so his decision is not entirely surprising." But also we must consider McCain's concern regarding the GOP and the Hispanic vote.

Tags: Sotomayor

(18) |

(0)

Monday, August 03, 2009

AP: McCain to Oppose Sotomayor for Supreme Court

Posted by: Meredith Jessup at 3:50 PM

The AP is reporting that Senator John McCain plans to oppose the appointment of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court during his Senate confirmation vote this week.

The Arizona senator calls Sotomayor a judicial activist who tried to walk back from that record during her confirmation hearings. He says President Barack Obama's nominee has used her position as a judge to try to change the law...

McCain says Sotomayor's life story is inspiring and compelling, but he says that's not enough to qualify her for a position on the high court.