Oh, So That's Why DOJ Isn't Going After Pro-Terrorism Agitators
The UN Endorses a Second Terrorist State for Iran
The Stormy Daniels Trial Was Always Going to Be a Circus. It's Reached...
Biden Administration Hurls Israel Under the Bus Again
Israeli Ambassador Shreds the U.N. Charter in Powerful Speech Before Vote to Grant...
New Report Details How Dems Are Planning to Minimize Risk of Pro-Hamas Disruptions...
The Long Haul of Love
Here's Where Speaker Mike Johnson Stands on Abortion
Trump Addresses the Very Real Chance of Him Going to Jail
Yes, Jen Psaki Really Said This About Biden Cutting Off Weapons Supply to...
3,000 Fulton County Ballots Were Scanned Twice During the 2020 Election Recount
Joe Biden's Weapons 'Pause' Will Get More Israeli Soldiers, Civilians Killed
Left-Wing Mayor Hires Drag Queen to Spearhead 'Transgender Initiatives'
NewsNation Border Patrol Ride Along Sees Arrest of Illegal Immigrants in Illustration of...
One State Just Cut Off Funding for Planned Parenthood
Tipsheet

The Democrats' New "Bush" Standard

Apparently, the Democrats think there is political advantage to be had by accusing Republicans of hypocrisy when it comes to national security -- namely, because Republicans have criticized the decision to try the Christmas bomber in civilian court when, after all, the Bush Administration tried shoe-bomber Richard Reid in civilian court in 2002.
Advertisement


Wait a minute.  First, if the Bush Administration made a mistake trying Reid in civilian court, then there's no reason to repeat that mistake in the Obama Administration.

Second, as our liberal friends will no doubt recall, they were raising doubts about the constitutionality of the Bush military tribunal plan, which ultimately was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2006.  So there were good reasons, efforts at bipartisanship among them, that the Bush administration might have gone ahead in civilian court, rather than pressing ahead with a military tribunal that enraged liberals.  Even more, if Reid had been tried by the then-new military tribunals -- and the tribunals had later been found to be constitutionally insufficient (as they were) -- that would have invalidated Reid's conviction.  One can understand why the Bush administration officials didn't want to take that chance.

Note that the Court didn't find the military tribunals were inherently unconstitutional -- it was just that they needed to be established through federal legislation (or as a result of military necessity), rather than through a military order issued by the president.  Now, of course, there is federal legislation authorizing the use of the tribunals, and all the questions about their legality that existed in 2001-02 have been cleared up.  So there's no reason for Obama
Advertisement
not to use them -- and he specifically signed off on a military tribunal plan in March.

Finally -- who are really the hypocrites here?  The same Democrats who spent 7 years assailing Bush as a Nazi are now using his policies and decisions as the "gold standard" in terms of handling terrorism suspects.  How, exactly, does that work?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement