I don't have the slightest clue what you're trying to argue. Fill in this sentence for me:Eric Holder was the Justice Dept. official who made the political decision during the Clinton Administration to overrule career prosecutors and recommentd the pardon of Marc Rich. Remember? Based on his record political considerations are relevant criteria in the administration of justice. Otherwise, how do you explain the pardon of Marc Rich?
"Eric Holder made a politicized decision dealing with pardons almost a decade ago, so that means _____________ as relating to these terrorism prosecutions today."
I would have to assume that it's because he believes that there is enough admissible evidence to win convictions in federal court for these 5 individuals, but isn't convinced of that fact as it applies to the other detainees. That seems like a pretty logical conclusion from my perspective.Why has Obama created a two tier system of justice with some detainees receiving trials before a military tribunal and other detainees receiving trials in the federal court system? If you don't know say so and I won't ask again, but don't ask me to have faith in Eric Holder or Obama.
Yes, Obama's base is just giddy over the prospect of aligning themselves with the planners of 9/11.Why do I say this is as much a political decision as a legal decision? The Gitmo Five trials will be a massive anti-American propaganda circus. The defendants will put the prior administration on trial. This will please Obama's base.
We had one with the planners of the first WTC attack, one with the Shoe Bomber, one with the American Taliban, etc. All of those were "media spectacles." None of those resulted in terrorism.You've never had a show trial like this with these kinds of terrorists for defendants.
Which means what?If Obi Wan exercises his post acquittal detention authority there will be an uproar on the American and European left the likes of which none of us has ever seen imo.