« Open Thread | Main | More Tea Party Inspiration »
May 2, 2009
Andrew McCarthy to Holder: Hell No I'm Not Your Prop
NRO contributor Andrew McCarthy is a former federal prosecutor who has so much experience with terror cases that the skeevy pro-terrorist rat currently serving as Attorney General invited him to be used as a prop in a farcical President's Task Force on Detention Policy. To his credit, McCarthy declined. Highlights from his response to Eric Holder:
[I]t is quite clear — most recently, from your provocative remarks on Wednesday in Germany — that the Obama administration has already settled on a policy of releasing trained jihadists (including releasing some of them into the United States). […T]he meeting will obviously be used by the administration to claim that its policy was arrived at in consultation with current and former government officials experienced in terrorism cases and national security issues. I deeply disagree with this policy, which I believe is a violation of federal law and a betrayal of the president's first obligation to protect the American people. Under the circumstances, I think the better course is to register my dissent, rather than be used as a prop.
Moreover, in light of public statements by both you and the President, it is dismayingly clear that, under your leadership, the Justice Department takes the position that a lawyer who in good faith offers legal advice to government policy makers — like the government lawyers who offered good faith advice on interrogation policy — may be subject to investigation and prosecution for the content of that advice, in addition to empty but professionally damaging accusations of ethical misconduct. Given that stance, any prudent lawyer would have to hesitate before offering advice to the government. …
Given your policy of conducting ruinous criminal and ethics investigations of lawyers over the advice they offer the government, and your specific position that the wartime detention I would endorse [i.e., keeping terrorists locked up at Club Gitmo instead of releasing them in the US and putting them on welfare] is tantamount to a violation of law, it makes little sense for me to attend the Task Force meeting. After all, my choice would be to remain silent or risk jeopardizing myself. …
Foreign terrorists trained to execute mass-murder attacks cannot simply be released while the war ensues and Americans are still being targeted. We have already released too many jihadists who, as night follows day, have resumed plotting to kill Americans. Indeed, according to recent reports, a released Guantanamo detainee is now leading Taliban combat operations in Afghanistan, where President Obama has just sent additional American forces.
The Obama campaign smeared Guantanamo Bay as a human rights blight. Consistent with that hyperbolic rhetoric, the President began his administration by promising to close the detention camp within a year. The President did this even though he and you (a) agree Gitmo is a top-flight prison facility, (b) acknowledge that our nation is still at war, and (c) concede that many Gitmo detainees are extremely dangerous terrorists who cannot be tried under civilian court rules. Patently, the commitment to close Guantanamo Bay within a year was made without a plan for what to do with these detainees who cannot be tried. Consequently, the Detention Policy Task Force is not an effort to arrive at the best policy. It is an effort to justify a bad policy that has already been adopted: to wit, the Obama administration policy to release trained terrorists outright if that's what it takes to close Gitmo by January.
Obviously, I am powerless to stop the administration from releasing top al Qaeda operatives who planned mass-murder attacks against American cities — like Binyam Mohammed (the accomplice of "Dirty Bomber" Jose Padilla) whom the administration recently transferred to Britain, where he is now at liberty and living on public assistance. I am similarly powerless to stop the administration from admitting into the United States such alien jihadists as the 17 remaining Uighur detainees. According to National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, the Uighurs will apparently live freely, on American taxpayer assistance, despite the facts that they are affiliated with a terrorist organization and have received terrorist paramilitary training. Under federal immigration law (the 2005 REAL ID Act), those facts render them excludable from the United States. The Uighurs' impending release is thus a remarkable development given the Obama administration's propensity to deride its predecessor's purported insensitivity to the rule of law.
I am, in addition, powerless to stop the President, as he takes these reckless steps, from touting his Detention Policy Task Force as a demonstration of his national security seriousness. But I can decline to participate in the charade.
The kakistocracy running our government is for all intents and purposes on the side of the al Qaeda terrorists who carried out the atrocities of 9/11 and would like to inflict far worse. When the next attack inevitably comes, anyone who helped the Obama regime to power or helped advance its pro-terrorist policies will have American blood on their hands. Kudos to McCarthy for keeping his hands clean.
On a tip from The MaryHunter. Hat tip: Yid With Lid.
Posted by Van Helsing at May 2, 2009 12:43 PM
Comments
But I won the election so eat me!!!
and don't read this Rasmussen Report
it' has bad data - I'm popular
Posted by: BHO at May 2, 2009 1:34 PM
WHO IS JOHN GALT!!!!!!
Posted by: Heather M at May 2, 2009 3:14 PM
Wonder how long McCarthy is going to survive the retribution sure to come from the Obamination Administration. I just hope this letter gets more exposure.
Posted by: The MaryHunter at May 2, 2009 8:16 PM
Quick results?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/05/02/obama-looks-revive-military-courts-guantanamo-bay/
Posted by: Anonymous at May 2, 2009 9:40 PM
If, God forbid, another terrorist attack happens, then the ENTIRE Oshama Misadministration should be tried for treason and then hanged for their crimes (preferably on the Washington Mall).
Posted by: Amy D at May 2, 2009 10:03 PM
Tell that jackass jerk ERIC HOLDER what he can go with his stupid job
Posted by: SPURWING PLOVER at May 3, 2009 7:02 AM
So, are you suggesting that we just continue to hold them indefinately w/o charges and without a trial? Should Bush and Co. not be held accountable for allowing the greatest attack in American history? You cannot have it both ways. Apparently an understanding of the laws alludes you.
Posted by: Ghost of Wellstone at May 3, 2009 12:43 PM
Apparently an understanding of the laws alludes you.
And apparently you don't own a dictionary.
President Bush held accountable for "allowing the greatest attack in American history?" Pearl Harbor didn't happen recently so it's easy to forget it, isn't it? President Bush didn't allow the attack to happen. To even suggest such a thing is to show you for what you are, nothing but a partisan political hack.
Posted by: Kevin R at May 3, 2009 1:00 PM
SQUAWK SQUAWK ERIC HOLDER PLEASE DROP DEAD SQUAWK SQUAWK SQUAWK KKKAAAHHHAAAACCKKK
Posted by: Flu-Bird at May 3, 2009 2:59 PM
Ghost of Wellstone; Your plane awaits!
Posted by: Anonymous at May 3, 2009 4:02 PM
Wellstone: So you wouldn't have a problem if the Gitmo detainees were tried by a military tribunal? I seem to recall the Army doing that with "werewolf" (nazi guerrilla unit) members shortly after the war ended. By extension, you'd have no problem if they also suffered death by musketry, if that was the sentence? Just for the record, you'd agree, right? That would be perfectly legal and guided by precedent.
Posted by: comet at May 4, 2009 2:18 PM
