The first thing you did was a surprise. It was a surprise because of the outrage that would have resulted had the racial roles been reversed. You see, many of us turned on our TV's and saw two large black men in front of a polling station wielding billy clubs in a threatening manner and making intimidating remarks. On election day. Now, while we may not be experts on the law, we know that scene has all the makings of a case of racial voter intimidation, complete with eyewitnesses, video evidence from a news organization, and police reports. Now comes the surprising part: you dropped the charges against these men.
Why?
Next came your unbelievable decision to try the architect of 9-11 in a civilian court, with all the rights of an American citizen, in clear conflict with the Geneva Conventions.
Why?
Next up was another unbelievable decision to read the failed Christmas Day bomber his Miranda rights and place him in our criminal justice system as though he had merely robbed a convenence store, ignoring the obvious fact that he tried to kill over three hundred innocent people.
Why?
Now, we find out that members of your department have previously defended illegal enemy combatants, in what appears to be a very clear case of a conflict of interest. Senator Charles Grassley has asked you to identify these people. So far, you've been less than forthcoming with your answers, to the point of stonewalling. Byron York puts it this way:
Private lawyers can choose to take or not take cases. Sometimes they make their decisions based on money, sometimes on principle, sometimes because they are sympathetic to the accused. The lawyers who worked with the terrorist detainees chose to represent people who are making war on the United States. That's certainly their right, but it's entirely reasonable to ask whether they should now be working on detainee issues at the Justice Department.
It's also entirely reasonable to ask how those lawyers are able to get a good nights' sleep, knowing that they are helping our sworn enemy to defeat us in our own courts.
Mr. Holder, why aren't you complying with the numerous requests to be honest with the American people?
Whose side are you on?
No comments:
Post a Comment