Imaknick,
I'm in the process of listening to last Sunday's Ask JTF. So I wanted to add my two cents regarding your question on Richard Reid vs. the Christmas underwear bomber.
The left loves to point out that President Bush gave shoe bomber Richard Reid a civilian trial. However, from what I understand, the law for military tribunals had not been put into effect yet. Check out this article:
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007214&docId=l:1128593558&start=4---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O'REILLY: "Back of the Book" segment tonight, you may have heard the argument that the shoe bomber, Richard Reid, who pled guilty to terrorist-related activities in 2002 is pretty much the same situation as the underwear bomber currently charged in Michigan.
But Ann Coulter says that is not so, and she joins us now from New York and is author of the book "Guilty," now out in paperback.
So what is the headline here? What have you found out that we don't know?
ANN COULTER, AUTHOR, "GUILTY": The headline, well, I remember it from these ferocious fights throughout the Bush administration, and that is you keep -- we keep hearing that Bush sent Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, into a civilian court as if, you know, that was his choice.
No, he came out about a month after 9/11 and issued. He issued executive order for military commissions. And immediately, the left wing, particularly the left-wing legal community, went mental. Senator Leahy, the Democrat head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, was denouncing this. He had all of the human rights mix, amnesty. The entire law professor faculties across America denouncing Bush for doing this without congressional approval, without Congress passing laws.Immediately, there were about six bills in Congress, setting up military tribunals of their own, including John Conyers' bill, which would apply only to the 9/11 terrorists.
And -- and so obviously, this was a matter that was heavily litigated over the next seven years. It went to the Supreme Court twice. The Supreme Court struck down Bush's executive order for military tribunals with ferocious dissents, I might add, by justices Scalia and Thomas.
And then Congress back in -- this is in 2006 now -- writes a military tribunal law that itself gets appealed to the Supreme Court. The first military tribunal under Bush, after endless litigation from the left, from left-wing lawyers, did not occur until summer of 2008. At that point, Bush had...O'REILLY: OK. Let me stop -- let me stop you there.
So what you're saying there is that the argument that Alan Colmes and others make, Vice President Biden, that 300 captured terrorists have been tried in civilian court is not valid, because there was no other way to try them. Because of all the legal challenges, you couldn't put them in military commissions, because every two minutes there was a blockage of the action. Is that what you're saying?COULTER: That's right. Not only that but just specifically because of the left wing that we couldn't go forward with military tribunals which, by the way, I agree with Scalia and Thomas on, were constitutional. It is -- the president is the commander and chief in war time.
O'REILLY: I'm shocked. I'm shocked that you agree with Scalia and Thomas.
COULTER: It was a hugely litigated issue.
O'REILLY: OK. I got it. I got it.
COULTER: For the left itself to put up all of these obstacles through a military tribunal and then say, "Oh, look, Bush didn't try Mr. Reid in the military..."
O'REILLY: I think it's a good point.
COULTER: Thank you.
O'REILLY: It's a good point. OK, so we have that now blown away. That -- all of this argument about that it was an option...
COULTER: Oh, and by the way, one important -- one important footnote here: after the Supreme Court ruled in 2006 that you could not have military commissions unless Congress acted, Congress goes to work quickly within two months.
O'REILLY: Yes, they did act.COULTER: They then put together a military tribunals act, and guess who voted against it? Yes, that's right. Senator Barack Obama.
So this isn't just Obama doing the exact same thing Bush would do. This is all the left-wing lawyers who were suing to shut down military commissions who have decided, "Oh, it would be a good idea to bring up Khalid sheikh Mohammed for a trial in New York."
O'REILLY: But Coulter, Coulter, Coulter, Coulter, come on, come on, come on.
COULTER: yes.
O'REILLY: I'm sorry. I have a little cold out here. That's why I'm coughing.
Obama has been very consistent. He didn't like it then. He doesn't like it now. That's why the underwear guy wound up in civilian court in Michigan.
COULTER: Yes.
O'REILLY: So you can say he's wrong, and most Americans do. They disagree with the president's position on this. But he's consistent.
COULTER: Yes. He is very consistent.
O'REILLY: He doesn't like it now.
COULTER: But that is not what the left is saying. What they're saying is, "Oh, he's doing the same thing Bush did." No, he isn't.
Bush had the first military tribunal of, by the way, Usama bin Laden's driver in 2008. At that point, after seven years of litigation with these left-wing human rights nix, finally we get in process a constitutional system, approved by everyone, for military tribunals.
At that point every terrorism suspect by President Bush, any Republican president, any president who cares about the defense of the nation, ought to have been sent to a military tribunal. This is not the same thing as George Bush.
O'REILLY: All right. I only have 30 seconds. I want you to make a prediction. Is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed going back to the military, do you think?
COULTER: In this case, I hope the delusional nut Joe Biden is right and that he does go back.
O'REILLY: Do you predict? Will you predict?
COULTER: I kind of think he will. I mean, what seems to happen with these left-wing presidents is they pursue their crazy policies. The American people react by wanting to boil them in oil, and they back down. National health care, the trial of Khalid sheikh Mohammed. So yes, I guess if I had to predict, I'd say he is.
O'REILLY: All right, Ann. Thank you.
Topic: To Imaknick - Regarding Your Question On Ask JTF (Read 691 times)