Ashcroft: Holder lacks legal authority to order terror trials

I don't imagine Holder would use this authority if he didn't have it. Maybe Ashcroft protests too much? :think:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/68373-ashcroft-holder-lacks-legal-authority-to-order-terror-trials


Ashcroft: Holder lacks legal authority to order terror trials
By Michael O'Brien - 11/18/09 12:43 PM ET


Attorney General Eric Holder lacks authority to make a decision on moving terror detainees to civilian courts for trial, one of his predecessors said Wednesday.

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft, who held his position during the Bush administration from 2001-2005, said that Holder lacked the legal standing to decide to move alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other terror detainees to federal courts in New York City to stand trial.

"The attorney general doesn't have the authority to mandate that the secretary of Defense turn somebody over to him and yield jurisdiction so that something that would have been done in a military setting is done in a civilian setting," Ashcroft told the Christ Stigall show on KCMO radio this morning.

"I believe that this is a decision that comes as a result of the president making the decision, or if not making the decision, allowing an attorney general to do what he normally doesn't have the authority to do, and could only do at the acquiescence of the president," the former AG and former Missouri senator argued.

President Barack Obama has said that he instructed Holder to make an independent determination on the best way to proceed against the terrorist detainees.

"You know, I said to the attorney general, make a decision based on the law," Obama said in an interview on CNN this morning.

The president has backed Holder's decision, saying he has confidence in the court system to resolve the cases, including a potential death sentence for the defendants.

Ashcroft said his own experience as attorney general led him to his conclusion about Holder's authority.

"The office of Attorney General doesn't have the power or authority to do this on its own, in my judgement," he explained. "Of course, my judgment can be flawed -- I spent a few years there and considered these kinds of issues."

This is the guy who thought he was doing a good job because he brought the perpetrators of the McDonalds Monopoly sweepstakes fraud case to justice.

It's difficult keeping up with all these BushCo clowns.

He was the one who lost an election to a dead guy.

The ultrareligious conservative who had to leave office due to a liver condition most probably brought on by years of alcohol abuse.

Of course Holder has the authority.

:eyes:

Holder is black. In Ashcroft's world blacks have no authority.

;)

Mr. Ashcroft has not yet realized that this is a brand new world, and one he had better get used to.

And it will be up to the court to decide if they have jurisdiction. Which may present the pretty little legal problem that the United States doesn't have the authority to try KSM, let alone detain him. Because the United States doesn't recognize the International Criminal Court, it could be that we have held, detained, tortured and attempted to try KSM illegally, and we have no recourse to do anything with him. And if we don't KSM could be entitled to turn around and make a claim against the United States for acting outside its jurisdiction and in violation of international law.

Very nice little turd the Bush administration left in its In box for the next President. Because ultimately, that's where the responsibility lies for any violation we may have perpetrated against Mr. Mohammed's civil rights. Another reason for not giving in to knee-jerk reactionary foreign policy.

against these individuals to prevent an open trial and block a discovery process that would open up all kinds of canned worms for the previous administration.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_11/021002.php

'UNPRECEDENTED,' EXCEPT FOR ALL THE OTHER TIMES

snip//

Bush administration used federal justice system to bring several foreign terrorism suspects to justice. During the George W. Bush administration, several foreign terrorists were brought to justice through the federal justice system, including 9-11 conspirator Zacarious Moussaoui, "Shoe bomber" Richard Reid and East African embassy bombing perpetrators Wahid el-Hage, Mohammed Sadiq Odeh, Mohammed Rashed al-Owhali, and Khalfan Khamis Mohammed.

Clinton administration also used federal justice system to bring foreign terror suspects to justice. During the Clinton administration, 1993 World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Ahmed Yousef and "urban terrorism" plotters Sheik Oma Abdel Rahman and others were brought to justice through the federal justice system.

There are already 216 international terrorists in U.S. prisons. A May 29 Slate.com article reported that according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, "federal facilities on American soil currently house 216 international terrorists and 139 domestic terrorists. Some of these miscreants have been locked up here since the early 1990s. None of them has escaped. At the most secure prisons, nobody has ever escaped."

As to Reid, there was the fact that he was a U.S. citizen whose actions happened on U.S. soil. The same can be said for Moussaoui, who was also on U.S. soil, and the bombing of the U.S. embassy, which is considered U.S. soil. Yousef and Rahman were similarly in the United States prior to the crimes they were convicted of. I don't know that KSM was ever in the United States prior to his capture outside the U.S. While long-arm jurisdiction can be extended to a foreign national who plots a crime in another country, it will have to be shown that the allegations that KSM was involved in the plotting of the 9/11 attacks are not tainted by illegal incarceration, torture, or other extralegal circumstances that would cause the evidence against him to be excluded.

What may be unprecedented is the attempt to introduce evidence obtained through torture, the threat of torture, or the residue of torture.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

in 2001 and with the precedents already set, that 9-11 was a prosecutable act, not a war act. But, presecution was avoided for corporations and Aschcroft was the corporate facilitator - the gatekeeper who let it all slide into bombing, destroying, killing and maiming.

Prosecution was emphatically denied the people by Cheney and Bush - they would allow no investigations or prosecutions, but did end up giving in to an investigation-review of our intelligence services - under pressure and deflection to allow the people the thought that they were getting something.

They allowed a lousy set-up investigation of our intelligence services that settle on putting the CIA up for blame. Nada. Nothing. Nada could be a good nickname for Ashcroft.

Color me surprised he'd take such a position.

He's going on my list of pant-shitters and so is Mort Zuckerman who was extemely animated (on Mourning Schmo this morning) in his opposition to trying KSM in New York. My list is getting longer and longer. And, hey! Guess what? They are all republican'ts!

and so do the other's that are protesting wildly against an open trial in the United States.

in the first place, so Ass-hat really has no credibility on the issue.

unconstitutional, but torture is OK.:crazy:

where Ashccroft, probably correctly, says the AG can't simply override a decision by the Defense Secretary.

However, the President can, and apparently did.

as Ashcroft knew, yet he's still complaining.

I'm complaining that I opened this thread and there's nothing here.

(I was kinda hoping Ashcroft actually did something worth complaining about. Or at least talking about.)

An invasion mounted after 9/11 isn't a rationale for military jurisdiction.

It was one of those ugly, revealing moments as to just how far removed people are from the enormously evil shit goes undetected by 'normal' Americans.

Is it because he is not a republiCON and to top it off he is Black..