Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Please in the recorded history of prosecutorial press conferences please, point to one where a DA, didn't state that they were confident of a conviction.
Can you point to a case where the prosecutor said they would stay behind bars, even if they were acquitted - as holder did?
But then, pressed again about what would happen "if one of these terrorists" in the future were found not guilty or given a short sentence, Holder agreed that the Justice Department would still retain the authority to lock them up as enemy combatants.
"I certainly think that under the regime that we are contemplating, the potential for detaining people under the laws of war, we would retain that ability," Holder said.
The poster claimed that no "Enemy combatant" had ever been tried in a civilian court, and that is patently false. Bush gave terrorists civilian trials.
He didn't dismiss the case. He ruled against the detainee and concluded he was legally detained. I have no clue what people are upset about. Invalid evidence gets tossed out all the time from any kind of court, but it turns out there was sufficient evident to doom this guy anyway. So where's the beef?
The OP is just spinning something, so she can then predict a premise that will occur in the future and complain about it.
We don't - we hold POWs according the Geneva Convention - but Bush created a new category called 'enemy combatants' so he could ignore that process and beat the shiite out of them. Now the legal consequences of that mistake are coming back to haunt us.
We don't - we hold POWs according the Geneva Convention - but Bush created a new category called 'enemy combatants' so he could ignore that process and beat the shiite out of them. Now the legal consequences of that mistake are coming back to haunt us.
With this, we created an entire new generation of terrorists that want to blow America to smithereens, just like Iraq.
The poster claimed that no "Enemy combatant" had ever been tried in a civilian court, and that is patently false. Bush gave terrorists civilian trials.
Who?
Richard Reid? American Citizen
Jose Padilla? American Citizen
What POW, captured on the battlefield, has been tried in civilian court under Bush?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
