About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Buchanan apparently concerned detainees might "get bail" in US

May 21, 2009 1:48 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (May 21, 2009 1:52 pm ET)
      1  
      Yeah... 71 Year old Bernie Madoff is sitting in MCC-NY Fed Penn, two doors down from the cell the nearly broke John Gotti, as we speak, but we're going to give bail to a suspected international terrorist. You know... I hope that DOES happen, becasue it would expose a HUGE FLAW in out bail bond system that could then be fixed. But somemhow I don;t think our system is THAT broken.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Dem02020 (May 21, 2009 3:39 pm ET)
         

      There's little reason I can think of, to bring someone into a U.S. Court, before a Judge whose Jurisdiction is the Jurisdiction of that Court, and before a Jury of American Citizens (most likely residing also in the District or Jurisdiction of that Court), for something supposedly done outside the U.S., and in Afghanistan of all places...

      And I do need to hear about hypotheticals here, like 'what if the guy did this or that hypothetical thing', but I would only hear the particulars in the this matter, specifically to hear what any one of these detainees did in Afghanistan for example, that requires they be brought before a U.S. Jury...

      This is a matter for detailed and specific considerations : it is not a vague and general discussion of the Law I am making here... what did the detainee do, and where did they do it... and if it was done in Afghanistan for example, then why would the American People of say Los Angeles County, be called to Jury Duty and sit and listen to a case, along with a Judge of that District, listen to a case about something supposedly done in Afghanistan?

      And do not let your mind run to hypotheticals at this point, because we're talking about real people, and supposedly real and actual things they did (in Afghanistan mostly I believe), and they're really in CUBA of all freaking places, and someone's really thinking of bringing them to the U.S., to be tried by you and me on a Jury... why?

      It doesn't make sense... and primarily and most extraordinarily what doesn't make sense, is why these 'detainees' were removed in the first place, from the Jurisdiction of the place where they did whatever it is they supposedly did, and taken to CUBA of all freaking places!

      And now into a U.S. Court, my LORD!

      For what, for something done in the United States of America?

      OK then, that makes sense, make that case and be specific please... but for something done in Afghanistan for example?

      Then make that case, and don't imagine the details, but cite the true and actual facts of this present matter.

      Why the freak then were they taken out of Afghanistan?

      What sense did that make?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by peebs755 (May 21, 2009 4:13 pm ET)
        3  
        "Why the freak were they taken out of Afghanistan. What sense did that make?"

        Ask george bush and dick cheny about that. What buchanan doesn't seem to realize is that we're paying for all that now. And bail?? Give me a break, are these people for real?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by bilbo_dies (May 21, 2009 4:25 pm ET)
        1  
        Well, let's see. First they were sent to Gitmo because it was thought to be outside of the reach of US law. Thus allowing the previous adminstration to do what they wanted. As far as trying individuals in the US for crimes commited outside the US. Crap, that happens all the time. US embassies are considered US property so any crime committed there falls under US jurisdiction. If you attack a ship flagged in the US on the open seas, you get to go to court in the US. Now, I don't know how it works when attacking US troops on someone else's soveriegn ground but; I think it can be argued that could be tried in US court. As to where in the US, that would depend on which Federal court would get the case.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Dem02020 (May 21, 2009 5:12 pm ET)
             

          There you go, you just did exactly what I said was pointless to do, you came up with hypothetical and imagined reasons why someone would be tried in the U.S. for something done outside the United States, instead of making a particular and specific detailed argument of why any detainee at CUBA should be brought into a U.S. Court.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by gmsingh (May 21, 2009 5:37 pm ET)
      2  
      Everyone knows that if even one of those guys make bail they will recruit several hundred jihadists to go to flight school and fly bazillions of planes into buildings. If that fails they will get DVD box sets of "Criminal Minds" and all become serial killers, so they can kill bazillions of Americans.

      Can someone please tell these right wing clowns that we're all sick of their fractured fairy tales?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (May 22, 2009 8:07 am ET)
           
        Don't use that term. "Fractured Fairy Tales" featured the voice of the late, great Edward Everett Horton. Pat Buchanan has a voice like someone filing their toenails with a cheese grater.
        Report Abuse