Trial’s Focus to Suit Bush

[cal04]

By STEVEN LEE MYERS
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/washington/12assess.html?hp

WASHINGTON — Harsh interrogations and Guantánamo Bay, secret prisons and warrantless eavesdropping, the war against Al Qaeda and the one in Iraq. On issue after issue, President Bush has showed little indication that he will shrink from the most controversial decisions of his tenure.

With the decision to charge six Guantánamo detainees with the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and to seek the death penalty for the crimes, many of those issues will now be back in the spotlight. In an election year, that appears to be exactly where Mr. Bush wants the focus to be.

The White House said on Monday that Mr. Bush had no role in the decision to file charges now against the six detainees, leaving the strategy for prosecuting them to the military.

(snip)
In each of these cases — the military tribunals, the wiretapping legislation, Iraq — the White House seems eager to lock in as many of the president’s policies as possible before he leaves office in 11 months. And as it looks ahead to the November elections, the White House seems to have concluded that each is politically sustainable and even favorable for a Republican candidate and Mr. Bush’s own legacy.

[Gman]

1. This is a huge political miscalculation if Bush kills these prisoners

It could be a political disaster of biblical proportions. Democrats could pick up 30 more seats in the House and another 5-6 in the Senate. I believe there will be a helluva backlash on this.

Then again, I'm stupid sometimes for believing people give a damn.

[Baby Snooks]

3. Maybe not...

He most likely will see to it that they are tried and executed to give the Republicans the maximum political advantage and the Republicans may turn out in record numbers to defeat a Democrat. Shaking in their boots.

"The terrorists are coming, the terrorists are coming." And only the Republicans, you see, know how to deal with terrorists.

Well, the Republicans and the Clintons. No doubt Hillary will issue some vague nothing about it all. Just in case she wins. Just in case she loses.

[CJCRANE]

2. Why have we never heard of these people

accused of 9/11 before? (Except for KSM).

B*sh has been spouting off about Bin Laden (who the FBI offficially claims there is no evidence linking him to 9/11) and Saddam (who had no link to 9/11) for years. Why has he never mentioned these other people?

:shrug:

[zonmoy]

4. because they are fall guys.

tried in a kangaroo court and executed while innocent.

[Arctic Dave]

5. these are NOT trials

For now on we need to refer to them as dog and pony shows, because that is what they are.