How Not to Indict a Terrorist

National Review ^ | Saturday, July 5, 2014 | Andrew C. McCarthy

[kristinn]

What happens when the president who has politicized law-enforcement to a degree unprecedented in American history meets a terrorist responsible for killing Americans he has recklessly failed to protect, decimating his pretensions about “decimating” al-Qaeda?

What happens is: You get the most politicized terrorism indictment ever produced by the Justice Department. Behold United States v. Khatallah, Case No. 14 Crim. 141, quietly unsealed in a Washington courtroom last Saturday while the country dozed off into summer-vacation mode.

Ahmed Abu Khatallah, of course, is the only suspect apprehended in connection with the Benghazi massacre, a terrorist attack on a still-mysterious U.S. diplomatic installation. J. Christopher Stevens, the United States ambassador to Libya, and three other Americans — State Department official Sean Smith and two former Navy SEALs, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty — were killed. Until recently, such attacks have been known as acts of war carried out by the enemy. In the age of Obama, they are now known as “crimes” for which “defendants” like Khatallah are “brought to justice” — rather than brought to Gitmo. Meaning: They are whisked into our country when no one’s paying much attention. The red carpet is rolled out at a federal courthouse, where the “defendant” is given Miranda warnings, taxpayer-funded counsel, and all the rights of the American citizens they plot to kill, including lavish discovery-of-intelligence files relevant to their civilian trial.

Gold-plated due process for our enemies begins with the constitutional right to an indictment returned by a grand jury, providing the “defendant” with notice of the charges against him. In Khatallah’s case, the first thing you’ll notice is that the indictment is tiny: less than two pages long — 15 measly lines of text once you discount the caption, citations, and signature lines.

[Tilted Irish Kilt]

kristinn:" Ahmed Abu Khatallah, of course, is the only suspect apprehended in connection with the Benghazi massacre,
a terrorist attack on a still-mysterious U.S. diplomatic installation. J. Christopher Stevens, the United States ambassador to Libya, and three other Americans..."

Just another case of "Work place violence"
nothing to see here ! . Move along ..

[1rudeboy]

bttt

[DaveA37]

My guess the Mr. Ahmed Abu Khatallah is nothing more than a plant, a victim of the odumbo administration who needed someone, anyone to throw under the bus. I would expect he was grabbed off the street and his fate was sealed.

Odumbo and his ilk will do anything to cover their behinds.

[Paladin2]

Guilty of creating bad press for The Won.

[seowulf]

...decimating his pretensions about “decimating” al-Qaeda?

Maybe he did or did not "decimate" al-Quaeda. Unfortunately, decimating something literally leave 90% of it intact.

The problem may be that Obama just didn't check his dictionary before he did all this decimating.

[Dilbert San Diego]

I have been confused and frustrated, at how it was that this dude is getting a civilian trial in a criminal court. Why is he not getting a military tribunal trial?

Attacks on our embassies or consulates are acts of war. As such, any justice should be military justice. Such as happened at Nuremburg, where we carried out military tribunals.

So what am I missing? why does this dude get Miranda rights and all the rest of it, for committing an act of war against America?????

[Valin]

“I have been confused and frustrated, at how it was that this dude is getting a civilian trial in a criminal court. Why is he not getting a military tribunal trial?”

Welcome to Sept 10 2001

[ZOOKER]

why does this dude get Miranda rights and all the rest of it, for committing an act of war against America?????

If he gets the same rights as any US citizen, how come he isn't out on bail yet?

He has a right to trial by a jury of his "peers", but aren't his peers in Benghazi, not America?

Come to think of it, why is he being tried in America at all? He has committed no crimes here, shouldn't he be in a court where the alleged crime was committed?

[Mycroft Holmes]

Maybe he did or did not "decimate" al-Quaeda. Unfortunately, decimating something literally leave 90% of it intact.

---

Sort of in line with being the most transparent regime ever. Everybody knows if it's transparent you can't see it.

“Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum. Cogito. -- "I think that I think, therefore I think that I am, I think." Cute twist on the Ambrose Bierce quote.

	Freedom ≠ Free Stuff☭
	I, for one, welcome our new Cybernetic Overlords /.
Mash Dobbshead® for HTML, bop Hello_Cthlhu for XAMPP

[gitmo]

So he’s accused of being a video critic.