David Rivkin debates how the U.S. treats its terror suspects

DavidRivkin.com, YouTube ^ | 01/12/2012 | David Rivkin

[american_steve]

Constitutional defender and appellate attorney David Rivkin debates Vincent Warren of the Center for Constitutional Rights on the tenth anniversary of Guantanamo, how the U.S. treats its terror suspects, the U.S. Justice paradigm, and current legislation. "For the first time Congress has explicitly put its stamp of approval on what here to for has been done either based upon indirect congressional support and authorization to use military force, executive branch practices and judicial decisions." - David Rivkin on not seeing the legislation as "new."

[american_steve]

Thoughts?

[Track9]

The answer is, a lot better then they deserve.. and the only reason there is an issue is because democRAT hacks play this card for their own nefarious ends.

[Tenacious 1]

I think this is beautiful. Rivkin is an Obama fan, a hard left liberal. He has to maintain his position for the sake of his career but has to parse details in order to not indict his idol in the WH. Still, he must criticize or else lose credibility.

The real argument here is whether or not terrorists are protected by our constitution. I say absolutely not. Illegal Immigrants and terrorists have no rights afforded US citizens on US territory protected by the Constitution. There should be no way any civilian law enforcement or court should have any powers what so ever (beyond persuasion) to force the military to do anything with regards to prisoners taken during war.

After all, the Executive Branch of our government is in charge of all military and can give direct orders to any and all personnel under the command of the “Commander in Chief”. There is no need for the federal judicial branch to get involved with enemy combatants at all (unless they are American Citizens).

[Tenacious 1]

....Not Rivkin .... the other guy. Sorry.

[stylin19a]

I’m still peeved they moved them inside.