[tcuoohjohn]

I am amazed at the idea that a vigorous defense of someone accused of a crime is now deemed treasonous. I suspect the founders would be rolling in their graves at the notion.

If a spirited defense is only acceptable for those deemed "worthy" of defense then we are making a mockery of justice.

[hole_n_one]

I am amazed at the idea that a vigorous defense of someone accused of a crime is now deemed treasonous. I suspect the founders would be rolling in their graves at the notion.

It's the cumulative record that is being weighed.

[squidly]

I am amazed at the idea that a vigorous defense of someone accused of a crime is now deemed treasonous.

Not at all. But Ramsey Clark is a treasonous bastard. I'm guessing from you're statements that you're not overly familiar with his "career."

[Oztrich Boy]

If a spirited defense is only acceptable for those deemed "worthy" of defense then we are making a mockery of justice.

The is a difference between someone declaring that even the most despicible are entitled to a defence ie Dershowitz's remark re Hitler, as opposed to a longtime supporter of the Iraqi Ba'athist position doing so.

If we believe that a man accused of crimes is entitled to a vigorous defense then we should have no objection to anyone providing that defense.

If we belive that Hussein is entitled to a vigorous and effective defence, there are many objections to allowing the bewildered Clark to do it.

The US would be blamed anyway if a US lawyer lost the case, no point it making it easy to claim it was a incompeteant and sham defence.

[hellinahandcart]

I am amazed at the idea that a vigorous defense of someone accused of a crime is now deemed treasonous. I suspect the founders would be rolling in their graves at the notion.

You've managed to miss the entire point. We don't consider Ramsey Clark a traitor for offering to represent Saddam. We've thought of old Ramsey as a lying treasonous America-hating communist bastard for years. This development doesn't even rate as the cherry on the sundae. If he had NOT offered to defend Saddam (which was utterly predictable), his sentiments on this occasion would still have provoked the same reaction on our part.

If a spirited defense is only acceptable for those deemed "worthy" of defense then we are making a mockery of justice.

Well, again, you're addressing the wrong group of people. Ramsey Clark knows all about "mockeries of justice", he's directly participated in many. If his offer is accepted, Saddam's trial will be Theatre of the Absurd.