Posted on 01/08/2010 12:39:05 PM PST by nhwingut
Thanks. Got it. Up to speed now.
Still, there was a major difference here. Bush fought extension of habeas to detainees. Obama (first as a Senator, then as candidate) applauded it. 'Course, as president, "Just Words," arbitrarily fought extenstion of habeas to Bagram detainees in exactly the same circumstance as Gitmo detainees (i.e. brough there from third countries): Obama's Gitmo (WSJ APRIL 21, 2009).
Its not the judge's fault. He is merely upholding the US Constitution and the laws of our land. Its Obama's fault for allowing the filth to be covered by our constitution by treating them as criminals instead of enemy combatants. This ruling was not "Unexpected".
Now there’s a big surprise - not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.