Tortured logic

Toledo Blade ^ | 4-25-09 | Jack Kelly - OP/ED

[smoothsailing]

Tortured logic

Jack Kelly

April 25, 2009

AS ARCHBISHOP of Canterbury, William Laud (1573-1645) was a staunch political supporter of King Charles I and an ecclesiastical supporter of "high church" practices. Neither of these set well with Parliament, which was controlled by Puritans such as Oliver Cromwell. So Parliament passed a law declaring Archbishop Laud guilty of treason, and had him beheaded.

The law was called a bill of attainder. Bills of attainder had two features. First, they bypassed the courts in declaring someone guilty of a crime. Second, they criminalized ex post facto actions that were not against the law at the time they were committed.

After the restoration of King Charles II, a new Parliament in 1660 passed bills of attainder declaring Mr. Cromwell and John Bradshaw (the judge at the trial of King Charles I) guilty of treason. Though both had died years before, Parliament ordered that their bodies be dug up and beheaded.

For obvious reasons, the American colonists were not fond of this aspect of the British legal system. Article 1, section 9, clause 3 of the Constitution declares: "No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed."

Perhaps neither President Barack Obama nor his attorney general, Eric Holder, are familiar....

[Ancient Drive]

The law was called a bill of attainder. Bills of attainder had two features. First, they bypassed the courts in declaring someone guilty of a crime. Second, they criminalized ex post facto actions that were not against the law at the time they were committed. Holy crap... isn't that what Obama is trying to do with the torture memos?

[Ancient Drive]

somebody send this to that idiot at the WH: Article 1, section 9, clause 3 of the Constitution declares: "No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed."

[Lysandru]

But didn't Barack Obama teach Constitutional Law?

< /sarcasm>

(Yeah, I don't buy this crap either.)

[jazusamo]

retired Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters in the New York Post on Thursday. "Should President Obama acquiesce, he won't be furthering the rule of law, but dismantling it."

Amen to Ralph Peters!

And if Obama and cronies are successful in holding show trials of patriots over top secret documents that were released for political reasons and probably illegally released, there will be fewer patriots in the future willing to protect those who are too much cowards to protect themselves.

[SunkenCiv]

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic ·
	Gods Graves Glyphs	Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach.
·Dogpile · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology · Biblical Archaeology Society · · Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·

[highlander_UW]

And after Obama is out of office once abortion is declared to be killing a baby Obama can be prosecuted as an accessory to mass murder...at least if he's treated the way he's treating Bush. After all, Obama is in favor of bills of attainders so I'm sure he wouldn't mind it being applied to him.

[smoothsailing]

That's an excellent analogy, IMO.

[smoothsailing]

My guess is the goal is to continue to bash Bush as long as possible in order to keep us distracted from their true agenda, a totalitarian state.

If they accomplish their goal, then they'll more than likely do the show trials and hang Bush and Cheney and you and me and everybody else who doesn't do their goosestep.