» News

Is This a Case of Common Ground With Proggies?

Home - by - December 20, 2012 - 23:00 America/New_York - 4 Comments

The Atlantic -

Lawmakers charged with merging the House and Senate versions of the National Defense Authorization Act decided on Tuesday to drop a provision that would have explicitly barred the military from holding American citizens and permanent residents in indefinite detention without trial as terrorism suspects, according to Congressional staff members familiar with the negotiations.

Says Adam Serwer, another journalist who treats these issues with the urgency that they deserve:

Of the four main negotiators on the defense bill, only one of the Democrats, Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), opposes domestic indefinite detention of Americans. The Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.), believes detaining Americans without charge or trial is constitutional, and only voted for the Feinstein amendment because he and some of his Republican colleagues in the Senate convinced themselves through a convoluted legal rationale that Feinstein’s proposal didn’t actually ban the practice. Both of the main Republican negotiators, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard “Buck” McKeon (R-Calif) and Senator John McCain (R-Ariz) believe it’s constitutional to lock up American citizens suspected of terrorism without ever proving they’re guilty.

As Serwer puts it, “The demise of the Feinstein-Lee proposal doesn’t necessarily mean that Americans suspected of terrorism in the US can be locked up forever without a trial. But it ensures that the next time a president tries to lock up an American citizen without trial — as President George W. Bush previously tried — it will be left up to the courts to decide whether or not it’s legal.”

Don’t let the dearth of attention fool you — this is a scandal. Congress has turned its back on safeguarding a core Constitutional protection and a centuries old requirement of Western justice.



  1. Stranded in Sonoma

    December 20th, 2012

    Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2:

    The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

    As I read that, it says rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it, which I take to mean that the public safety is only in danger by way of rebellion or an invasion. I know SCOTUS could have a different take on it, and probably will.

    Unless the democrats are telling us that we are under an invasion. I believe we are, by the muzloids. Though Omarxist is likely to claim a rebellion is happening because of those conservative terrorists that were mentioned in the report that DHS released a few months into the Omarxist regime. Remember that? Yeah, that chicken is coming home to roost right now, don’t ya think?

    However, the law seems to be stated differently.

    …detaining Americans without charge or trial is constitutional…it’s constitutional to lock up American citizens suspected of terrorism without ever proving they’re guilty.

    It just sounds like they’re going to jail people individually for whatever purpose they want. It doesn’t sound like a mass rebellion or invasion. Sorry, but The Great Writ would quash that idea in the blink of an eye. I just hope that the Chief Justice is on the side of liberty when the first of these appeals comes before his court.

    Thumb up +4

  2. KF

    December 21st, 2012

    The “common ground” with the progressives will end up with most or all of us IN the ground. They’re communist zealots.

    Thumb up +7

  3. old_oaks

    December 21st, 2012

    Isn’t is a damn insane shame we allow 535 dipshits run the lives of 310,000,000 people?

    Thumb up +7

  4. BILL

    December 21st, 2012

    does anyone have faith in our “ganster government” anymore?

    they exempt themselves from every law they write for us.

    they disregard our constitution as they wish.

    they hold office for absurd lengths of time all the while enriching themselves at the taxpayers expense.

    how much longer are we going to put up with them?

    Thumb up +7