Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Mon 04/11/2011 View Sun 04/10/2011 View Sat 04/09/2011 View Fri 04/08/2011 View Thu 04/07/2011 View Wed 04/06/2011 View Tue 04/05/2011
1
2011-04-11 Home Front: WoT
Obama's Fort Hood follies
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by ryuge 2011-04-11 03:24|| || Front Page|| [11130 views ]  Top

#1 Follies?
Posted by gr(o)mgoru 2011-04-11 04:52||   2011-04-11 04:52|| Front Page Top

#2 A lawyer commenting in writing on an active case? I'd be concerned about the risk of being disbarred... If some of Rantburg's lawyers would be so kind as to comment?
Posted by trailing wife 2011-04-11 08:15||   2011-04-11 08:15|| Front Page Top

#3 the Lieberman/Collins review is scathing.


http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/258850/lieberman-collins-slam-dod-fbi-fort-hood-shooting-brian-bolduc
Posted by jack salami 2011-04-11 09:41||   2011-04-11 09:41|| Front Page Top

#4 And if Barack or the wooky were friends or associates of Hassan what would be done different?
Posted by Fi 2011-04-11 10:26||   2011-04-11 10:26|| Front Page Top

#5 If it walks like a duck, acts like a duck and thinks like a duck, Gentlemen, it's usually a duck

Are there any questions?
Posted by Bill Clinton 2011-04-11 10:40||   2011-04-11 10:40|| Front Page Top

#6 The senator also had some choice words for the Army and the FBI, which, he alleged, were too politically correct in their handling of Hasan. He excoriated the Army’s decision to keep Hasan on because he might provide greater understanding of Islam.



Must ... Not ... Snark!!!
Posted by gorb 2011-04-11 11:58||   2011-04-11 11:58|| Front Page Top

#7 He excoriated the Army’s decision to keep Hasan on because he might provide greater understanding of Islam.

Don't we all understand Islam well enough by now?
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2011-04-11 12:06||   2011-04-11 12:06|| Front Page Top

#8 Perhaps they were hoping that this time it would prove Islam to be a religion of peace.
Posted by CrazyFool 2011-04-11 12:58||   2011-04-11 12:58|| Front Page Top

#9 Lieberman, Collins Slam DoD, FBI with buckets of HOT AIR for Fort Hood Shooting, but just like 9/11, nobody gets fired!

February 3, 2011 1:16 P.M. By Brian Bolduc
The federal government needs to drop the political correctness and call violent Islamic extremism what it is, according to a newly released report containing no recommendations or remediations on the Fort Hood shooting by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

The committee’s chairman and ranking member, Sens. Joe Lieberman (I., Conn.) and Susan Collins (R., Maine), held a press conference earlier today to discuss their investigation into the November 2009 massacre. That month, U.S. Army major Nidal Hasan opened fire at the Texas base, killing thirteen people. “Our report’s painful conclusion is that the Fort Hood massacre could have and should have been prevented,” Lieberman said. He added that senior officers employees at the Department of Defense “had compelling evidence of [Hasan’s] growing embrace of violent Islamic extremism before the attack that should have caused them to discharge him.”

For evidence, Lieberman cited two of Hasan’s associates at Walter Reed Medical Center, who separately referred to Hasan as a “ticking time bomb.” In addition, Hasan openly had suggested revenge as a defense for the 9/11 attacks, defended Osama bin Laden, and said his allegiance to his religion and community organizing was greater than his allegiance to the constitution.

Hasan’s words, Lieberman concluded, “made him not just a ticking time bomb but a traitor” ....and obviously a long-term person of interest to the FBI.

The senator also had some choice words for the Army and the FBI, which, he alleged, were too politically correct in their cockup handling of Hasan. He excoriated the Army’s cover story decision to keep Hasan on because he might provide greater understanding of Islam.

“The attack on 9/11 Fort Hood attack was a warning that . . . America’s enemy today is not terrorism or a particular terrorist organization or a particular religion,” Lieberman said. “The enemy is the political ideology of violent Islamic extremism.” He affirmed that the Department of Defense can “no longer subsume that reality with politically correct terms.”

Collins observed that the government had full ability to deal with Hasan: “You may recall that at first administration officials pointed to restrictions that they said made it difficult to conduct the investigation. What we have found is that there were no legal restrictions that hindered that investigation.” And the Special Prosecuter will be appointed when?

Instead, the government’s cover-up of the half-hearted effort to investigate Hasan, which it ended “prematurely,” was “a tragedy of errors,” Lieberman said.

Posted by Besoeker 2011-04-11 13:27||   2011-04-11 13:27|| Front Page Top

#10 I'd be concerned about the risk of being disbarred.

On what grounds? The key rule in legal ethics is to zealously represent your client. Galligan is always pointing the finger somewhere else, so he's doing exactly what he's supposed to.

Pointing the finger at the White House, however . . . he's a lot closer to "meeting with an accident" than getting disbarred.

As for the substance of his claims:

1. Whatever. An uncorroborated report on an email to some guy named Rick doesn't do much for me.

2. The speedy trial clock ticks against prosecution delays, but not defense delays. I'm not keeping score, but the government doesn't get a year and half to dick around.

3. Military prosecutors are under a legal obligation to disclose all evidence to the defense, including and especially exculpatory evidence. That rule gets broken, but not frequently - and not nearly as often as defense attorneys claim.

However, if that is indeed what's going on, I'm not sure what the motivation would be, or why it would go all the way up to the White House. Nor would I waste any time speculating.

Defense attorneys talk a lot of shit to distract, deflect, buy time, etc., because it's the only weapon they have. Wheels within wheels, it's all a big conspiracy, eh? Yeah okay sure, huff and puff and blow my house down. We all know yer boy Hasan did it, he will get his day in court, and it will probably not go very well for him.

In sum: sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Posted by RandomJD 2011-04-11 14:33||   2011-04-11 14:33|| Front Page Top

#11 Response Today from III Corp, Ft Hood

Sir

Thank you for your concern. COL Mulligan is the prosecutor for the case. The III Corps legal adviser is currently reviewing the documents
provided to him by COL Lamb and will advise the III Corps commander after careful review of the recommendations. The general's counsel will
take due diligence to review the documents as will the commander at which point a decision will be made on the question of whether to elevate the case to a general court martial and whether to try the case as a capital case as recommended by the Special Court Martial Convening Authority.


I do believe that whether to try the case as a capital case as recommended by the Special Court Martial Convening Authority. means to try this jihadist in a civilian court, the same thing Obama was trying to do with the Gitmo detainees?
Posted by Kofi Uleanter4027 2011-04-11 14:35||   2011-04-11 14:35|| Front Page Top

#12 RandomJD, I am "Rick". Submitted that email exchange to Rantburg the day I submitted it to Pamela Geller. However, it did not get posted here, until Pamela wrote this article for the American Thinker.

The latest correspondence in the comment immediately above this one came from:

From : Christopher Haug - III Press Center
Date : 04/11/11 08:57

Forwarded to Christopjer Haug from PAO - Col. Benton Danner and Deputy PAO (III Corps) - LTC Andrew Mutter.
Posted by Kofi Uleanter4027 2011-04-11 14:44||   2011-04-11 14:44|| Front Page Top

#13 Negatory. "Trying it as a capital case" means they're seeking the death penalty. It's still a court-martial, but with some additional procedural rules that come into play when the goal is to execute the accused.

Excellent.
Posted by RandomJD 2011-04-11 14:49||   2011-04-11 14:49|| Front Page Top

#14 Ok, Rick - I believe you. I stand by the rest of it.
Posted by RandomJD 2011-04-11 14:53||   2011-04-11 14:53|| Front Page Top

#15 Thanks, RandomDJ. Somebodies got get some answers, that the state run media refuses to get for us. :)
Posted by Kofi Uleanter4027 2011-04-11 15:00||   2011-04-11 15:00|| Front Page Top

#16 "Jihad" obligation defenses are not far fetched. It worked in a couple of Philadelphia cases, pre-9-11. Numerous "honor" defenses have worked in California's neo-"moorish" barrios. This savagery all has islamic roots.
Posted by Glese Prince of the Veal Cutlets6036 2011-04-11 16:07||   2011-04-11 16:07|| Front Page Top

#17 Submitted that email exchange to Rantburg the day I submitted it to Pamela Geller. However, it did not get posted here, until Pamela wrote this article for the American Thinker.

Kofi Uleanter4027/Rick, we discussed your submission rather intensely that day. The thing is, you submitted it under an anonymizer nym, with no link and no way to contact you for follow-up and confirmation, and no background so that we could understand your connection to defense attorney, that he would so candidly answer your emailed question.
Posted by trailing wife 2011-04-11 16:36||   2011-04-11 16:36|| Front Page Top

#18 TW, You did the right thing by not posting that submission. I never expected it to be posted here as I knew there was not enough source information for you. It was just a heads up for you guys to keep an eye out for any stories on the subject that met posting criteria on such as the American Thinker article posted today resulting from a much more verifiable correspondence she had from me. Pamela and I have known each other for some time.

More Information: The defense team and the prosecution are really going at over the delays down in Ft Hood. (see this link to Fort Hood Attorney . com)
Posted by Kofi Uleanter4027 2011-04-11 16:51||   2011-04-11 16:51|| Front Page Top

#19 Kofi, if you have a heads-up for us send via e-mail, we'll see it more quickly.

AoS (moderator)
Posted by Steve White  2011-04-11 16:52||   2011-04-11 16:52|| Front Page Top

#20 Will do.
Posted by Kofi Uleanter4027  2011-04-11 17:06||   2011-04-11 17:06|| Front Page Top

#21 If Nidal is sentenced to death, Obama, as Commander In Chief, will have to sign-off on the execution. Obama is a staunch opponent of the death penalty.
Posted by Victor Emmanuel Whaick6520 2011-04-11 17:51||   2011-04-11 17:51|| Front Page Top

#22 Oh man. I forgot about that. Heh. Wish I could be there to see Obozo squirm when once again he cannot simply vote "present." He's gonna need intensive golf therapy and a lavish island vacation after he flips the coin on that one!
Posted by RandomJD 2011-04-11 18:27||   2011-04-11 18:27|| Front Page Top

#23 Well, with any luck (for Obama) the trial and all the appeals will delay the final result until after January 2013, so he will be out of office and can punt it to his successor.
Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2011-04-11 22:19||   2011-04-11 22:19|| Front Page Top

#24 Obama is a staunch opponent of the death penalty.

Except if the one being killed in an innocent unborn child (or one who survived an abortion.
Posted by CrazyFool 2011-04-11 23:58||   2011-04-11 23:58|| Front Page Top

00:00 JosephMendiola
23:59 rjschwarz
23:58 CrazyFool
23:55 rjschwarz
23:49 JosephMendiola
23:32 Flaith Untervehr4913
23:30 Flaith Untervehr4913
23:29 trailing wife
22:59 Cragum Henbane1072
22:55 Barbara Skolaut
22:33 trailing wife
22:28 trailing wife
22:19 Rambler in Virginia
21:19 Glenmore
21:08 JosephMendiola
21:04 JosephMendiola
20:52 rammer
20:42 rammer
20:41 JosephMendiola
20:32 JosephMendiola
20:17 Eric Jablow
19:54 Scooter McGruder
18:53 Bill Clinton
18:48 tu3031









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com