Really Liz Cheney? Really???

[thereom4]

How does a woman with a J.D. from a top 10 law school suggest that the attorneys who represented terrorism suspects were doing anything other than their jobs? Seriously they need to take her degree away. Did she forget about that tricky thing called due process? Does she not know that the accused have a right to an attorney? Perhaps she thinks that by calling those attorneys the "Al Qaeda Seven" she's in fact keeping America safe. But she's not. She's trying to plant seeds in peoples head about those attorneys that is not only unfair but can potentially put their lives at risks. An over zealous individual may think it is their duty as a patriot to take one of those attorneys out to help keep America safe? Why is their no Hippocratic Oath for lawyers the bar is not enough.

[Purple Fencer]

The fact that some GOPers are coming down on her should mean something....but in her case, I sorta doubt it....more likely she'll accuse THEM of being sympathizers.

And a JD degree doesn't mean she actually has any brains....she's proven THAT often enough in the last year.

[Empty Wallet]

So, who or what is Marc Thiessen?

As our only source of US news is the Daily Show, one never knows whether these are real people or not.

[JackOfHearts]

And a JD degree doesn't mean she actually has any brains....she's proven THAT often enough in the last year.

My old coach had a saying, "I"m not smart. I just have a lot of paper that says I am."

Some people are just looking for witches to burn. *Shrugs*

[lindajdunn]

I think the term "McCarthyism" fits here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Thiessen

I don't like wikipedia as a source, but I think it's adequate here.

Thiessen has worked in Washington for many years, starting with five years at Black, Manafort, Stone and Kelly. He spent six years (1995–2001) on Capitol Hill as spokesman and senior policy advisor to Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms (R-NC).[3] He joined the Bush administration as Chief Speechwriter for Donald Rumsfeld in 2001, then moved to Bush's speechwriting team in 2004.[3] In February 2008, he became chief speechwriter when William McGurn resigned. [4]

In March 2009, Thiessen and Peter Schweizer opened Oval Office Writers LLC.[5]

Thiessen is currently a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is also a columnist for The Washington Post, starting March 2010

Thiessen's first book, Courting Disaster: How the CIA Kept America Safe and How Barack Obama Is Inviting the Next Attack (ISBN 1596986034), was published by Regnery Publishing in January 2010. The book is endorsed by the former Vice President Dick Cheney,[6] former Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld,[7] and former Attorney General Michael Mukasey.[8][9]

[Inquartata]

Oh, yeah. Terrorists are just common criminals, therefore totally deserving of lawyers and "due process". It's just so obvious.

[Philistine]

Oh, yeah. Terrorists are just common criminals, therefore totally deserving of lawyers and "due process". It's just so obvious.

Obviously. Due process is only for innocent people. And if the government says you're guilty, you don't need a lawyer, and there's nothing more to be done or said--because then the lawyer would be just trying to get you off on a technicality, and he probably hates America just as much as you do.

Nobody was detained who wasn't the "worst of the worst." I mean, it wasn't like we were paying ordinary Afghans a bounty to come forward and turn in "Taliban" or "Al Queda" members. No potential problem there, no siree.

--Philistine

[Inquartata]

And has the whole "enemy combatants" issue been settled, then? They're all just regular accused criminals, with full legal rights in the criminal justice system, case closed?

[Philistine]

And has the whole "enemy combatants" issue been settled, then? They're all just regular accused criminals, with full legal rights in the criminal justice system, case closed?

Well--in part because of the efforts of those Al-Queda sympathizing lawyers--now they can't just be locked away forever just on the Government's say-so, without access to a court.

Surely the Republic will fall!

While we're at it--given that Liz Cheney's husband works at a law firm that also does pro-bono work for detainees--does that make her husband (and by extension her) an Al-Queda supporter?

--Philistine

[thereom4]

While we're at it--given that Liz Cheney's husband works at a law firm that also does pro-bono work for detainees--does that make her husband (and by extension her) an Al-Queda supporter?

--Philistine

Yes it does.

[thereom4]

Keep America Safe

I keeps fear as mace <this is the one I came up with on my own

I found the following online using wordsmith.org/anagram:

A Ace Fake Premise
Escapee Fake Amir
A Preface Aim Seek
A Amerce Spake Fie
A Amerce Peaks Fie
A Peace Faker Mise
A Farce Maise Peek

[I_luv_saber]

I think the term "McCarthyism" fits here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Thiessen

I don't like wikipedia as a source, but I think it's adequate here.

Just as a tangent, I find it funny that no one likes Wikipedia as a source until it's convenient.

Wikipedia is perfectly fine as a source, providing the claims you're using to back up your argument have citations.

/thread drift

[fencerchica]

And has the whole "enemy combatants" issue been settled, then? They're all just regular accused criminals, with full legal rights in the criminal justice system, case closed?

Obviously a bunch of goat-herding peasants who get rounded up by bounty hunters and turned over to US troops for a cash reward are 100% guilty and have no right to due process! Hang 'em out to dry!

[Hauptman]

Obviously a bunch of goat-herding peasants who get rounded up by bounty hunters and turned over to US troops for a cash reward are 100% guilty and have no right to due process! Hang 'em out to dry!

What I want is a clarification of who we're at war with, and under what circumstances that war will end.

I mean the whole confusion here is that the president gets all sorts of war powers as commander-in-chief when war is declared. In Afghanistan it appears we're at war with the Taliban who were defacto gov't of the country. So does that mean any Taliban fighters captured are prisoners of war?

So when the official war end, what happens to the so-called "war on terror"? If there is not an official war in progress, do the war powers of the president go away? If they go away don't all terrorists get dealt with in civilian courts because the military doesn't have jurisdiction if there is no declaration of war?

I certainly don't like the rampant expansion of presidential powers. The "imperial" presidency is definitely not what our founders envisioned.

[Inquartata]

Well--in part because of the efforts of those Al-Queda sympathizing lawyers--now they can't just be locked away forever just on the Government's say-so, without access to a court.

Forgive me...was that an answer to the questions I actually asked?

Obviously a bunch of goat-herding peasants who get rounded up by bounty hunters and turned over to US troops for a cash reward

Yes...that's all that happened.

Damn you, Yankee imperialism!

[Philistine]

Forgive me...was that an answer to the questions I actually asked?

Were they really serious questions? Really?

But treating them as such, yes it was an answer. To the first one, at least. To put it more seriously, the Courts have held--contrary to the Government's initial position--that the detainees are, in fact, entitled to counsel--and cannot be held in a legal limbo in which so long as the executive branch merely asserts they are terrorists or "enemy combatants", they have no ability to make any challenge to the basis of their detention--including the assertion itself.

These court rulings came about in no small part because of the efforts of those like "the Al Queda 7."

Beyond the fact that I don't actually see any "there" there--as the DOJ hires lots and lots of lawyers who are involved in actively litigating against it before their hire--I think the ad's focus on these lawyers sharing Al Queda's values and as terrorist sympathizers is well-beyond the pale, to say the least.

--Philistine

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Rachel Maddow Makes Fun of Liz Cheney.

[phillipmj]

Give poor Liz a break. Whether by nurture or nature, it was probably impossible to grow up sane in the Cheney household.

[Inquartata]

But treating them as such, yes it was an answer. To the first one, at least. To put it more seriously, the Courts have held--contrary to the Government's initial position--that the detainees are, in fact, entitled to counsel

Meh, but I was commenting specifically on "Did she forget about that tricky thing called due process?" and the whole complex of sentiment behind it, not just on whether they should get attorneys or not...unless that is the entirety of "due process"?

I think the ad's focus on these lawyers sharing Al Queda's values and as terrorist sympathizers is well-beyond the pale, to say the least.

--Philistine

Perhaps, but I was not remarking on the ad.

[fencerchica]

Obviously a bunch of goat-herding peasants who get rounded up by bounty hunters and turned over to US troops for a cash reward are 100% guilty and have no right to due process! Hang 'em out to dry!

Yes...that's all that happened.

You really need these dots connected for you? Seriously? The point of due process is to sort out the innocent from the guilty. Or would you like to get picked up by the police for being around the corner from a burglary and then told you don't deserve due process because the police pick up bad guys too? The hell?