000000President Bush's controversial guidelines for trying

The NY Daily News ^ | MONDAY JANUARY 07 2002 | By the Editorial Staff specializing in Prevarication.

[vannrox]

By THOMAS M. DeFRANK

Daily News Washington Bureau Chief

Retreat On
Military Tribunals
After uproar, White House
to ease terror trial rules

WASHINGTON

The tribunals uproar, which officials close to the President downplay, is attributed to legal sloppiness, inadequate White House consultation with Justice Department and Pentagon lawyers, and hubris arising from stratospheric approval ratings for the President's handling of the terror war.

"They have shot themselves in the foot several times," said David Scheffer, the Clinton administration's ambassador at large for war-crimes issues.

"They rolled out [tribunals] as if they were the primary option instead of an exceptional option. Then they didn't provide enough detail on how they planned to deal with fundamental due-process protections."

Another source, closely allied with the White House,(not specified) agreed with that assessment, saying Bush's original order was so poorly drafted and received, "It's hard to find anyone who says, 'I wrote it.'"

The administration has moved quickly to control damage from the self-inflicted wound. Some of the likely changes to the tribunal regulations — outlined in a strategic leak from a well-placed government official(not specified) late last month — have defused much of the criticism from human-rights groups, legal experts and (liberal)congressional watchdogs.

The final regulations, which will require unanimous death-penalty verdicts and mandatory appeals, are scheduled to be released by the Pentagon this month.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is described as a strong moderating influence inside the government. Over the Christmas holidays he signed off on several key portions of the regulations governing how Bush's "military commissions" will operate — but bounced several others as needing more work.

Though some critics still worry some of the language is too vague, the makeover of Bush's rules has generally been well-received. "It goes some of the distance toward alleviating concerns," said attorney Eugene Fidell, director of the National Institute of Military Justice, referring to details contained in the well-timed leak.

Two leading congressional critics, Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), already have said they're encouraged by such reports.

An official involved in the tribunals review said the administration was "surprised by the depth and scope of the reaction" and has scaled back some of Bush's harsher provisions to make the plan more palatable to critics.

Under Bush's initial order, non-U.S. citizens charged with terrorism could have been convicted — and sentenced to death — by a two-thirds vote of military tribunals.

Evidentiary standards were looser too — the "beyond a reasonable doubt" test for conviction was reduced to evidence that has "probative value to a reasonable person." And there was no provision for appealing a sentence.

Leaked portions of the draft regulations are more in keeping with federal court standards. Terrorist defendants would be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, a unanimous verdict would be needed to impose the death penalty and a three-judge panel, possibly including retired civilian judges, would hear appeals of all convictions.

[vannrox]

LIBERAL BULL MANURE. Comb the article. The entire text of the article is based on hearsay. It is mostly peppered with a stong dosage of media bias trying in a vain attempt to make the liberal position to be greater than what it is.


Notice also that they minimized what has been released as not-important. From what I gather, the Bush proposal is about 80 percent intact, with only a few odds and ends that need to be clarified. This article is pure demo-media-crap.

"...000000President Bush's controversial guidelines for trying terrorists by military tribunals are being significantly softened ..."

Significantly? Where? All they rely on is rumor. This is a military matter. And demorats can't possibly understand what is involved.

[Mudboy Slim]

"They have shot themselves in the foot several times," said David Scheffer, the Clinton administration's ambassador at large for war-crimes issues. "

ROFLMAO!! Nice source...Mr. Scheffer was complicit with the Kosovo Slaughtero of Innocents and he talks of this Administration having "...shot themselves in the foot several times." I say we invite Mr. Scheffer to testify before a House Sub-committee hearing on Terrorism and ask why the past Adminsitration allowed bin Laden's Murderous Thugs to go unfettered despite their bombing of the World Trade Center, the US Emabassies, and the USS Cole!!

SHEEEESH...the PUNK's a War Criminal!!

FReegards...MUD

[caisson71]

The democraps are looking for anything, anything to bring down the Bush administration. If this sticks and the mainstream media falls in line, this event will be one of the issues the democraps will use to battle Bush's high job approval ratings. If this issue doesn't have legs, they'll find something else. Bush's "compassionate conservatism" will be standing in the middle of a firing range wearing a red coat.

[Cicero]

Clinton, Blair, and Schroeder are the worst war criminals the world has seen since the Nuremberg Trials. And this guy was one of clinton's enablers. Special Ambassador for War Crime Cover-Ups would be a more accurate title.

[Mudboy Slim]

"Special Ambassador for War Crime Cover-Ups would be a more accurate title."

Agreed...this guy ought be doing his interview from a Prison Cell!! The chutzpah of the EffeteEliteLeft is nothing short of breath-taking.

FReegards...MUD