Leahy is the most anti-America senator in D.C. His acts on the Judicial Comm. are a disgrace to this country. Please contact your representatives and complain long and loud.

The writer is a commentator and host of a nationally broadcast radio talk show.

That's the understatement of the year!

Leahy is American?? Not by his actions!!

You mean "Leaky Leahy" ?

Past FR article on "Leaky Leahy"

OLD "LOOSE LIPS" LEAHY

Just proves you should never give up!

Congrats!

"The most un-American Senator?" I don't think so. My nominee is that famous author -- you know, the one who wrote a book about "It takes a Village" or something like that. Darn! Why can't I remember her name? She is a Senator from Grenich Village, yah, she is from New York, sort of.

Great to see you in print, Rush!

"The media" has long needed your writing perspective!

Thanks for providing documentation on how the liberals have made Swiss Cheese out of our Justice System during most of the last century.

The Military Tribunal System should provide an excellent example of how swift justice can be easily restored to our ruined-by-liberals Justice System.

You are so right - I say we vote both of them top winners as the most un-American senators...........but wait, there's Dasshole, Jeffers, etc., etc.,etc. Oh, the H*LL with it, let's nominate the entire DNC!!!!

Your link didn't come through so I couldn't read the whole article, so I may be missing something.

My understanding of the FDR case is that a military tribunal was used to try 6 Nazi spies that were landed in the US via submarine. The primary difference between that and what is going on now, is that these were spies from a country that we had officially declared war on (congress declared war on Germany as provided for in the constitution).

If you want a more accurate comparison you should look to the internment of Japanese-Americans which is generally agreed to have been a mistake.

You are so right - I say we vote both of them top winners as the most un-American senators...........but wait, there's Dasshole, Jeffers, etc., etc.,etc. Oh, the H*LL with it, let's nominate the entire DNC!!!!

I demand dishonorable mention for paul wellstone. He should make the top five easily.

I'm against the military tribunals myself. A liberal friend of mine was going on and on about how unconstitutional
they are, etc, etc. I merely turned to her and said "That's what happens when you treat it as a living, breathing document."

Left her speechless.

If we have a living, breathing constitution that means whatever we want it to at the time why did we set up a process to change it? Try to write a "Constitutional Amendment" to justify hate crimes laws or affirmative action or a thousand other federal laws, it can't be done.

The primary difference between that and what is going on now, is that these were spies from a country that we had officially declared war on (congress declared war on Germany as provided for in the constitution).

If you want a more accurate comparison you should look to the internment of Japanese-Americans which is generally agreed to have been a mistake.

No. The Japanese involved were generally Americans. Bush has not suggested extending this to Americans. As to War, it was declared on us and inflicted on us. Declaring war is only neccessary to curtail American rights. Congress explicitly and clearly called on the President to prosecute those responsible for the terrorist attacks. Trials are lesser than blowing them to bits or shooting them.

Congress explicitly and clearly called on the President to prosecute those responsible for the terrorist attacks

They didn't call for him to bypass the judicial process and use miltary tribunals.

They didn't call for him to bypass the judicial process and use miltary tribunals.

Wrong question. The authority for military trials has been there, but since we haven't been attacked on our shores it hasn't been exercised in a while. It's not a bypassing, it's a not relenquishing control. The danger isn't the one stated, but rather the blurring of the lines between POWs and war-criminals - although the various conventions do not protect attackers who are not in uniform.

This is not a case of individuals committing civil crimes. This is of a substantial external military organization, with the support of various external governments launching a military attack, and committing numerous war-crimes.

He also forgot which are the Great Lakes.

Apparently congrees disagrees with you as they have already sheduled hearings on the issue.

See-- http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/579657/posts

>>They didn't call for him to bypass the judicial process and use miltary tribunals.<<

"Bypass the judicial process"? It IS a legitimate, functional, and often-used judicial process.

Seems you've bit into the boob-bait-for-the-Bubbas.

Apparently congrees disagrees with you as they have already sheduled hearings on the issue.

Interesting logical leap. Hearings suggest a formed opinion?

It IS a legitimate, functional, and often-used judicial process.

I disagree. Give examples, where it has been used in this way to this extent.