THE JUDGE

I almost never disagree with WTC-1 Prosecutor Andy McCarthy, but…

Obama may make a terrible decision, he may make a good one, or he may do something in between. But in any event, it was entirely reasonable for him to ask for a four-month time-out — which was done in a very respectful manner that did not in any way denigrate the dignity of the military tribunals. He is still getting his national security team in place and getting them the clearances they need to get up to speed on all the relevant facts, many of which are no doubt highly classified. He is, moreover, the President of the United States and the commander-in-chief of our military forces in a time of war.

So was George W. Bush. And Obama kicked him in the nuts every chance he could. For example: “The court’s decision is a rejection of the Bush administration’s attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantanamo.”

The judge, Army Col. James Pohl, who is also the chief military judge at Guantanamo Bay, asserted that he found the the government’s arguments for delay “unpersuasive,” and thus reasoned that “the public interest in a speedy trial will be harmed by the delay in the arraignment.” That’s nonsense. …Pohl also wrote, “The Commission is unaware of how conducting an arraignment would preclude any option by the administration,” and that “Congress passed the military commissions act, which remains in effect. The Commission is bound by the law as it currently exists, not as it may change in the future.” This, too, is just silly. The administration is not claiming that the Military Commissions Act is bad law…”

Really? Obama: “As president, I will close Guantanamo, reject the Military Commissions Act, and adhere to the Geneva Conventions.” Sounds like he’s claiming it’s bad law–so bad he can simply reject a signed act of Congress. And just for the record, under the Conventions, we can summarily execute these moral pirates. Geneva signatories agreed to treat each others’ prisoners decently. But why would rogue actors ever sign if they are automatically given the benefits without any of the obligations?

However inadvertently, Col. Pohl is just giving President Obama more reason to think there are better ways to deal with detainees than a system that denies abundantly sensible motions — and in which Osama bin Laden’s personal bodyguard, arrested in possession of missiles intended for shooting at U.S. troops, gets sentenced to a grand total of six months on a war crimes conviction (which is what happened in the first commission trial).

That was an outrage, alright. And so is the fact that so many parolees have returned to jihad. But I don’t hear Obama calling for a 120-day time out on paroles. Besides, anything Obama does will be easier, not harder, on these killers.

This judge is absolutely right. It was liberals who dragged this war into court and liberals on the court who mandated this whole system–and now they don’t like it? Tough.

In their mad zeal and power lust, Obama and his pals have demagogued and smeared everyone at Gitmo, including this judge. They didn’t give him or anyone else at Gitmo the benefit of the doubt–except for the prisoners, of course. But now they’re somehow entitled to the benefit of the doubt that they denied to everyone else? I don’t think so.

I’m on safer ground with Mr. McCarthy here; we both oppose Eric Holder’s nomination and hope Michael Steele shows some steel.

At Pres. Clinton’s pleasure, Holder freed two Weathermen terrorists. He was up to his neck in Hillary’s Pardon Swap, freeing Puerto Rican terrorists for votes. And his law firm is representing 18 Gitmo terrorists.

That would make Holder the first Atty. General in our history who had spent more time freeing terrorists, excusing terrorists, pardoning terrorists and defending terrorists than prosecuting them! But such is the upside-down logic of Obama-land.

Nor will he outright promise not to prosecute interrogators who relied on Justice Dept. guidance. In other words, if you asked an Atty. Gen. Holder his legal opinion and followed it, he might prosecute you years later if the political winds shifted…for following his own advice!

C’mon, Eric; just pretend the interrogators are terrorists and cut ‘em some slack!

McCarthy nails it here:

“…[L]eadership has to start embracing these important battles, not ducking them. There was an embarrassment of riches to exploit on Holder, Geithner and Hillary Clinton. …Fighting is how you tell people who you are, and even if you don’t win it makes you stronger down the road.”

When Democrats were out of power, they did two things; they demagogued and they fought.

We can’t demagogue, but we’d better show up to the fight; everything we believe in is under assault. People have to hear the argument even if we don’t win it today.

One day we will win it…but only if we fight.