Conservatives ’sit out’ NYC trials protest despite calls by Liz Cheney, Gingrich and Rove

By Daniel Tencer
Wednesday, November 18th, 2009 -- 2:50 pm
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

statueofliberty911darksmoke Conservatives sit out NYC trials protest despite calls by Liz Cheney, Gingrich and RoveAn effort by several prominent Republicans to rally opposition to Attorney General Eric Holder's plan to bring five accused 9/11 plotters to the US for trial apparently fell flat Wednesday.

Despite efforts by former Bush White House adviser Karl Rove, former House Majority Leader Newt Gingrich and Liz Cheney, daughter of the former vice president, no protest erupted outside the chamber of the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday morning as Holder arrived to explain his decision to try the accused plotters, including alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in a Manhattan courtroom.

"No such message was delivered on Wednesday morning," writes Nick Baumann at Mother Jones. "When Holder arrived at the committee room in the Dirksen Building, there were no demonstrators, no angry mob."

While Baumann states that "some 9/11 relatives who oppose trying KSM in New York were in the house," other news sources suggested the opposition was somewhat more fierce.

"Relatives of Sept. 11 victims turned out in force Wednesday to oppose Holder's decision," reported USA Today.

Story continues below...

But Baumann's description of the hearing -- plenty of available seating, no "throng of irate citizens" -- suggests the Republicans' efforts fell far short of expectations.

Bush administration strategist Karl Rove sent out a call for a protest on Monday. "Don't sit out: 9:30am 11/18 Dirksen Senate Bldg Rm G-50 to oppose Atty Gen's testimony on trying terrorists on US soil," he wrote on Twitter.

On Tuesday, Liz Cheney's new conservative pressure group, Keep America Safe, sent out a similar Tweet. "Join Keep America Safe at 9:30am Wed at Dirksen Senate Bldg to protest Holder's testimony," the group stated. That was quickly echoed by Gingrich, who wrote: Join Keep America Safe at 9:30am Wed at Dirksen Senate Bldg to protest Holder's testimony on bringing terrorists to US."

That was enough to bring some opponents of the Obama administration's decision to Capitol Hill, as USA Today reported:

"I don't have a clear understanding about why it has to be in New York," Peter Regan, 28, whose father, New York City firefighter Donald Regan, 57, was killed in the attacks, said before the hearing. "There is no reason it has to be in New York. It gives them the biggest stage to do what they want to do.

"They are being given the rights of American citizens. They aren't American citizens. They never will be American citizens."

Alice Hoagland, whose son, Mark Bingham, was killed on Flight 93, said she was "sorry our attorney general was not brave enough" to try the Sept. 11 planners in military court. "The logical place is a military venue," Hoagland says.

In the face of some opposition to his plans, President Barack Obama has sounded a tougher note on the accused 9/11 plotters. The president made a rare foray into an ongoing judicial process, predicting on Wednesday that Mohammed would be convicted and would face the death penalty, the Associated Press reported.

Asked about opposition to the New York trial venue, Obama reportedly said: "I don't think it would be offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him."

And Holder suggested that prosecutors in the case may be willing to accept a guilty plea from Mohammed. Mohammed had attempted to plead guilty before a military tribunal in 2008, but the Justice Department blocked his efforts.

Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee his department would be willing to accept a guilty plea, in order to move the case forward faster, The Hill reports.

While Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor who saw the city through the 9/11 attacks, opposes the New York trials, current Mayor Michael Bloomberg has said he sees it as "fitting" that the trials should take place near the site where the vast majority of 9/11 victims died.

Share this article:
  • Print
  • email
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Story comments are below...

  • BlueSun
    Cheney and Rove should get down on their knees every night and give thanks to whatever god or gods they believe in that they, themselves, are not sitting in the dock in orange jumpsuits charged with treason, war crimes, and crimes against humanity - not to mention breaking so many U.S. Federal statutes and Constitutional prohibitions that space concerns prevent a comprehensive listing of them here.

    One of the most important principles to come out of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunals was the idea that an unprovoked unilateral attack on a sovereign nation that is not actively threatening you is the most severe war crime and crime against humanity of them all. That was true of Hitler manufacturing the case that Czechoslovakia, the Sudetenland, and Poland were threats that justified invasions.

    It is just as true of Cheney and Rove manufacturing the case that Iraq was a threat that justified our invasion.
  • BlueSun
    Cheney and Rove should get down on their knees every night and give thanks to whatever god or gods they believe in that they, themselves, are not sitting in the dock in orange jumpsuits charged with treason, war crimes, and crimes against humanity - not to mention breaking so many U.S. Federal statutes and Constitutional prohibitions that space concerns prevent a comprehensive listing of them here.

    One of the most important principles to come out of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunals was the idea that an unprovoked unilateral attack on a sovereign nation that is not actively threatening you is the most severe war crime and crime against humanity of them all. That was true of Hitler manufacturing the case that Czechoslovakia, the Sudetenland, and Poland were threats that justified invasions.

    It is just as true of Cheney and Rove manufacturing the case that Iraq was a threat that justified our invasion.
  • GunTotinLiberal
    I’m not one for conspiracy theories, but the fact that these people, especially Rove, are so opposed to having this evidence heard in an open court does raise some flags. Their excuse has no logical basis. We try people charged with terrorism crimes all the time in court and have never suffered any retaliation for doing so. No right wingers sought revenge for putting Timothy McVeigh on trial, and no anti choice zealots have sought vengeance whenever a clinic shooter stood trial. Not only was there no backlash, but few even realize that just the other day the people connected to the plot targeting the Sears Tower in Chicago were sentenced. At the risk of sounding redundant, the Regressives are appearing simply irrational with fear.
  • RevolutionDynamo
    Why does the USA Today feel compelled to take comments to people whose only stake in this is that they lost a family member during the attacks. Why does that make their opinion any more qualified than anyone elses on the proper and legal venue to try a case?

    I'm sure the family of most victims would like to see the perpetrator tried under the most brutal and exacting conditions, and would be very dissapointed if the 'bad guy' got off on a technicality. However, this is the price we pay for living in a free society that respects the rule of law.

    If you don't like it, MOVE TO CHINA!
  • WJM51
    So after 8 years of completely fucking up everything they touched, these morons actually think ANYONE would show up because THEY said so? More proof that the republicans think you are as stupid as a human can be and still walk.

    You want to make a REAL dent in terrorism? Show these people that they will get treated like a human being, regardless of the violence they bring upon us. The ONE thing that really makes a difference is affording these people the rights that we SUPPOSEDLY live by. What we are doing now, and have done for 8 years, is proof to these people that we don't actually believe in what we preach to everyone else. Give people the rights that we swear they have thanks to God, and they turn around 180 degrees and start seeing us as something other than the "great satan". And all we have to do is live up to what we have always said we believe in.

    If you want to keep seeing people coming here to hurt us, all you have to do is to continue to deny these people their rights. The more we hold people without trials and torture them the more fodder for the terrorist's cannons WE provide. And for the life of me I will NEVER understand those who insist that fear is a good enough reason to throw away 200+ years of history, tradition, and our national identity. By allowing W and Cheney to get away with the most unAmerican types of behavior we bring more and more of this upon ourselves. Why we can't actually look at ourselves and see that we bring a lot of this kind of thing on ourselves is just beyond me. Cause and effect USED to be something they taught in schools. Apparently they DIDN'T when W, Cheney, Rove, and the rest of the republican "leadership" went to school, because they sure as hell never learned it.
  • brantl
    And these guys can be convicted, if they use the evidence that wasn't gathered by torture, like the Al Jazeera interview with KSM.
  • bayside1
    I expect they will fight tooth and nail to keep this from coming to trial , because they dont want the truth to come out..Its coming out anyway ,either by us or the hague. There is no limitations on genocide..........
  • damixaustex
    These jokers are out of touch and have miscalculated.
    People want this trial in NY and you can't convince them otherwise.
  • texasaggie
    "I don't have a clear understanding about why it has to be in New York,"

    Because those are the people who have been collecting evidence since the first Trade Center bombing and those are the people who have evidence untainted by anything that the Bushies did to coerce confessions.
  • aerows
    Rove and Cheney oppose it because they are afraid of what will come out during a public trial.
  • conservatve
    Why is Rove still a free man? When other criminals are awaiting trial, does the press publish their comments?
  • mrethiopianz
    The only reason what Karl, Cheney and Gnute want this is military court is because they can then control what evidence gets used and can then control the conviction, controlling the evidence will reduce any new questions being asked and again limit the American peoples knowledge of any wrong dong by the last administration, I imagine the military court would also stop the defendants of mentioning torture.

    Personally I think getting this out in public court could open up our knowledge of exactly what happened on 9/11, the fact that Cheney was running war games on the exact same day is unbelievable, the fact that the FBI did not close the seen and run a standard investigation, the fact that the scope of what the 9/11 commission reported on was not infarct all the information the government has on 9/11

    I want to know exactly what happened, and not wait 100 yeas like in the Kennedy assignation – utter BS
  • Hologram5
    That is good news. It shows that people aren't as stupid and the Cheney's and Rove thinks.
  • essar1
    EVERY story mentioning Giuliani should and has to mention the fact that he was cheerleading bringing to justice - in NYC, no less - the folks behind the '93 WTC bombing.

    And the actual LAW requires a trial in NYC. Case closed.
  • khudnut
    They don't really think it is un-safe or in-secure to have alleged terrorists tried in NewYork. They only think it is a cause celebre that they can use to undermine Obama. Nice to see their efforts fail.

    Having said that, it could still backfire on the administration. As has been stated by the likes of L. and R. Cheney, Rove, some Senators etc: the alleged terrorists could get off on technicalities. I in fact think it might be fairly easy for a decent defense lawyer to get them off, since all indications are they were tortured. It is a big political risk. It is not a National Security risk, per se.
blog comments powered by Disqus