Turley: Obama ‘crossed the line’ by predicting Khalid Mohammed death sentence

By David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Thursday, November 19th, 2009 -- 11:04 am
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

khalidmohammed Turley: Obama crossed the line by predicting Khalid Mohammed death sentenceThe Obama's administration's decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other alleged 9/11 plotters in New York City has sparked a great number of heated expressions of offense from Republicans -- and may now have landed President Obama in legal hot water.

Obama defended his decision on Wednesday by telling MSNBC's Chuck Todd, "I don't think it will be offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him." When Todd expressed surprise at the remark, Obama hastily corrected himself, insisting, "What I said was people will not be offended if that's the outcome. I'm not pre-judging it."

Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley chuckled over Obama's predicament on MSNBC's Countdown, telling substitute host Lawrence O'Donnell, "He certainly came across as the Queen of Hearts, calling for a sentence first and a verdict later."

"He knows that's a problem," Turley went on, more seriously. "The great irony is that in defending this noble decision of his to give a fair trial to these men, he then crossed the line and is likely to be cited by the feds that it's not quite so fair."

The Obama administration has been fairly cavalier so far in brushing off the possibility that any of the defendants might be found innocent. According to Attorney General Eric Holder, ""I would not have authorized the bringing of these prosecutions unless I thought that the outcome -- in the outcome we would ultimately be successful."

Story continues below...

Last summer, however, press secretary Robert Gibbs responded to a question about a possible not-guilty verdict in a non-9/11 terrorism trial by saying, "We will talk about what happens about a verdict when a verdict comes." A few weeks later, an administration representative announced that the US might continue to hold terrorism detainees who posed a "threat" indefinitely, even if they were found non-guilty.

O'Donnell went on to note that some Republicans seem to be overly eager not to offend al Qaeda in any way that could goad them to retaliate. "If Republicans really want to do whatever will be the least offensive approach ... why not just set Khalid Sheikh Mohammed free?" he asked sarcastically.

"I find that the most amazing line of rhetoric," Turley laughed. "If you really want to make al Qaeda mad, then don't be a hypocrite. ... Show that we brought one of their members to the rule of law and applied it fairly."

Turley also contrasted current Republican outrage with President John Adams' pride in having provided the legal defense for British soldiers who had killed American rioters in the Boston Massacre of 1770. "It makes you wonder, when you listen to these critics, whether we weren't a better people when we had less power but more principles," Turley concluded.

This video is from MSNBC's Countdown, broadcast Nov. 18, 2009.



Download video via RawReplay.com

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

Tags: ,
Story comments are below...

  • damixaustex
    If Mohammed gets off or the case thrown out due to process issues, like illegal torture or being held without charges, will people blame Obama/Biden/Holder or Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft?
  • chabuka
    I suspect if you saw Obama walking on water...you would gloat and say he was walking on the water because he "can't swim" (like white folks can)
  • damixaustex
    Not quite sure what you mean.
    Do people walk on water? I've never seen it so I have no idea how I'd react.
  • zogtheobvious
    One of the reasons we're Democrats is because we feel that dissent is patriotic. I'm not sure what to think of the way some folks handle the anti-Obama dissent. Some of the reactions are so over the top I have to occasionally check and make sure I didn't wander into a right-wing blog by mistake. I myself go back and forth on my opinion of Obama- I'm not totally impressed with the "Change" so far....

    ...but having said that, your comment was goddamn funny and made me spill my pop. :)


    edited for grammerr ;)
  • Elim
    Zog, I think some of the posters here (or a lot, I'm not sure) are disaffected Dems and Repubs, mostly Dems, who advocate a third party being allowed in our politics. When you hear anti-Obama dissent, I wouldn't assume that it's Repubs or conservatives who are voicing that dissent.
  • zogtheobvious
    Well, yea, but that's my point. That's what my comment was aimed at--I'm talking about the Democrats who dissent against Obama, and the people who rip into them for doing so. There have been some incredibly over-the-top reactions to dissent in here, yet some of those same people were angry (rightly so) when THEY were called unpatriotic when they wanted to dissent against Bush.
  • Elim
    Maybe this is the purpose of having these guys in civilian court, to further undermine Obama and his administration. I've heard that this is an ongoing operation, to discredit and undermine him as much as possible, so when he is removed (I won't speculate here as to how, exactly) most people won't be too sorry, or outraged, to see him go.
  • anarchisto
    Obama is now an integral player in the grand 911 attack hoax perpetrated on the world.
    Like Bush before him he runs his mouth and the Freudian slips blurt out.
    Most of us are aware that 911 was an inside job and that intelligence agencies from several countries were aware of the plan and surely had parts play.
    Wall St. and the military industrial complex were the big beneficiaries and the jobs not finished yet.
    The global financial collapse is the coup de grace in this elaborate scheme that may reduce the USA to third world status.
    The end game is to shift as much power and wealth to the world oligarchs while they vie for their piece of the pie as the world is carved up in Bilderburg meetings and such.
    Let's hope KSM gets a stateside show trial where bits of the truth may come out.
  • martydidier
    Obama and others within the Administration as well many others linked to the huge criminal system within our Federal Government have got to be worried about what is happening. They seem to be nervous....

    Plus what if the Gitmo prisoners are tried and not found to be the ones who MasterMinded 911? Also, there are many scandal stories leading up to them even coming over for the trial so when the ending fails the issues leading up to the failure will bring down many more.

    How I know about 911 and who were involved is because I was in a family for more than 26 years who were directly supporting those involved with doing 911. While in the family during the 90's 911 wasn't a secret at all. Everyone in the family were told and retold over and over. Plus it was known that many others outside the family and their families knew too.

    Marty Didier
    Northbrook, IL
  • Elim
    I disagree with them being worried about KSM and his co-defendants saying anything that could be harmful to the government. If that were so, Obama and Holder would have made the case that it would be best for these "terrorists" to have a military tribunal, and that's what they'd be getting. For some reason, they've decided it would be better to have a civilian trial, and they're not concerned with what is revealed. They should be, so I have to assume they already have a plan in place to keep them from speaking it, or to keep us from finding out about it. Perhaps the same way they kept us from finding out what Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols said during their trials, or what the alleged Saddam said during his.
  • martydidier
    Thanks for the reply... However there are a few things you aren't aware of which later is expected to surface. What I can tell you is that there are many levels to this. One level as an example fits will with many people's understanding. But there is a higher level that fits with the power players who have a lot to loose and are worried. Again I know this because the family I was in were directly involved with supporting those running 911. I was told in detail about many operations and setups planned before 911 and after 911. 911 was to be a kickoff point that would be the beginning of a series of chained events. Watch as more surfaces!

    Need I say more?

    Marty Didier
    Northbrook, IL
  • donofcali
    Let me paraphrase: "He'll get a fair trial before the hanging".

    Is there any evidence against this guy that was not obtained through torture? I doubt it. He probably knows less about what went on during 911 than we do. But make no mistake, whether he's proven guilty or not, he'll either be executed or imprisoned forever.
  • Elim
    He'll be executed to shut him up, and any mention of torture will be scrubbed from the transcripts, if we're ever allowed to see them. Maybe they'll use some legal maneuver to keep the defense and the prosecution from mentioning it, in the same way at the trials of holocaust revisionists are not allowed to introduce evidence that most of the assertions about it are lies.
  • chillwinston
    Holder should not be lambasted for his remarks. Isn't he just being a prosecutor? Now if a judge or Obama says it, I would surely correct them.
  • Satan
    U.S. presidents cause the murders of innocent people every day, every week and it's been going on for years and years, the only people that would disagree are all of the propaganda outlets like MSNBC and FOX and all of their minions. Obama can burn in hell.

    A least this article isn't another about Carrie Preajan (she's so not gay) and Sarah Palin.
  • marxymcliberalson
    I heard him say this. I don't know if I'd say he "hastily corrected himself" I think it was more elaboration. IN CONTEXT the question was about trying KM in NY. And the answer was when he's found guilty I don't think anyone will have a problem with it. There's no there there. What? The guy can't have an opinion on a case? If you asked a thousand people 999 will say they think he will be found guilty and sentenced to death. I don't understand the problem.
  • Elim
    If you're an everyday American citizen, it's perfectly OK to say you think KSM will be found guilty after a fair trial. If you're the President, you don't say that, anymore than you would say that as KSM's defense attorney. Obama was not speaking as a private citizen. He was speaking as the President of the United States, and he should not have said that.
  • stormy7
    Does anybody really believe this man or any Muslim could get a fair trial anywhere in the USA? Obama tries so hard to have balls.
  • Phil E. Drifter
    Oops.

    On another note, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed looks like he's doing his Nick Nolte 'famous mugshot' impression.

    Kill the dude, let him think he's a martyr. He's in for a big surprise when he finds out there's no afterlife and no 72 virgins, and no coming back.
  • lorn
    And some day phalusdrifter, you will wake up and realize all the American politicians you respect trust and believe are actually the ones responsible for 911. You will break down and cry, and feel stupid for having believed the absurd Bush conspiracy theory involving 19 Arabs. You will hate Bush for doing it and you will hate Obama for covering it up.

    You are in for a big surprise when you find out the 911 fairytale is as true as the 72 virgins story. Both are such obvious lies, only an idiot could believe either one.
blog comments powered by Disqus