Backpedaling on KSM Trial?

Newsweek's Michael Isikoff claims that the KSM trial in NYC may not necessarily go forward:

Top administration officials are getting nervous that they may not be able to proceed with one of their most controversial national-security moves: trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other accused 9/11 conspirators in federal court in New York City. Last November Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. portrayed the trial as a way to showcase the American justice system to the world—and to accelerate President Obama's stalled plans to shut down the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay. But because of shifting political winds in Congress, the trial is now "potentially in jeopardy," a senior official, who did not want to be named talking about a sensitive situation, tells NEWSWEEK. The chief concern: that Republicans will renew attempts to strip funding for the trial and, in the aftermath of the bombing attempt aboard Northwest Flight 253, pick up enough support from moderate Democrats to prevail.

Part of the shifting political winds includes the election of Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts, which occurred after this blog entry was published. Brown opposes giving civilian trials to captured terrorists.

CNN Anchor Blasts Ft. Hood Report

CNN's Jack Cafferty used to be one of the Bush administration's most vociferous critics. Lately, Democrat leaders in Washington have become the subject of his wrath. In this clip, he calls the Pentagon's 86-page report on the Ft. Hood shooting rampage a joke and a politically correct whitewash:

Christmas Day Bomber and Bureaucratic Bungling

It's incredible that this proposed legislation is even necessary, but as the saying goes, it is what it is:

Senator Susan Collins, R-Me., Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, introduced legislation Thursday to require that U.S. intelligence officials be consulted following a foreign terrorist’s detention by the United States.

The legislation would address a serious error that occurred in the handling of the so-called Christmas Day terrorist, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was charged in civilian criminal court.

At a Homeland Security Committee meeting Wednesday, Senator Collins learned during her questioning of witnesses that none of the three top U.S. intelligence officials had been consulted about that important decision. The determination to place Abdulmutallab into the U.S. civilian court system was made without their input or knowledge.

Senator Collins said this mistake “may have prevented the collection of valuable intelligence about future terrorist threats to the United States. Frankly, I was stunned to learn that the decision to place the captured terrorist into the U.S. civilian criminal court system had been made without the input or the knowledge of any of those three top intelligence officials:the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, and the Secretary of Homeland Security."

“These officials were never consulted by the Department of Justice. The decision was made without them.”

Administration Panel: 25% Of Gitmo Detainess Too Dangerous To Release

A committee made up of officials from the Justice Department, Defense Department, DHS, State Department, and CIA and FBI has determined that some detainees must stay locked up for the duration:

A Justice Department-led task force has concluded that nearly 50 of the 196 detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should be held indefinitely without trial under the laws of war, according to Obama administration officials.

The task force's findings represent the first time that the administration has clarified how many detainees it considers too dangerous to release but unprosecutable because officials fear trials could compromise intelligence-gathering and because detainees could challenge evidence obtained through coercion.

Human rights advocates have bemoaned the administration's failure to fulfill President Obama's promise last January to close the Guantanamo Bay facility within a year as well as its reliance on indefinite detention, a mechanism devised during George W. Bush's administration that they deem unconstitutional.

[Source: Washington Post]

Even Before Being Sworn In, Senator Brown Notches First Victory

Nancy Pelosi concedes:

The leader of the House of Representatives said Thursday she lacks the votes to push the Senate's sweeping health overhaul bill through the House, a potentially devastating blow to President Barack Obama's top domestic priority issue.

...Pelosi said, "In its present form without any changes I don't think it's possible to pass the Senate bill in the House, adding "I don't see the votes for it at this time."

[NBC]

Mr. Brown Goes To Washington: There Is A New Sheriff In Town

Congratulations to Scott Brown on his stunning victory in the Massachusetts Special Senate election. The march towards socialism has been stopped in its tracks. And far as homeland security, this is what the Senator-elect said in his acceptance speech:

And let me say this, with respect to those who wish to harm us, I believe that our Constitution and laws exist to protect this nation - they do not grant rights and privileges to enemies in wartime. In dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them.

Immediate fallout of the Brown victory: Obama's flawed nominee to head the Transportation Safety Administration, Erroll Southers, has withdrawn his name from consideration.

Will The Machine Stall Scott Brown's Certification

Should Scott Brown win tomorrow's Massachusetts special election, Democrats may delay the legal "certification" of his victory. One problem with that scenario--it may be unconstitutional:

Appointed Senator Paul Kirk will lose his vote in the Senate after Tuesday’s election in Massachusetts of a new senator and cannot be the 60th vote for Democratic health care legislation, according to Republican attorneys.

Kirk has vowed to vote for the Democratic bill even if Republican Scott Brown is elected but not yet certified by state officials and officially seated in the Senate. Kirk’s vote is crucial because without the 60 votes necessary to stop a Republican filibuster, the bill will be defeated.

This would be a devastating loss for President Obama and congressional Democrats. The bill, dubbed ObamaCare, is the centerpiece of the president’s agenda. Brown has campaigned on becoming the 41st vote against ObamaCare.

But in the days after the election, it is Kirk’s status that matters, not Brown’s. Massachusetts law says that an appointed senator remains in office “until election and qualification of the person duly elected to fill the vacancy.” The vacancy occurred when Senator Edward Kennedy died in August. Kirk was picked as interim senator by Governor Deval Patrick.

Democrats in Massachusetts have talked about delaying Brown’s “certification,” should he defeat Democrat Martha Coakley on Tuesday. Their aim would be to allow Kirk to remain in the Senate and vote the health care bill.

But based on Massachusetts law, Senate precedent, and the U.S. Constitution, Republican attorneys said Kirk will no longer be a senator after election day, period. Brown meets the age, citizenship, and residency requirements in the Constitution to qualify for the Senate. “Qualification” does not require state “certification,” the lawyers said.

[WeeklyStandard.com]