<I>This Week</i>: Fred Thompson Muddies The Waters On SCOTUS Gitmo Decision
By Nicole Belle Saturday Jun 14, 2008 1:03pm
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t Heather)
This is what aggravates me so much about the Sunday "news" shows. There is so much lying and muddying of the waters so that the average American--who doesn't have the time to read judicial decisions--doesn't understand that the Supreme Court basically told the Bush administration that they are operating outside of the established laws of the country for the third time in the way that they are prosecuting their War on Terror™. Former Senator and indolent presidential contender Fred Thompson appeared on This Week with George Stephanopoulos to provide his "Law & Order"-honed gravitas to the false assertion (and GOP platform) that the recent Supreme Court decision saying that Guantanamo detainees have a right to habeas corpus is somehow destroying this country.
After years of trying to make the unitary executive a more powerful branch of the government, the GOP seems upset that the Court would remind them that new laws enacted would be subject to review by the judicial branch...that whole Constitution thing being more of a suggestion than a system of government, apparently. Thompson claims that our laws are more liberal as they ever have been, which is odd, considering that the ones they sought to strike have been in place since the founding of the country. In fact, referencing Marbury v. Madison (1803), Justice Kennedy wrote: *
(T)he writ of habeas corpus is itself an indispensable mechanism for monitoring the separation of powers. The test for determining the scope of this provision must not be subject to manipulation by those whose power it is designed to restrain.
But I guess it's too much to ask for a Republican to actually respect the Constitution.
Transcripts below the fold
*Corrected to properly attribute quote
STEPHANOPOULOS: You heard Senator Edwards on the Guantanamo decision. You guys seem to be at polar opposites of this issue.
THOMPSON: Yes. Yes. Well, one of the things that my friend ignores is the fact that there is a procedure for hearings. There is a procedure that's more liberal than anything we've ever had in the history of this country, as far as foreign enemy combatants are concerned. And it winds up in the federal courts, as a matter of fact, under the process before the Supreme Court just did what it did.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But there's no guaranteed right to review for the detainees at Guantanamo right now, though, before the Supreme Court decision.
THOMPSON: Oh, yes. The federal circuit court, D.C. Circuit Court. That's where it winds up. That's where, when they go through the military procedure at Guantanamo, they have a right to appeal to that court. And it's been there for about two and a half years, and these petitioners have not availed themselves of it.
So Justice Roberts said in his dissent that this is the most liberal procedure that we've ever had in the history of the country, as far as wartime is concerned.
But what the court has done, in a nutshell, is to basically give access to our federal court system on a habeas corpus basis, the same rights as an American citizen would have. These are rights given to foreign enemy combatants and held in foreign territories in a time of war.
And not only is it erroneous, I think, of the reading of the Constitution and historical precedent, it's bad policy.
They've basically taken something that's been under the purview of the other two branches, elected branches of government, for all these years, and arrogated that to themselves. And it's bad for them and I think it's bad for the country.
STEPHANOPOULOS: We've never seen a situation quite like this before. We have a war where there's really no timeframe for it, and you have so many of these...
THOMPSON: Well, whose fault is that, George? I mean, the fact that the war's going on a long time, whose fault is that?
STEPHANOPOULOS: But in this situation, these combatants at Guantanamo don't have right for review unless they get that tribunal, and so many of them haven't gotten it.
THOMPSON: No, they're entitled to the tribunal, and that's what's being established now. Under the Hamdan decision that was recently handed down, the court basically said for an American citizen, for an American citizen, this tribunal, kind of tribunal system would be OK.
THOMPSON
Login or Register to post comments.
As Cliff Schecter details in his book The Real McCain, Mr. Straight Talk offered anything but in lauding what Congress had done in the Military Commissions Act. On September 28, 2006, McCain declared Geneva had been preserved after all:
It's no wonder the Washington Post took McCain to task in the fall of 2006 for his Orwellian double-speak:
For more details, see:
"McCain's Sins of Military Commission."
Fred Thompson -- I forgot he was still alive.
Fred was brought in to dump another truck load of crap on Sunday morning for the republican party. Who really cares about what he has to say, so why invite him on the show? I understand Brett Hume (sp?) was beside himself he was so upset over the court's decision. Wonder if any of these good folks could even define habeas corpus?
what else can you expect from scarbonopolis?
Fred Thompson looks like a zombie.
On the one hand the GOP wants to "spread democracy throughout the Middle East."
On the other, the GOP argues that the rights defined in the US Constitution apply ONLY to US citizens, and not to the "detainees" - most of whom are of Middle Eastern origin.
But of course this kind of hypocrisy is nothing new for the GOP.
This is the quote that highlights his douchebaggery:
"There is a procedure that’s more liberal than anything we’ve ever had in the history of this country, as far as foreign enemy combatants are concerned."
If you watch it, he pauses between "...of this country," and "as far as foreign enemy combatants are
concerned." Making it clear that what he says after the pause, qualifies what he said before the pause.
Seeing as how the enemy combatant status was just invented by the Bush admin, the argument is pretty fucking hollow isn't it?
Thompson's a good example of the brain dead republican. It's like he was frozen in time circa 1980 and hasn't had on original thought since. Personally a lot of republicans I know are in cults or zealousy religious.
Biggus Diggus @ 2:
Funny, that's what I thought when he was still in the GOP primary race.
Well, that is not so long ago for Freddy.
Who woke Freddy up anyway?
The right wing bozos are all whining about the Supreme Court's decision to restore Habeas Corpus. Their little fascist dreamworld is crashing down between them. Boo Hoo.
To say anything at odds with the pronouncements of walking zombie Fred Thompson would not be showing suitable respect for the (un)dead.
Biggus Diggus @ 2:
So did Fred's wife.
pissed off patricia @ 3:
FIFY
series100 @ 12:
They won't be whining when they are sitting in jail awaiting their court date.
This guy's got one of the most soporific voices you'll find anywhere. Wasn't he supposed to be a front runner for the republican nomination at some point? Man, how crappy was this year's crop of republican candidates if that was the case?
Republican's under fund education and hope the people are too stupid to know the truth but remain just smart enough to pull the lever for them on election year. We are in the modern dark ages.
Freddy says:
They have not availed themselves of it because they have not had the right ito habeas corpus fuckhead.
Mike Nehme @ 17:
The guy ran the second worst campaign just a little better than Rudy Giulliani.
.
If only Fred Thompson actually knew the Hamdan ruling...
... He would know that the Supreme Court said to NOT use military tribunals on US persons in captivity.
Fred must have been sleeping through that time period.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....
.
Mike Nehme @ 17:
The guy ran the second worst campaign just a little better than Rudy Giulliani. It was the "Call me Russert comes on" strategy.
What is really astonishing is that most polls show people SUPPORTING the decision. Guess people are on to the "Republicans hate America and the Constitution" bandwagon.
Why don't the Republicans just come out and say that The Constitution gets in the way of "The Global War On Terror?"
Just cut to the chase.
.
And George Stephanopoulos just sat there and blinked at Fred Thompson because...
... he's pretty?
.
Fred is not an authority on this subject because he slept in a Holiday Inn last night.
He is an expert on this because he plays a big D.A on law and order.
Timithy Mcviegh was served justice. But Mcviegh never had tortured confessions that would arise in question during his trial.
You have to remember as well, Fred disagreed as did the entire republican party(including a President) that although I Lewis (Scooter) Libby "inmate#28301-016" was found guilty on several charges. The strongly disagreed with the court and the Jury's decision of conviction.
Fed needs to go back to sleep. Why did Stepho wake him up?
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 16:
The 35 Articles of Impeachment brought by my political hero, Kucinich, are to be followed by 25 more. These will have no statute of limitations.
Probably why Bush bought that 100,000 acre ranch in Paraguay... no extradition agreement there.
Then Freddy goes on to say:
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court majority in the 70-page opinion. Scalia wrote a half paragraph that did not reference any law.
Freddy is not a lawyer but plays one on TV.
Why isn't anybody questioning Fred about the Magna Carta?
And why is everybody on this board so cocky about the ruling, when the court was so closely split on the decision? No one mentions the likely reversal as soon as the one more "conservative" judge is appointed.
fred fails to mention that the ability to go to court and be heard was continually blocked by republicans. bush has been avoiding the courts and constitution by having prisoners on foreign soil.the executive branch must bring in the congress and judiciary.....i don't dangerous/crime committing people released but i also don't want imprisoned for many years without the ability to challenge their detention.....i feel this was much about political postering and a strategy to continue the friction with certain arab factions....both candidates say they want to close gito so something has to happen...this is a sign of strength not weakness in my opinion
http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&It...
marykmusic @ 27:
Bush will also be able to get Dish network in Paraguay so that he will be able to watch his favorite cartoons.
Might I suggest the next time george wants to talk about a supreme court decision that he invite a constitutional lawyer to be his guest. Not some has-been actor who will carry the party line even if the line isn't attached to a damned thing.
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 28:
Curiously, Freddy is a lawyer.
karl @ 30:
I hate to say this karl but it looks like you have been celebrating Father's Day with a few Bloody Marys. lol
Why the hell would you have Fred Thompson on a -- supposed -- News Program to discuss a SCOTUS ruling? Is he a constitutional scholar? Did he even read the opinion. The guy was a personal injury lawyer and Republican shill. The court did not 'open hearings for all enemy combatants'. . . The court said you cannot hold citizens or liens for six years without access to an open system to justify their status. If the Bush administration would have classified these prisoners as POWs, there would be no issue; if the Bush administration had provided open and fair hearings, there would be no issue; if the Bush administration would have abided by Hamdan, there would have been no issue. Instead the Bush administration claimed regal authority to lock prisoners up with no review, no access to courts, no Geneva oversight, for as long as they wanted for whatever reason they wanted.
I really wonder what Fred, and his ilk, would claim if Clinton, or Obama made similar claims of executive authority.
Republicans ignore all laws unless it involves lying about a blowjob.
bob @ 33:
He must of missed the day in law school when they covered habeas corpus. Or maybe he was napping.
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 37:
Or maybe in Tennessee you get your law degree from a box of Fruit Loops.
krn @ 29:
cocky......?.....reversal i doubt that very much and when a different judge is going to be appointed.. maybe you know that i don't.. i'm aware of their ages but who knows.....this war is political and country is divided that might be a reflection of the close vote... partisan philosophies....if the prisoners can be proven to have committed a crime put them in jail until then let them contest their detention....hey i'm not smart but that seems reasonable to me
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 37:
I think he took the day off to wash and wax his little red pick-up truck.
And as we all know, "Arthur Branch" is America's supreme constitutional expert as compared to a guy who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago.
Please!
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 34:
hey if your a hater let it out.......i'm not too smart so anything you can teach me i'm all curious grey matter
They aren't actually considered enemy combatants. Just like someone accused of murder is not determined to be a murderer until they have been convicted of committing the act of murder. These are, I guess, more properly referred to as detainees. Detention without charge for six years would be something the US would raise holy hell about if these were Americans being held in some other country.
Three of the four who dissented were appointed by GW Bush (Roberts, Scalia, Alito), and the fourth (Thomas) by GHW Bush.
Thompson was a totally media created presidential entity, he was needed to feed the false nostalgia of "Morning in America" - but there was no there there anywhere- still ain't. He vaguely reminded the Reagan cult of their favorite actor/president - that's it.
Who would have guessed that McCain is the best actor among the three.
Thompson has been pissing on the concept of separation of powers for 35 years. Mr Law and Order was a traitorous whore who passed information to the Nixon administration while serving as counsel to the Senate Watergate investigation.
Richard Nixon on Fred Thompson:
" . . . the former president's most damning words for Fred Thompson came during a May 1973 conversation with then chief of staff Alexander Haig about concerns that the future senator wouldn't stand up strongly enough to Democrats.
"Oh shit, he's dumb as hell," Nixon says at the mention of Thompson's name. "Who's -- Who is he? He won't say anything."
The tapes also reveal an apparently close association between Thompson and the White House.
"[Thompson] is willing to work with us, he is also now willing to work with us on shifting some focus to the Democrats," White House counsel Fred Buzhardt told the president. "He's finally made up his mind he's got to start looking at some of their stuff."
"It was the equivalent of, you know, two prosecutors knowing about something and one of them going behind the scenes to tell the person being accused what the witnesses were saying about them," former Senate Watergate Committee investigator Scott Armstrong told ABC News."
source: http://rawstory.com/news/2007/ABC_finds_Fred_Thompson_dumb_as_1009.html
steve @ 35:
I'm not going to argue that Freddie is a "constitutional scolar", nor will I argue that he wasn't a personal injury lawyer(I'm a bit fuzzy on his complete history), but he was legal counsel to Howard Baker an the joint committee that was investigating Watergate. Just sayin'...
krn @ 29:
John Paul Stevens is 87. Healthy, but still 87. Ruth Bader Ginsberg is 75. A lot can happen in 7 months.
The idea that Habeas Corpus has become debatable is what's frightening, and one of the most important and successful aspects to the propaganda machine: neutralize extreme and obscure notions by making people believe there are two sides to the issue. Of course, for less obscure issues like the destruction of the middle class and the looting of the treasury, the propagandists use the always reliable racism and jingoism to redirect people's rage against one another instead of the corportists.
A combination of technology and the American people's insatiable desire to be entertained has made the gingrich/rove propaganda machine more powerful and more efficient than any that's ever existed. How to overcome this monster is what sickens me pretty much every day.
Hot, manly gas is not what we need in this elevator.
Diana @ 49:
this is why i often hear people say i don't want to get involved in politics or even discuss politics because often it can get heated/personal judgement is made. we all understand politics is division but the gingrich/rove strategy is dividing people about social/cultural differences..to me it seems to be the opposite of what this country should be about and stand for.....i believe their strategies are dirty and based on human insecurities
karl @ 42:
Calm down Karl. I'm your friend. I like your posts. It just looked like you were typing faster than you were thinking. It's Sunday, Father's day. I thought you, like me, were celebrating a little. It's all good big guy.
Captain Obama’s Bitter Half Husein Kangaroo @ 52:
i'm kool just popped open another can of clamato juice
The neocons have no respect for the constitution, pure and simple. All they see is power in the hand of a few. They've managed to drag the republicans into this ideology without a fight. Working people have to stand up to this crap because the neocons are laughing their asses off at us.
VegasRage @ 18:
Not sure what this has to do with the topic at hand. Neverthless, since we are sort of discussing the Constitution, quote for me the Article that grants the Federal Govt the responsibility to "fund education". Now we can accurately discuss if Republicans in each of he 50 states adequately funds education, but I challenge you to tell me where the Federal Govt is granted this responsibility. (and here's a hint: it's NOT the "General Welfare" clause.
Dave @ 55:
I'm sure this Article is not in the Constitution. But from seeing how the Republican party operates, I would bet that they would be trying to remove it from the Constitution with an aggressive determination.
ya know @ 56:
i don't believe the government has that responsibility but i will say this the government has developed a co-dependency to states and the public.......the dept of education hasn't gotten huge due to both parties..this is something that is perpetually broken if you will.. i recently moved to a state where the most populated county has a high school graduation rate of 45%...puts a whole new meaning to "no child left behind"...and increases crime possibilities which cost money to the public and the local government pay me now or pay me later
I'm sure this Article [education] is not in the Constitution. But from seeing how the Republican party operates, I would bet that they would be trying to remove it from the Constitution with an aggressive determination.
I disagree. The clear precedent has been set with Bush and his signing statements, which put him above law and Constitution. They all can now promise to defend the Constitution and simply re-interpret or ignore it as desired. Who will question them? Some senator just the other day was suggesting history as a subject should give way to more technology subjects in education. Which means fewer and fewer will even have a clue what they should question our "representatives" about. So I don't think any of them see a problem with federally funded education - as long as they determine curriculum. As long as it's federally funded and mandatory, they'll be the ones who control it.
Rather than former presidential candidate the caption should read "former traitor/lousy actor."
I love the differentiation that is always made between the rights of American citizens and foreign nationals. It's as though "ferners" can't be just as innocent as Americans and thus, they don't need or deserve the same rights as citizens. The implication seems to be that we lavish all kinds of frivolous and unnecessary rights on Americans just because they're Americans, when justice could be served equally well by locking up people on the basis of presidential edict without hearings or due process.
The Declaration of Independence got it right when it stated that all human beings have "unalienable Rights."
Scalia's contention that more Americans will undoubtedly die as a result of this decision is not only offered as a statement of fact about something that is unknowable, but it is irrelevant. It's nothing but standard right wing propaganda. Rights aren't doled out on the basis of body counts. I'd guess that it is equally likely that if the United States were to continue on the path that Bush has chosen and Scalia, Thomas, et al. have supported, more Americans will die as a result of the increasing hatred for this country that our barbarism spreads around the world.
The reason for Geneva conv in the first place was because the top echelon knew the ground soldier never knew exactly what the evil war planners really wanted and we who know history know nobody ever really wins in war just depopulation rigging.
The next time I want a political opinion from someone who PLAYS an attorney, I'll certainly look Mr. Thompson up. And, I suppose, the next time I need an operation I'll get one of the guys from NBS"s "ER" to come in and do it.
Kathy in St. louis @ 62:
Absolutely!
Who cares what Thompson has to say about anything.
Dear Grandpa,
Nobody cares what you think, you're not only a bad actor but politically speaking, cream puffs have more weight to them.
Love,
(Well not really)
Andy K Jong Il @ 47:
Oh, well, then....
get an actor to an actors job..........here fred here's the neocon talking points on the right's of habeus corpus for the prisoners of gitmo...you know the deal..fred work the same theme.....fear....okay got it
When I think the gop cannot possibly get any more stupid they always come thru--god bless em.
Oh Ya Fred, Secret Prisons and Torture are a good thing. Why dont you check into Gitmo Fred, and stay there about a year , you shriveled up prune-face POS.
Freddy Thompson - methadone actor ;-}
G. Stephanoupolis is completely clueless. He doesn't do the homework necessary to check Thompson's ridiculous assertions, he simply asks more questions. I think Steph is the worst journalist on ABC, and perhaps on the top ten worst journalists working today. He should have been fired for the debate that he conducted with the democratic candidates, and this is just further indications of his lack of understanding, research or knowledge. He may be a face, but there's not much more there than that.
reality check: this guy is an actor.
krn @ 58:
I disagree. The clear precedent has been set with Bush and his signing statements, which put him above law and Constitution. They all can now promise to defend the Constitution and simply re-interpret or ignore it as desired. Who will question them? Some senator just the other day was suggesting history as a subject should give way to more technology subjects in education. Which means fewer and fewer will even have a clue what they should question our "representatives" about. So I don't think any of them see a problem with federally funded education - as long as they determine curriculum. As long as it's federally funded and mandatory, they'll be the ones who control it.
I see your point, but from what I've witnessed of Republican rule, they don't want the government to do much of anything for the average working American, so the funding of education would be one of the first things they would get rid of. The way they see it, if it's not there then they won't have to worry about controlling it. The uneducated and uninformed will do it for them.
Fred Thompson??? I thought that was John McCain. Damn!
Gregg Martinson @ 70:
True, but he must have 9 lives. I thought he got vaporized or something in "Mars Attacks!"
Why are we even subjected to what he thinks?
The fact that George Stepandfechit even has a show, let alone bringing on a guy who not even rethuglicans like, is beyond me!
As matter of fact, all of the Lamestream media poly sci gibber jabber is a complete waste of time. They bring on liars from both sides and in the end, unless someone makes a mistake and inadvertently tells the truth, I have learned nothing and need a bath!
If only this "liberal" procedure was actually given to the detainees, which have been denied for the first four years they were being held. The fact that the administration keeps fighting to keep these reviews from happening on a timely basis apparently has no significance for the Republican apologists.
The job of the Supreme Court is to determine whether or not a law in Constitutional when a suit finally reaches the Court.
Every single thing he said was politically motivated. And isn't it ironic that the Federal Courts, which he claims are too liberal are now more conservative than ever? The very courts he's blaming for for acting "politically popular" and abrogating more and more power. Power which evidently only the President gets to abrogate.
And Justice Roberts is in lockstep with the political agenda of the Administration.
What a load of neo-con blather.
And for the Third time, Dictator Bush doesnt care! After all, he is the new world regime and does what he wants when he wants! Heil Bush!
www.an0n.mirrorz.com
The titantic is starting to take in lots of water.
So Thompson didn't lie or misrepresent; you just disagree with his reading. Color me underwhelmed.
After finishing his defense of the indefensible, Thompson looked around the studio and said, "Can I get some applause here. I need some applause. I'm an actor. Please, will someone applaud? Stroke my ego. Stroke my ego. I'm an actor. I need applause. I can't live without it. Someone applaud, dammit!" (as he broke down sobbing and muttering to himself)...so someone gave him the clap...but just one.
Oh, BTW, the corrupt Bush/Cheney administration is just as much against these GITMO cases being aired out in any citizen court (versus military) as this corrupt and evil administration is against any of the cases against complicit telecom companies being aired out in any court.
Could it be that the Bush/Cheney administration, the worst in American history, has committed so many crimes that they have tried every nefarious, devilish trick in the book to try to bypass our judiciary entirely, to try to keep anyone sympathetic to the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law from questioning them, probably uncovering the multitudinous crimes committed by BushCo in the process???
I don't know, seems about right to me. Fascists all over the world seem to follow the same game plan. Commit crimes and then try to hide what they've done from public purview.
I see a lot of talk about the Constitution, but almost no references to the document or to case law.
All the Left has to offer are insults, and no constructive discussion of the what Habeas is or when it applies or does not apply.
The Supreme Court has fabricaed a new "right" for aliens who are not present within the U.S. sovereign jurisdiction. Kennedy admits as much in his opinion when he states that "It is true that before today the Court has never held that non-citizens detained by our Government in territory over which another country maintains de jure sovereignty have any rights under our Constitution." BOUMEDIENE v. BUSH, 553 U. S. ____ (2008), slip op. at 41.
The Supreme Court had previously held that "Executive power over enemy aliens, undelayed and unhampered by litigation, has been deemed, throughout our history, essential to war-time security. This is in keeping with the practices of the most enlightened of nations, and has resulted in treatment of alien enemies more considerate than that which has prevailed among any of our enemies and some of our allies. This statute was enacted or suffered to continue by men who helped found the Republic and formulate the Bill of Rights, and although it obviously denies enemy aliens the constitutional immunities of citizens, it seems not then to have been supposed that a nation's obligations to its foes could ever be put on a parity with those to its defenders." Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763,774 (1950)
As Scalia notes in dissent, "The category of prisoner comparable to these detainees are not the Eisentrager criminal defendants, but the more than 400,000 prisoners of war detained in the United States alone during World War II. Not a single one was accorded the right to have his detention validated by a habeas corpus action in federal court—and that despite
the fact that they were present on U. S. soil."BOUMEDIENE v. BUSH, 553 U.S. ____ (2008), Scalia, J. Dissenting at 16.
The Supreme Court is therefore inventing a new right, and not affirming an existing right.
He's not really a lawyer, but he used to play one on TV...
it's the same thing over and over again.
every one of these tv shows drag out the same clowns with the same talking points.
get some new blood.
Stephanoupolisidiot doesn't give a damn, he's been phoning it in for years.
washington is so out of touch with the US, they all goto the same parties, run in the same circles.
Do you really think they can turn on each other when their golfing with each other the previous day?
the press, politicians, lobbyists have become so in bred-its incestous.
Three points:
1. "Time of war". There is always this "time of war" phrase lured into the discussion about everything. Yes, it is true that people are being killed, but no one has declared war. There are no legal grounds for the fighting that is being talked about. Where is this darn war? If unofficially and by the whim of the president, sending an army somewhere to murder a bunch of people who are in the way of big business making enough money, the US has been in a constant state of war since 1886 (paging Orwell...)
2. Thompson sounds like just abut everyone in the US, right or left; US citizens are human and should be treated as such, everyone else are “untermench” who deserve being treated like filthy animals and do not deserve any form of justice whatsoever. Only thing that is missing is having drum beating, blond haired youth marching in the background shouting "Sieg Heil" every other step.
3. The US managed to perform a bloody miracle during the first half of the last century, getting about everyone to sign international treaties transforming the world into a civilized place where democratic values about human rights and rule of law were the norm between nations. And then Bush shits all over these same treaties, basically claiming that everyone needs to follow them but Americans. Now... that is understandable, that some asocial retard gets elected and does his thing once in a while, but what is completely preposterous is that the majority of the nation thinks that is just all right. And don’t say it is not right; this way of thinking permeates all discussion about foreign affairs, in all US media; that Americas civilization should be measured with a different instrument than the rest of the world.
Sorry about the rant, but Thompson has the quality to sum up all the worst you can find in a politician.
Kald @ 85:
Aren't you forgetting something? One week after 9/11 Congress passed a resolution authorizing the President to “use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks” or “harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.” Authorization for Use of Military Force (“the AUMF”), 115 Stat. 224.
"A war where there really is no time frame."
"Well, whose fault is that, George?!"
Whose fault, fred? The fault of the country that's going around invading and occupying other countries, freddy, that's who.
Crawl back in your hole, you dipshit.
This guy is older than mcAncient, and why anyone would care to hear what this old fart has to say is beyond me.
He hasn't a brain in his noggin. What a dufus. Could they have found a bigger buffoon to represent their dying party?
The fascist party is dead and gone...only the old bones are left.
The thing that is always overlooked whenever the subject of "terrorists" is brought up and Guantanimo in particular is THIS. Iraq did not invade the United States. The United States invaded Iraq. And along with the soldiers we brought along Blackwater and gave them the authority to indiscriminately MURDER in cold blood anyone, man, woman, and child who got in their way with no accountability under either American OR Iraqi law. So, in that context, who are the terrorists? To my opinion, George Bush is a terrorist. And if the U.S. under the terrorist Bush's ORDERS can go around the world kidnapping and torturing and imprisoning anyone who disagrees with him as a terrorist forever, then what happens when and IF Iraqi government officials decide that it is THEIR right to go around the world kidnapping, torturing and imprisoning AMERICANS at will as enemy combatants? If you go along with the idea that George Bush can change the rules and disobey the law, both U.S. and international law, then so can every other country on the face of this earth. We do NOT operate in a vacuum. Those of you who continue to defend the lawlessness of the Bush Administration and insist that we have the right to FORCE "Democracy" and our way of life on everyone else on the planet by force if necessary must be prepared for the rest of the world to do the same to us. This BS has GOT to stop and the only way to do that is for Americans to STOP voting for the media favorites and those with the MOST MONEY. And maybe Impeachment is not the thing for Democrats right now, but at least holding the HEARINGS would tie Bush and Cheney's hands from starting ANOTHER war before they are out of office and would get the TRUTH out there for all the world to see and SEE THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO LET THEM GET AWAY WITH ANY MORE CRIMES. That's worth the time if nothing else is.
alot of crap being spread, you probably need to tune in to C-SPAN for a few years and get your facts straight. Sound like good ole liberal talking points.
This is a must see video.
http://www.eyeblast.tv/Public/Video.aspx?rsrcID=2036
I wish Fred Thompson would do the world a favor and just go away. The SC has spoken, so the views and opinions of a failed presidential candidate don't amount to very much.
Does Fred Thompson ever stop to think about what he says before he says it. If anyone is guilty of a television problem, it's jack asses like himself who think torturing people and taking away Americans civil rights is ok. It's fascist television shows like 24, & the wanna be war criminals who watch it that are doing more harm to America than any crazy man with a bomb ever could.
Just be glad these Sunday shows have become so irrelevant that they are bring on "guests" that amount to short term politicians/ long term actors. In the words of the oracle Homer . . . Homer Simpson that is, "Ahhh actors! Is there anything they don't know?"
If the laws are "more Liberal than ever", then that's a GOOD thing, because it simply means we're being more true to our American roots.
Liberals founded this country.
Conservatives didn't have one damn thing to do with it.
Indeed, they were the Royalists who would have willingly knelt at the OTHER King George's feet like good little suplicants while he beat the snot out of them.
probabilityzero @ 5:
Yes he does, and Nicole, "indolent" was the perfect word to describe him. Those bags under his eyes are the years of sauce catching up, aging him and making him a lethargic windbag. (The English have a nickname for those under-eye booze bags.)
Just another full of shit lying republican scumbag!
Embittered-Max-Hussein-1 @ 25:
I kept wondering when he was going to ask some questions, or rebut, but, NO! Nothing. Just goo-goo eyes.
Wigboldus @ 86:
This was not a declaration of war upon a sovereign state, this was a Declaration of Stupidity. This was the Hill, giving a paranoid megalomaniac a blank check to attack anything in sight,instead of identifying the problem and going after it.
Freddy is as old and stupid as McBush.
Having a guest like Fred Thompson just magnifies the irrelevancy of the Sunday morning gabfest with Stephanopolous. As a politician, Fred Thompson proved that he was lazy, ignorant and irrelevant so what on earth could he possibly add to any conversation? What a waste of time.
Forgive me if I don't take my advice on the SCOTUS decision from someone whose only terrorism experience is from being in Die Harder.
Login or Register to post comments.