America...Led by America Haters

Lord Obama's lackey, AG Eric Holder, appeared before Congress to explain why "his" decision to bring terrorist murdering scum to the US for civilian trial is not political. All he succeeded in doing was proving the aware citizens that is all it is.

And it is more than just his and Obama's hatred of Pres. Bush; there has always been more than a hint of America hatred. After all, his law firm defended some of the terrorists at Gitmo.

Holder spoke of the trials as a correction of Bush-era delays and an overdue attempt to seek justice for the victims of 9/11, but many present disagreed with his definition of justice. "To give these animals due process and to afford them constitutional rights is obscene," said John Owens, whose brother died in the towers on 9/11. (Peter Owens would have turned 50 next week.) "It angers me to no end that this guy is gonna get a platform, paid for by us, in the shadow of Ground Zero where my brother died."

Senator Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who chaired the hearing, touted the backing of Peaceful Tomorrows, a pacifist group of 9/11 families, in favor of the Holder plan, but the showing of support in the gallery was sparse. The antiwar protesters of Code Pink only mustered two uncharacteristically quiet women. The Jersey Girls, a politically active group of 9/11 widows, released a statement supporting the decision two days after the hearing.

At times, emotions bubbled over, causing Leahy to call the crowd to order once. Holder's assertion that "failure is not an option" in these prosecutions raised senatorial eyebrows and snickers from the crowd. "Well, that's an interesting point of view," said Herb Kohl (D-Wisc.). Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) added, "I don't know how you can say failure is not an option. I'm a farmer, not a lawyer, but it seemed to me ludicrous."

Jon Kyl, the Arizona Republican, raised cheers from the gallery with his sharp questioning of Holder, who contended that his decision to bring 9/11 terrorists to civilian courts was based, not on politics, but on where he'd have the best shot at conviction.

"How could you be more likely to get a conviction in federal court when Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has already asked to plead guilty to a military commission and be executed," he asked. "How can you be more likely to get a conviction in a [civilian] court than that?"

Remember just how much better things were going to be when we got rid of Bush and put a post-racial president in charge? Once more, the pricks who voted for Obama or sat on their asses instead have so much to answer for.

(Does it sound like I'm angry? Damned right, I am.)