Quantcast
Connect with us

Senate defeats challenge to indefinite detention provision

Published

on

WASHINGTON — The polarized US Senate on Tuesday beat back an attempt to set aside proposed rules on detention of terrorism suspects, defying a White House veto threat and criticisms from the FBI and the Pentagon.

By a 37-61 margin, senators defeated an attempt to strip the proposed regulations from a vast annual spending bill that has yet to pass but is seen as a sure thing because it affects US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

ADVERTISEMENT

Democratic Senator Mark Udall’s amendment would have replaced the rules with a call for US military and intelligence officials to study the plan and offer their own blueprint for how to interrogate and detain alleged extremists.

The proposed rules, which were likely to face challenges from other senators, are part of a $662 billion Defense Authorization bill that President Barack Obama has vowed to veto over the detainee provisions.

The controversial measures affirm Obama’s right to hold suspected terrorists indefinitely, including US citizens, and calls for al-Qaeda fighters who plot or carry out attacks on US targets to be held in military custody.

But they allow Obama to decide whether a detainee fits that definition, and permit the government to hold suspected al-Qaeda fighters in civilian custody after formally declaring that to be in the US national security interest.

During an often testy debate, Udall noted that US civilian courts have convicted 300 suspected terrorists since the September 11, 2001 attacks, with many expected to die in prison, and urged: “Let’s not fix what isn’t broken.”

ADVERTISEMENT

He also expressed worries that tough new standards for transferring detainees to other countries — notably a requirement that top US officials formally declare them no longer a threat — could hamper the US exit from Afghanistan.

The proposed rules explicitly say that the military detention requirement does not apply to US citizens, but supporters of the legislation stressed that American Al-Qaeda members may be held indefinitely without trial.

“The Supreme Court has recently ruled the following, that there is no bar to this nation’s holding one of its own citizens as an enemy combatant. This is the Supreme Court speaking,” said Democratic Senator Carl Levin.

ADVERTISEMENT

Levin, who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the proposed rules would not short-circuit the administration’s use of civilian trials for suspected terrorists and denied they would cripple civil liberties.

“We could see American citizens being sent to Guantanamo Bay,” countered Republican Senator Rand Paul, who warned the new provisions would not have prevented the failures that led to the September 11th attacks.

ADVERTISEMENT

“These are not failures of laws. They are not failures of procedures. They are failures of imperfect men and women in bloated bureaucracies. No amount of liberty sacrificed on the altar of the state will ever change that,” he said.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who voted against Udall’s amendment, accused Obama of overrelying on the FBI and other civilian institutions in fighting suspected terrorists.

“America is part of the battlefield. We firmly believe the war is coming back home,” he said. “We’re fighting a war, not a crime.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The White House two weeks ago warned that Obama would veto the bill, and the FBI, the Pentagon, and the Director of National Intelligence have all criticized the legislation.

Photo: Flickr user takomabibelot.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Stefanik voters turning on GOP lawmaker after she threw away her credibility to defend Trump

Published

on

Over the course of the impeachment hearings, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) has gone from a relative backbencher who sells herself as a moderate to voters in Upstate New York, to a theatrical partisan grandstanding for President Donald Trump and a top target of ire from Democrats.

But according to Politico, at least some of her voters appear turned off by her new stance.

"While Stefanik once able to strike a delicate balance between her Republican identity and her positions on issues like climate change, some think those earlier convictions are gone, like Phillip Paige, a former Stefanik backer and a member of SUNY Potsdam’s College Republicans," wrote Politico's Anna Gronewald. "A native of the 21st district’s Madrid, New York, Paige said he started to lose faith in Stefanik when she began supporting Trump as the party’s nominee in 2016. Paige supported John Kasich’s candidacy in that election. 'A lot of her boots-on-the-ground young Republican crowd has really become quite disillusioned,' he said. 'We saw her as what we thought the future of the Republican Party was and that really has been disproven. Unless, maybe the future of the Republican party is Donald Trump.'"

Continue Reading

2020 Election

GOP ridiculed for hyping Ohio anti-impeachment protest — and only a handful of Trump supporters showed

Published

on

The official Twitter of account of the Republican National Committee was buried in mockery after hyping up a video of anti-impeachment protesters in Youngstown, Ohio, where it appears only a handful of people showed up.

According to the tweet, "Ohioans are sick and tired of the Democrats’ impeachment charade. It’s time to STOP THE MADNESS!"

However, in the video from WKBN, which can be seen below, few people chose to show up for the cameras.

As one commenter noted with tongue-in-cheek, "Thought Ohio had a few more people than that."

That was the general consensus in the comments.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Melania Trump scorched by columnist for standing by president’s Thunberg bullying: ‘Indefensible’

Published

on

In a piece for the Washington Post, columnist Karen Tumulty called out first lady Melania Trump for her statement defending her husband's bullying of 16-year-old environmental activist Greta Thunberg in a fit of jealousy after she was selected Time Magazine's Person of the Year.

Responding to a statement from the White House that stated, “BeBest is the First Lady’s initiative, and she will continue to use it to do all she can to help children. It is no secret that the President and First Lady often communicate differently — as most married couples do. Their son is not an activist who travels the globe giving speeches. He is a 13-year-old who wants and deserves privacy,” Tumulty wasn't having it.

Continue Reading