Eric Holder: Miranda rights need to be changed for terror suspects

Hmmm. Maybe we could start with not reading them their rights. Recognizing they are Islamic Jihadis out to destroy the country. Maybe we could return to enemy combatants, rather than change Miranda. Maybe.

Then again, when you’ve told the world you intend to capture and try these folks in a civilian court under the protections afforded in the US Constitution in order to show the world that we are something that I am not quite sure what we’re supposed to be showing, and then you discover that the old cops and robbers routine doesn’t protect us in war, you have to find a way to stay within the parameters you have set up for yourself and still extract info for the jihadis. The result, let’s a rule that let’s us extract any info we can from them and still use it in a court of law before we use Miranda. Huh?

To combat the changing landscape of the war, both the administration and Congress are considering changes to the law to better address potential plots inside and against the United States.

Holder, whose Justice Department has taken criticism for reading rights to terror suspects like Shahzad and alleged Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, revealed Sunday that the administration plans to work with Congress to propose possible changes to Miranda rights.

“This is in fact big news,” Holder said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “It is a new priority.”


Sounds to me like the Mirandizing thing isn’t exactly working the way they had hoped. Sound to me like maybe, just maybe, Bush was right after all? I’m just saying is all.

8 replies
  1. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    Apply the test: substitute "Bush administration" for "Øbama administration", or better, John Ashcroft for Eric Holder, and tell this story to your friendly neighborhood, utterly oblivious liberal.  Throw in a little Dick Cheney and stir.  Watch the reaction.  When the swearing and ad hominem attacks cease, say "April fools!: it was Øbama and Holder!


    Want to see a human being imitating a fish out of water?  😉

  2. Delta
    Delta says:

    If I were the terrorists, I'd be using the fact that our soft-spot Obama as a means to jam in a couple more attacks. Doesn't matter if they work or not, the point is to derail and discredit the Obama Administration as well as instill fear in all of us. Iran's Ahmadinejad certainly doesn't care if Obama is going to "open dialogue" with Iran or not, he's interested in using the fact that Obama isn't tough enough to go toe to toe with him to continue to push for a nuclear Iran and probably strike Israel. TL:DR: everything that was said about Obama being weak on foreign policy is true, where is McRage to tell everyone he was right all along?

Comments are closed.