[WhiliaStelt]

I knew there was an on-going controversy regaring the Habeas Corpus rights of the foreign detainees at Gitmo.

But I had not heard until today that the habeus rights of all Americans had been revoked:

Olbermann: ‘The president has now succeeded where no one has before’

Death of habeas corpus?
Oct. 10: Part of the Military Commissions Act seems to eliminate the right of habeas corpus. “Countdown” examines in a special investigation.

On “Countdown” Keith Olbermann examined the Military Commission’s Act of 2006 and what it does to something called habeas corpus.

The following is a transcript of Keith Olbermann's special report on habeas corpus, as reported on Tuesday, October 10th:


The president has now succeeded where no one has before. He’s managed to kill the writ of habeas corpus. Tonight, a special investigation, how that, in turn, kills nothing less than your Bill of Rights. Because the Mark Foley story began to break on the night of September 28, exploding the following day, many people may not have noticed the bill passed by the Senate that night.

Congress passed the Military Commission’s Act to give Mr. Bush the power to deal effectively with America’s enemies—those who seek to harm the country. He has been very clear on who he thinks that is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: For people to leak that program and for a newspaper to publish it does great harm to the United States of America.

That fact that we’re discussing this program is helping the enemy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

OLBERMANN: So, the president said it was urgent that Congress send him this bill as quickly as possible, not for the politics of next month’s elections, but for America.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: The need for this legislation is urgent. We need to insure that those questioning terrorists can continue to do everything within the limits of the law to get information that can save American lives. My administration will continue to work with the Congress to get this legislation enacted, but time is of the essence. Congress is in session just for a few more weeks and passing this legislation ought to be the top priority.

The families of those murdered that day have waited patiently for justice. Some of the families of with us today, they should have to wait no longer.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

OLBERMANN: Because time was of the essence and to insure that the 9/11 families would wait no longer, as soon as he got the bill, the president whipped out his pen and immediately signed a statement saying he looks forward to signing the actual law eventually.

He has not signed it yet, almost two weeks later because, of course, he has been swamped by a series of campaign swings at which he has made up quotes from unnamed Democratic leaders and because when he is actually at work he’s been signing so many other important bills, such as the Credit Rating Agency Reform Act, the Third Higher Education Extension Act, ratification requests for extradition treaties with Malta, Estonia, and Latvia; his proclamation of German-American Day, the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Act; and his proclamation of Leif Erickson Day.

Still, getting the Military Commission’s Act to the president so he could immediately mull it over for two weeks was so important, some members of Congress did not even read the bill before voting on it. Thus, as some of its minutia escaped scrutiny.

One bit of trivia that caught our eye was the elimination of habeas corpus, which apparently use to be the right of anyone who’s tossed in prison to appear in court and say “Hey, why am I in prison?”

OLBERMANN: Why does habeas corpus hate America? And how is it so bad for us? Mr. Bush says it gets in the way of him doing his job.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) Olbermann makes comments between clips of speeches by different politicians below.

BUSH: This legislation passed in the House yesterday is a part of making sure that we do have the capacity to protect you. Our most solemn job is the security of this country.

OLBERMANN: It may be solemn.

BUSH: Bush, so solemnly swear.

OLBERMANN: But is that really his job? In this rarely seen footage, Mr. Bush seems to be describing a different job.

BUSH: And will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

OLBERMANN: COUNTDOWN has obtained a copy of this “Constitution” of the United States, and sources tell us it was originally sneaked through the constitutional convention and state ratification in order to establish America’s fundamental legal principles.

But this so-called “Constitution” is frustratingly vague about the right to trial. In fact, there’s only one reference to habeas corpus at all, quoting: “The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.”

[Diandaplaipsy]

Its impossible to revoke HC for only a select group by the simple fact that with out HC you can not challenge the governments assertion that you in said group. If anyone can be denied HC then everyone can be denied it on a practical basis.

[Assentesy]

Methinks the elimination of HC was unconstitutional in the 1st place. Someone should tell the SCOTUS.

[Kuncher]

Habeas Corpus

Us

[freevideoandoicsI]

He's got some pretty good precedents to point to, though.

[Civilrecordzz]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
He's got some pretty good precedents to point to, though. Not really. Look at Lincoln. His suspension of habeas corpus led to the Union winning the war, which means perfectly reasonable people are stuck having Alabama as part of their country. If that's not an argument for the sanctity of habeas corpus, I don't know what is.

[VodsNittats]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I was born in Alabama
sigh

[MilenaJaf]

NoVA >> Pittsburgh. And we wouldn't have Virginia without Lincoln.

[epPtsDno]

Originally posted by MrFun
Can't wait to hear what DinoDoc and others think of this. You're Lincoln's biggest fan, are you not? I would have thought that it would be you not I that would have been the best person to tell us why the suspension of civil liberties and other execrises of executive power in this fashion are actually a good thing that the country should support.

[Vmysobfi]

The correct term is "war."

[EsAllCams]

[fuslssdfaa]

Your geography is off by a few hundred miles, IIRC.

[Uttephabeta]

Actually I think it's a bit more precise than yours in this isntance.

[AttableBewNaw]

Let's dissect this: the Malabar front is from 1984 and is the site of the three powers' endless war. It's somewhere in India. That would put it several hundred miles from each Afghanistan and Iraq.

[Maymayfor]

Mea culpa.

[layevymed]

That's not really the point. After all, it isn't clear that in the world described in Orwell's novel, that the Malabar Front actually exists, and even if it did, it doesn't matter in the slightest, since the existence or not of the Malabar Front is irrelevant to the function that it plays in the media of Oceania.

IIRC in one of the appendices Orwell said that it did exist but was fought mostly by small, highly trained teams rather than the whole industry of each nation.

Quibbling about its location is irrelevant.

It was a snarky comment in response to another snarky comment.

[r7rGOhvd]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
The correct term is "war." The Constitution does not permit suspension of habeus corpus during times of war -- only during times of insurrection or invasion.