Election Year Terror Question: To Mirandize or Not?

So Republicans are pro taking away the basic rights of an American citizen… and the Tea Party believes Obama is a fascist?
.
That is some good PR.

Did they read McVeigh his Miranda rights?

I think in this case given that he’s a US citizen, intel or no they have to read him his rights. Doing so for foreign nationals is certainly a debate worth having, but for US citizens it’s non-negotiable.

He’s an American citizen accused of a crime. Whether or not to Mirandize him hasn’t been up for legitimate debate in 44. To even report on McCain seriously here is ridiculous. It’s as if he suggested curtailing the law of gravity so he could cut the NASA fuel budget.

Someone should give a speech to the Tea Party on the subject (not that they likely would accept reason) and point out: If the government is allowed to define which citizens receive their rights and which do not, what stops the government from arresting all of you?
.
Naturally though, I am sure within a week we will see Tea Party rallies demanding that the government not weaken national security by giving rights to terrorists.
.
At least there should be a perfectly hilarious Jon Stewart rant that comes out of a pillar of the country being trampled over.

“I know he’s an American citizen but still,”
.
Let that marinate for a while.
.
US Senator Oath of Office.
.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God. ”
.

Without even weighing in on the current question, I will note that the fact it’s being asked negates any and all whining by Tea Partiers about Obama’s alleged violations of the Constitution. John McCain might as well be wiping his @$$ with it…….

To be fair, I think the Tea Party hates McCain as much as they hate Obama.
.
That said, this is all part of his strategy to tack right to appease them… and it’ll probably work.

Whether to Mirandize or not should be on a case by case basis.

First of all, ALL American citizens should be mirandized. They have a constitutional right and to deny them that right clearly demonstrates sliding into totalitarianism.

As far as foreign nationals, it depends on the situation. The Christmas bomber should have been mirandized, and I think most foreign terrorist suspects, if caught in the act on American soil should be mirandized.

As far as masterminds caught overseas, given those circumstances, it may be alright to waive Miranda.

That seems reasonable to me.

To hell with the Constitution. Never mind the Supreme Court.

John McCain & Peter King, taking their cues from Keifer Sutherland, no doubt, to the rescue! Thanks to “Paul-no not th…” for reproducing the oath these macho-men have repeatedly taken. Gosh, what about that “So help me God” part? Evidently, it doesn’t apply when it comes to “standing up to terrorists.” Besides, a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do to win re-election AND get on the teevee.

The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com

Of course everyone realizes that failure to Mirandize him can result in the inability to convict him for his crimes. The fifth amendment was put in place to prevent people from having confessions squeezed out of them and every judge has a duty to acquit if he believes that that took place.

That everyone knows this but chooses to ignore it speaks volumes.

“First of all, ALL American citizens should be mirandized. As far as foreign nationals…if caught in the act on American soil should be mirandized.”
.
All foreign nationals apprehended abroad would be subject to the law of the country they are apprehended in, not American law and, most likely, would be prosecuted in that country instead of the US.
.
I do not believe anybody disagrees with you nor is arguing that a foreign suspect captured abroad should be subject to either the penalties nor the rights of US law.
.
This is another right wing anti-constitutional complaint which most likely, will not ever impact actual policy since law enforcement is answerable to the courts, not to the elected officials.
.
Except for the second Amendment and their own interpretation of it, conservatives hate the constitution and a huge majority of the ways it has been interpreted since the 1930s.

John Cole: ““I know he’s and American citizen, but still” really says it all, doesn’t it? Half our political leadership wants a banana Republic, and our media is just treating it like it is another opinion. At what point do we start calling these people what they are?”
-
Also too from John Cole this morning: “I don’t think it is fair to the rest of us, but these douchebags in the beltway media deserve to live in a world ruled by Sarah Palin and Bill Kristol.”

The Republican position is that Obama is taking away our freedoms, therefore the executive branch must have the power to arbitrarily detain citizens. Makes sense to me.

I don’t know guys, its pretty maveric-y to take a stand against miranda rights.

Even if we set aside the issue of whether or not he should have been read his Miranda rights — and seriously, the fact that that’s even “up for debate” is absolutely pathetic — there’s the larger issue of so what?
.
The undiebomber was read his Miranda rights, and conservatives insisted that was a disaster because he would never talk … and yet he did. Zazi, the guy who tried to blow up the NYC subways, was read his Miranda rights … and pled guilty to 13 counts, informing on his associates too. And on and on.
.
These idiots act like Miranda rights prevent us from convicting terrorists and catching their associates, when the actual facts show that nothing of the sort is true. In point of fact, not giving Miranda rights and resorting to torture and the like is less effective at catching and convicting terrorists.
.
And yet the braindead zombies in the media give full coverage to the chest-thumping of morons like Rep. Peter King (R-Irish Republican Army), making the issue seem like one of “civil liberties vs. safety” when it’s really one of “effective counterterrorism vs. macho posturing.”
.
Pathetic.

To even begin to provide exceptions to Constitutional civil rights on people, citizen or not, is to render the rights, and thus the Constitution, impotent for all. Very slippery and dangerous slope to go down.

Quoting myself:

That is of course why Constitutional guarantees are necessary, because they run directly counter to human nature especially in times of fear. As I’ve said before, if the temptation to torture weren’t common then the freedom from self-incrimination wouldn’t be necessary to enunciate. If the temptation to railroad criminals weren’t common then the right to a jury trial wouldn’t have been mentioned. Each of our Constitutional guarantees stands directly in the path of the easy way out. That’s why they are there.

Weather Vane McCain is at it again. As far as reading the Miranda rights to this terrorist – it is probably a moot point. There appears to be enough evidence to hang this guy with or without reading his rights.
One thing is certain: the law enforcement personnel that were responsible for apprehending this guy should be commended. They did an excellent job in a very short period. Hopefully, it will send a message to other would be terrorist – Don’t F. with us.

Peter King is only against terrorism from brown people. As long as they’re Irish and bombing innocent citizens in the UK, he’s ok with it.

Anyone arrested on or brought onto US soil should be mirandized. Period.

These people are all nitwits. Someone should talk to a lawyer, because any halfway-decent one would tell them what Miranda warnings mean. A suspect doesn’t _get_ rights when he’s Mirandized. They’re not magic words. The suspect _has_ constitutional rights, and the Miranda warnings tell him what they are. But the act of Mirandizing doesn’t change his legal status one whit. Shahzad either has Miranda rights, or he doesn’t–but whether or not he was told about his rights doesn’t change them one way or the other.

So far so good. Great comments. Of course, we haven’t heard from the mouth breathers yet.

You were almost there. It is an either/or issue. Terror suspects have EITHER been Mirandized OR they’ve been tortured. I don’t think any single one has been BOTH unless he’d been Mirandized AFTER the torture. But the point is, Miranda eliminates the possiblity of torture. And we all know how much a certain segment of the right like torture.

“Sound bite” McCair is on guard.

Was the guy who shot the guard at the Holocaust Museum Mirandized? Was the guy who shot Dr. Tiller Mirandized? Is it only brown people we question whether or not to Mirandize?

Answer to all three: YES.

Thanks for the quotes El Vez. I particularly like the 2nd one. I’ve long said that if the jackboots come to power in America, the intelligentsia will be in for a world of hurt. We all know which college professors are on blacklists. Artists, but of course, liberal politicians, good luck.
.
But I find it deeply amusing that wankers like Michael Scherer are so obtuse. Simply look to our resident R-wingers, declaring virtually all of the media to be Obama propagandists. When from our perspective, they’re enabling the stupid. These journalists would all be in re-education camps in the heartland, being preached to by Christian fundamentalists–that is if they weren’t put down from the word go.