Is Obama Interferring w Courts WORST than LKy

[uncleyap]

In any fair trial free and independent from Executive Interference or Presidential Interference, there should be no comments nor prediction of judgment by any president or executive officers. The AG is the legal officer of the executive body - government.

Presidents & AGs are not supposed to PRE-JUDGE any court cases.

However Obama & his AG are both reported by Yahoo News Headline right now for openly predicting judgments of 911 court hearings. That is very bad and audacious. Are they playing judges?

http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/20...ence-into.html

[uncleyap]

http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/20...ence-into.html








Political / Executive Interference into Judiciary, Obama PREDICTING Political Judgement









The question I am raising now is Obama interfering into Judiciary judgment by an extend worst than Old Dog Thief Lee Kuan Yew? Can a president and Attorney General openly state their own predictions on judgment of Politically Sensitive Court Trials? Is that appropriate?

Even the notorious famiLEE LEEgime Old Dog Thief Lee Kuan Yew dare not announce their own prediction of court judgment, which his LEEgime had been accused by International Bar Association to be LACK OF INDEPENDENCE APART between Executive & Judiciary. Obama and his Official Governmental Lawyer - AG are on Yahoo headline news today predicting judgment of 911 related trials.


What kind of Democratic Reformist Star is this?

[uncleyap]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091119/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_sept11_trial;_ylt=A2KIKvsa3ARLul8A4A6s0NUE;_ylu =X3oDMTJ0cTZla25zBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMTE5L3VzX3Nlc HQxMV90cmlhbARjcG9zAzMEcG9zAzgEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHN lYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA29iYW1haG9sZGVycA--">Yahoo News Headline today

Obama, Holder predict conviction in 9/11 case

http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/ap/brand/SIG=br2v03/*http://www.ap.org" id="yn-prvdlink" class="provider-logo ult-section"> http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/nws/p/ap_logo_106.png" alt="AP" class="" height="27" width="106" />


http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/ynews;_ylt=AiJd0QrPLXmL1Qo5vAaPgrkGw_IE;%20_ylu=X3 oDMTE5aGdma2FuBHBvcwMxBHNlYwN5bl9yX3RvcF92aWRlbwRz bGsDb2JhbWFpbnNlb3Vs?ch%20=4226714&cl=16712509&lang=en" class="media media3s video">
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20091118/videolthumb.%20c6901303e42cf2aa2b0cc4a84b7ed8fe.jp g?x=213&y=160&xc=1&yc=1&wc=%20399&hc=300&q=85&sig=fVnVcGypNk1jfdgzLtSdEw--" alt="Obama in Seoul after China Wall stop" height="160" width="213" />





http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Senate-Judiciary-Committee-hearing/photo//%20091118/480/a743587bbcdc40529ce3a50082acec82//s:/ap/20091119/ap_on_go_pr_wh/%20us_sept11_trial" class="media"> http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20091118/capt.a743587bbcdc40529ce3a50082acec82.%20congress_ justice__dcab111.jpg?x=213&y=196&xc=1&yc=1&wc=409&%20hc=376&q=85&sig=h7ejbgcZe1K3IA71E2.BtQ--" alt="Attorney General Eric Holder testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday," height="196" width="213" /> AP – Attorney General
Eric Holder testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Nov. 18, 2009,
before …





By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer Devlin
Barrett, Associated Press Writer – Wed Nov 18, 9:37 pm
ET




WASHINGTON – From opposite ends
of the globe, President Barack
Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder firmly rejected
criticism Wednesday of the planned New York trial of the professed Sept. 11 mastermind and predicted
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would be
exposed as a murderous coward, convicted and executed.

"Failure is not an option," Holder declared.

The president, in a series of TV interviews during his trip to Asia,
said those offended by the legal
rights accorded Mohammed by virtue of his facing a civilian trial rather
than a military tribunal
won't find it "offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty
is applied to him."


Obama, who is a lawyer, quickly added that
he did not mean to suggest he was prejudging the outcome of Mohammed's trial.
"I'm not going to be in that courtroom," he said. "That's the job of the
prosecutors, the judge and the jury."


The president said in
interviews broadcast on NBC and CNN that experienced prosecutors in the case who
specialize in terrorism have offered assurances that "we'll convict this person
with the evidence they've got, going through our system."

In Washington, the Senate Judiciary Committee questioned Holder for
hours about his decision to send Mohammed and four others from the U.S. military detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to New York for trial in a federal courthouse blocks
from the site of the World Trade Center towers destroyed in the 9/11 attacks in
2001.

The attorney general said he is certain the men
will be convicted, but even if a suspect were acquitted, "that doesn't mean that
person would be released into our country."

Tempers flared
when Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.,
challenged Holder to say how a civilian trial could be the best idea, since
Mohammed had previously sought to plead guilty before a military
commission.

"How can you be more likely to get a conviction in
a (civilian) court than that?" pressed Kyl, to applause from some in the hearing
room.

The attorney general said his decision was not
based "on the whims or the desires of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. ... He will not select the
prosecution venue. I will. And I have."


Critics of Holder's decision
— mostly Republicans — have argued the trial will give Mohammed a world stage to
spout hateful rhetoric.


Holder said such concerns are misplaced,
because judges can control unruly defendants and any pronouncements by Mohammed
would only make him look worse.


"I have every confidence that the
nation and the world will see him for the coward that he is," Holder told the
committee. "I'm not scared of what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has to say at trial —
and no one else needs to be, either."


Democrats on the panel were
largely supportive of the administration's decision.

"We're the most
powerful nation on earth; we have a justice system that is the envy of the
world. We will not be afraid," said Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.

Among the
spectators were some relatives of 9/11 victims who disagree with Holder's plan
to put Mohammed, the most senior al-Qaida suspect in U.S. custody, on public trial.

Opponents of the plan, including Holder's predecessor, Michael Mukasey, have accused
him of adopting a "pre-9/11" approach to terrorism.

Holder
emphatically denied that.
"We are at war,
and we will use every instrument of national power — civilian, military, law
enforcement, intelligence, diplomatic and others — to win," Holder said.
But South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham
called the decision "a perversion of justice" by putting wartime enemies into
the civilian criminal justice
system. "We're making history, and we're making bad history," Graham
said.
The attorney general said he does not
believe holding the trial in New
York — at a federal courthouse that has seen a number of high-profile
terrorism trials in recent decades — will increase the risk of terror attacks there.
He also voiced support for extra federal money for
the city to help safeguard the area while the trials are under way.
Alice Hoagland, whose son Mark Bingham died aboard Flight 93, spoke with
Holder after the hearing had ended. One of four jetliners hijacked on 9/11,
Flight 93 crashed into a Pennsylvania field after passengers rushed the cabin.

"We are heartsick and weary of the delays
and machinations," said Hoagland, of Redwood Estates, Calif.
Holder sought to reassure her there was evidence,
not yet made public, that makes federal court the best place to try Mohammed.

"I guess what I'm saying is trust me," the
attorney general said quietly, as reporters and security staff crowded around
the pair.
"I will trust you. I will defer
judgment," said Hoagland, though she added she still has serious doubts about
his plan.

[leetahbar]

perhaps he ignores and shuns chee soon juan too often so it's about time the SDPpies gang up to slime him.

oops! u r not even a SDPPY!

[uncleyap]

If the media & public discussion on courts cases can become SUBJUDICE then I think a Presidential Comment on pending trial one such like Obama's on 911 cases, should then be considered as SUPER-JUDICE, as presidents are constitutionally higher than courts as such they have power to commute courts sentences and grant presidential pardons to e.g. death-role inmates.

From the positions of presidents, they should professionally as well as constitutionally refrain from intruding into court proceedings. Otherwise be considered as abusing powers.

This is NOT a joking matter.

[steffychun]

Go tell your pal Nair to protest.