I would be very interested to hear yours and other's opinions (if they believe this statement to be true) on why this would be so?
Of course it's true -- it's in the opinion. Which I explained how to read for yourself, so you can see for yourself what it says.
Take a look, as I said, at page 51 of Steven's opinion.
Why? First and foremost, it's easy to get a conviction if you can use hearsay that's selected by the prosecution, and no evidence from the defendant.
That's called a kangaroo court -- kangaroo courts are great for prosecutors, you can always get a conviction in a kangaroo court.
And the DOD gets to wear all the hats -- the accuser, the prosecutor, the judge, and the executioner.
All this is going to backfire so bad it's going to stink to high heaven down the ages, like the Japanese concentration camps, it will be viewed as a travesty of justice.
Already is, actually, but you think people complaining just want to be mean to Bush, and you love Bush, so they must just be meanies.
I don't want to be mean to Bush, I wish he had better lawyers. He's been terribly served by these ones.
As I understand it, every lawyer in the DOD thinks the administration is wrong, wrong, wrong, on this one, but the White House calls the shots. The best lawyers in the DOD have been resigning rather than be held accountable later. |
