Every time I agree with "Porn Stash" Geraldo, I get scared. What does it say about Fox News with he is the voice of reason?

\\Fair and Balanced my ass!

Goddamn. Is it possible for one blonde to personify all stereotypes?

I think it is. Congratulations, Megyn. Also, tell your parents to consult a dictionary when spelling their child's name next time.

But Geraldo the Constitution does end at our shores and has been "turned off" in the past. And prisoners of war have never enjoyed constitutional protection or habeas corpus even when being held within the country's borders.

While the term "enemy combatant" was an end run at disallowing some Geneva Conventions protections they still would not have had any right to challenge their detainment.

While Megyn seems to be far from a legal scholar Geraldo gives nothing more than an impassioned speech without any real legal precedents for this action to be just. Should the court wish to press their decision they could always be deemed actual prisoners of war which would nullify the court. Right or wrong, that seems to be the end game.

But the problem is Snowflake Tubbybottom, the Bush administration has refused to designate them as POW's, under the mistaken theory that the Geneva Convention would not apply. In the interim, of course, the SCOTUS has already ruled that regardless of what you call them, many articles of the Geneva Convention are still applicable. The thing is, if the Bush administration had simply let them be classified as POWs, they might not have had to go through all of this. But when you've got the braintrust like Harriet Myers and Alberto Gonzales making legal decisions and they fark it all up, the fact that the rest of their legal reasoning and arguments have fallen on deaf ears at the S.Ct. shouldn't be too surprising to you should it?

Geraldo is exactly right in regard to the fact they are not being held on foreign soil. The laws of Cuba do not extend to the US Naval base on Guantanimo Bay, any more than the laws of Germany apply to the US Embassy in Berlin. There are a long line of cases establishing that precedent, including one which allows John McCain to be viewed as a "natural born" US Citizen and thus eligible to run for President, despite the fact that he was born in Panama (but on a US Naval Base.) Guantanamo Bay is Sovereign US Territory, the detainees are not being held under any aspect of Cuban law or under the control of Cuban authorities. Geraldo's exactly right, its a scam argument which the court saw right through.

As for US held prisoners not being afforded Constitutional Rights, that view is simply wrong and not factually correct. In re Quiren, the case involving the Nazi prisoners captured and eventually tried and executed established that even Nazi spies captured in the US had the right to due process. The court found that such due process was afforded through a military court martial, but they still had that right under the Constitution. In many places the Constitutiion does make a distinction between citizen and non-citizen, but in the Bill of Rights, nearly every right to trial, due process, etc. requires applicability to every "person" - NOT just citizens.

Geraldo: "Guantanamo Bay was created to specifically avoid the United States Constitution."

Megyn: "What's wrong with that?"

Fox News...We don't care about the Constitution!

lawboy87: As for US held prisoners not being afforded Constitutional Rights, that view is simply wrong and not factually correct. In re Quiren, the case involving the Nazi prisoners captured and eventually tried and executed established that even Nazi spies captured in the US had the right to due process.

We actually housed captured German soldiers caught on the battlefield in Europe right there in Iowa. They had no constitutional right to appeal their imprisonment nor had any standing to begin to make such a claim.

While the US does lease Gitmo from Cuba its jurisdiction lies with the UCMJ as do all US bases overseas. I'm not sure of what jurisdiction or set of laws a civilian committing a crime on said soil would be subject to but then again that isn't applicable to this situation. These so called "crimes" did not take place on any US held soil so the very real question of jurisdiction is of paramount importance... something that the 5 SC members seemed to have overlooked.

But when you've got the braintrust like Harriet Myers and Alberto Gonzales making legal decisions and they fark it all up, the fact that the rest of their legal reasoning and arguments have fallen on deaf ears at the S.Ct. shouldn't be too surprising to you should it?

Not at all. I never said I agreed with their reasoning to end run the Conventions but then again there is no controlling legal authority to uphold the Geneva Conventions. The UN may show some amount of displeasure but they are in reality a toothless dog with a weak bark.

any treaty signed by the us is enforced by the senate; iirc.

Etchy333: Geraldo: "Guantanamo Bay was created to specifically avoid the United States Constitution."

Megyn: "What's wrong with that?"

Fox News...We don't care about the Constitution!

Pretty much sums it up.

Snowflake Tubbybottom: We actually housed captured German soldiers caught on the battlefield in Europe right there in Iowa. They had no constitutional right to appeal their imprisonment nor had any standing to begin to make such a claim.

Correct, because they were prisoners of war. A label which the Bush administration has done everything in their power to strip from the Guantanamo detainees. Sorry, legal status isn't a buffet line. Prisoners can't have none of the legal protections of POW status and none of the legal rights of civilian status.

I'm really getting sick of all the POW non sequitirs getting flung around.

lawboy87: But the problem is Snowflake Tubbybottom, the Bush administration has refused to designate them as POW's, under the mistaken theory that the Geneva Convention would not apply. In the interim, of course, the SCOTUS has already ruled that regardless of what you call them, many articles of the Geneva Convention are still applicable. The thing is, if the Bush administration had simply let them be classified as POWs, they might not have had to go through all of this. But when you've got the braintrust like Harriet Myers and Alberto Gonzales making legal decisions and they fark it all up, the fact that the rest of their legal reasoning and arguments have fallen on deaf ears at the S.Ct. shouldn't be too surprising to you should it?

Geraldo is exactly right in regard to the fact they are not being held on foreign soil. The laws of Cuba do not extend to the US Naval base on Guantanimo Bay, any more than the laws of Germany apply to the US Embassy in Berlin. There are a long line of cases establishing that precedent, including one which allows John McCain to be viewed as a "natural born" US Citizen and thus eligible to run for President, despite the fact that he was born in Panama (but on a US Naval Base.) Guantanamo Bay is Sovereign US Territory, the detainees are not being held under any aspect of Cuban law or under the control of Cuban authorities. Geraldo's exactly right, its a scam argument which the court saw right through.

As for US held prisoners not being afforded Constitutional Rights, that view is simply wrong and not factually correct. In re Quiren, the case involving the Nazi prisoners captured and eventually tried and executed established that even Nazi spies captured in the US had the right to due process. The court found that such due process was afforded through a military court martial, but they still had that right under the Constitution. In many places the Constitutiion does make a distinction between citizen and non-citizen, but in the Bill of Rights, nearly every right to trial, due process, etc. requires applicability to every "person" - NOT just citizens.

QFT

/old school

TheCid: any treaty signed by the us is enforced by the senate; iirc.

wouldn't that be approved by the senate?

Korag_The_Nasty: Things are truly repulsive at Fox News when it's Geraldo Revera that's the "good cop".

Geraldo is the biggest liberal they have. Colms is a pansy little fake. Rivera actually takes a stand once in awhile.

Etchy333: Geraldo: "Guantanamo Bay was created to specifically avoid the United States Constitution."

Megyn: "What's wrong with that?"

I couldn't believe that when I heard it. I thought it was pretty much universal that "upholding the Constitution" is a good thing.

Un-fraking-believable.

Dear Clueless Bimbo: They are either prisoners of war or they are civilian criminals. Either way they have basic rights under the Constitution.

God, I hate these people.

Megyn needs to have a neighbor turn her in. What a fascist coont.

Geraldo: This is not about politics. This is about the sacred founding document of the United States of America. We are different than the enemy.

Megyn: I disagree with you.

Well thank God we've got that cleared up - the United States of America is now the same as terrorists in this womyn's eyes.

Occam's Chainsaw: Snowflake Tubbybottom: We actually housed captured German soldiers caught on the battlefield in Europe right there in Iowa. They had no constitutional right to appeal their imprisonment nor had any standing to begin to make such a claim.

Correct, because they were prisoners of war. A label which the Bush administration has done everything in their power to strip from the Guantanamo detainees. Sorry, legal status isn't a buffet line. Prisoners can't have none of the legal protections of POW status and none of the legal rights of civilian status.

I'm really getting sick of all the POW non sequitirs getting flung around.

That's pretty much the beginning and the end of this argument. I mean, how can they be POWs if we haven't even declared War?

Whatsleft: Occam's Chainsaw: Snowflake Tubbybottom: We actually housed captured German soldiers caught on the battlefield in Europe right there in Iowa. They had no constitutional right to appeal their imprisonment nor had any standing to begin to make such a claim.

Correct, because they were prisoners of war. A label which the Bush administration has done everything in their power to strip from the Guantanamo detainees. Sorry, legal status isn't a buffet line. Prisoners can't have none of the legal protections of POW status and none of the legal rights of civilian status.

I'm really getting sick of all the POW non sequitirs getting flung around.

That's pretty much the beginning and the end of this argument. I mean, how can they be POWs if we haven't even declared War?

Yeah, there can be NO POWs.

Megyn: "What's wrong with that?"

"...and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." That's what wrong with that!!!! And she says she is a lawyer. University of Pep Boys.

bberg
Geraldo: This is not about politics. This is about the sacred founding document of the United States of America. We are different than the enemy.

Megyn: I disagree with you.


Exactly what I came in here to highlight. Thanks for beating me to it.

Just let them all go. That will solve this problem. Right?

If Gitmo is foreign territory, then John McCain is ineligible for the presidency and should withdraw his candidacy.

Geraldo has a libertarian streak. Hardly surprising.

Irregardless: Just let them all go. That will solve this problem. Right?

Pretty much. If the government actually has any evidence that these people have commited a crime then they will be prosecuted. The Bush admin. is only bothered because their puppies are going to run away.

ilambiquated: If Gitmo is foreign territory, then John McCain is ineligible for the presidency and should withdraw his candidacy.

Yes. I don't believe any base is non-American but if that is the way they want to play it...

Etchy333: Geraldo: "Guantanamo Bay was created to specifically avoid the United States Constitution."

Megyn: "What's wrong with that?"

Syracuse Poli Sci, it's fannnnn-tastic.

Irregardless: Just let them all go. That will solve this problem. Right?

You are a moron.

Irregardless: Just let them all go. That will solve this problem. Right?

Why yes, that would solve the problem of detention for a indeterminate amount of time. Brilliant solution. It might create one or two more problems, though. Law of unintended consequences and all that.

/Lock me up for six years without evidence or trial? If I wasn't a terrorist before, I damn sure am now.
//Better have an AK and a Qur'an waiting for me when I step off the goddamned plane.

Sabyen91: Irregardless: Just let them all go. That will solve this problem. Right?

You are a moron.

I think you missed the saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacaaaaaaasmmmmmmmm.

Other than that, you are very clever.

Sabyen91: Irregardless: Just let them all go. That will solve this problem. Right?

You are a moron.

Oooops.

rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr should be in there.

Saaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrcaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasmmmmmmmmmmm.

/That's better.

It's been said many times before, this would not have been an issue if they were either A.) Treated as civilian criminals in a US justice system or B.) Treated as prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions.

The Bush admin tried to create an unheard of third category in the shadows. The Checks and Balances inherent in our system came into play and thankfully they sided in the favor of Constitutional law.

If they are not prisoners of war, they are civilians and thus subject to the rights of any civilian brought before a US court. Somebody from Germany being charged with a crime in the United States doesn't lose their constitutional protection, neither should these people who are on a US military base be denied theirs.

It's a slippery slope that we almost went down too far to come back up. Next thing you know US nationals could have wound up there with no rights because "Hey, that base is in Cuba."

Irregardless: Sabyen91: Irregardless: Just let them all go. That will solve this problem. Right?

You are a moron.

Oooops.

rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr should be in there.

Saaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrcaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasmmmmmmmmmmm.

/That's better.

Wow, you needed to go with two posts on that? Really?

Go Geraldo! It's hard to argue with someone when you can't look in both their eyes at the same time. Also, it's a sign of inbreeding when a human's eyes are on the sides of her head instead of the front.

Sabyen91: Irregardless: Sabyen91: Irregardless: Just let them all go. That will solve this problem. Right?

You are a moron.

Oooops.

rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr should be in there.

Saaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrcaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasmmmmmmmmmmm.

/That's better.

Wow, you needed to go with two posts on that? Really?

Why do you call people names like, "moron?" Why do you hate so much? Why can't we all just get along?

Is anyone surprised that the court ruled this way?

Seriously?

The Supremes are not going to rule in a way that reduces their power. Anyone who came even close to passing their high school history courses could tell you that. Look at Marbury v. Madison. John Marshall should have sided with Marbury. His political friends were on Marbury's side. Marshall was a partisan politician who sided with Marbury. He wanted Marbury to win.

But siding with Madison gave him more power. So that's what he did. And ever thus the rulings.

Come on! Even a retarded chimp could see this ruling coming a mile away.



OK. Most retarded chimps.

andrewagill: Is anyone surprised that the court ruled this way?

Seriously?

That four Supreme Court justices, including the Chief Justice, ruled in favor of subverting the Constitution and rule of law? Yeah, I was just a little surprised. Not quite earth-shattering revelation surprised, but at least a little.

I had hoped for better from Roberts.

Megyn is pretty hot though.

You've gotta admit that.

Hot, but adamantly stupid.

If Obama (hopefully) wins the election and Bush gets his rightful place as the worst president,

But Geraldo the Constitution does end at our shores and has been "turned off" in the past. And prisoners of war have never enjoyed constitutional protection or habeas corpus even when being held within the country's borders

Right, if he would have called them POWs, it wouldn't be an issue. But the administration was so adamant, they've dug this hole.

slobarnuts: Megyn is pretty hot though.

You've gotta admit that.

Hot, but adamantly stupid.

I prefer women whose eyes face forward. Megyn looks like a lizard.

Geraldo Rivera protected the Constitution today.

The Constitution doesn't really grant inalienable rights to people. What the Constitution does do is restrict government action, completely without respect to where the government happens to be sitting at the time. The US Government is currently sitting in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, through a quirk of international politics. Let me say again that there is NOTHING in the Constitution restricting its application to the 50 states.

Taken in that context, and within the context of Scalia's "belief" in strict originalism, his dissent in this case is hilarious.

lawboy87: military court martial

This is like saying ATM Machine.

/martial = Military
//should be court-martial
///stupid frenchisms
//i agree with you anyway
/slash!

El_Dan: slobarnuts: Megyn is pretty hot though.

You've gotta admit that.

Hot, but adamantly stupid.

I prefer women whose eyes face forward. Megyn looks like a lizard.

Women have eyes?

Hmm.

I'm not sure what's more disturbing: The video or the comments under it. Though, I suppose that neither is anywhere near the realm of the fact that 4 SCOTUS Justices seem to think that removing trials from the system is okay.

Here's a tip: In the United States, the vast majority of Constitutional rights are held by everyone, regardless of citizenship.

Neeek: I'm not sure what's more disturbing: The video or the comments under it. Though, I suppose that neither is anywhere near the realm of the fact that 4 SCOTUS Justices seem to think that removing trials from the system is okay.

Does the US constitution make any distinction between US citizens and non US citizens? In terms of basic rights I mean.

Does Fox Noise send their people through the same new employee orientation? Can any of them ever allow someone to finish a sentence without stamping all over it with more questions?

This video was full of win. Geraldo owned her, and she's still hot to look at despite the noise channel she works for. If she would just keep her mouth closed, she'd be perfect.

When the prisoners in Guantanamo are processed by the courts and ultimately released for lack of evidence, the American people will realize that this administration has done nothing to keep them safe and the so-called "war on terror" is a sham.

That is the only reason the right wingers are upset about this.

Mr Logo: Neeek: I'm not sure what's more disturbing: The video or the comments under it. Though, I suppose that neither is anywhere near the realm of the fact that 4 SCOTUS Justices seem to think that removing trials from the system is okay.

Does the US constitution make any distinction between US citizens and non US citizens? In terms of basic rights I mean.

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.