Dad! Send Lawyers, Bums, And Funny!

The attack on DoJ lawyers as traitors to country and the Constitution for defending accused terrorists is arguably one of the most awful things I've seen the Wingers do here this year...but not as bad as the Village idiots passing this horrific theory off as anything but laughable.  Double G:

By publishing a book that clearly and unapologetically defends the Bush torture regime, Marc Thiessen catapulted himself from obscure, low-level Bush speechwriter into regular Washington Post columnist, joining fellow torture defenders Charles Krauthammer and Bill Kristol.  Today, Thiessen's column defends the Liz-Cheney/Kristol smear campaign against DOJ lawyers and says this:

Yet Attorney General Eric Holder hired former al-Qaeda lawyers to serve in the Justice Department and resisted providing Congress this basic information. . . . Some defenders say al-Qaeda lawyers are simply following a great American tradition, in which everyone gets a lawyer and their day in court. Not so, says Andy McCarthy . . . . The habeas lawyers were not doing their constitutional duty to defend unpopular criminal defendants. They were using the federal courts as a tool to undermine our military's ability to keep dangerous enemy combatants off the battlefield in a time of war.

So any lawyer who represents accused Terrorists and argues that the Government is violating constitutional limitations in its Terrorism policies is -- all together now -- an "al Qaeda lawyer" (even if those detainees were innocent, as most were).  Worse, these "al Qaeda lawyers" -- which includes large numbers of long-time members of the U.S. military -- are "undermining our military's" efforts to keep us safe.  That sounds like treason to me.  It's great to see the leading newspaper in the nation's capital serving as the primary amplifying force for this McCarthyite smear campaign.  Does it get any more reckless and repugnant -- or primitive and stunted --  than that?  Does The Post have any standards at all?

Yes.  They have a standard to rehabilitate the Bush administration and destroy the Obama one.  It amazes me where Obama is decried as a lawless despot that must be opposed and removed, that the people who want to do say that defending a man accused of a crime is in itself a criminal act, and not just any criminal act, but treason itself.

Who is the tyrant making the mockery of our legal system here again?