White House, Republican Graham Team Up on Indefinite Detention Legislation
Thursday 18 February 2010
by: Kyle Berlin, t r u t h o u t | Report

(Image: Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t; Adapted: World Economic Forum, amandabhslater, MattNJohnson)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) said that he is working with the White House on legislation that would allow some alleged terrorists to be held indefinitely without trial.
The legislation, Graham told reporters Monday, is part of a deal to close Guantanamo Bay, which has stalled since Obama signed an executive order to shut it down on his first day in office.
According to a report published in Politico, Graham said, "I've been talking to the administration for the last couple of days. I'm encouraged that we're going to sit down and do some of the hard things we haven't done as a nation after Sept. 11."
Graham has been an outspoken opponent of Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a civilian court, and has signaled that his cooperation is also contingent on having them tried in the military justice system.
On Saturday, in a weekly Republican radio address, Graham said, "the military justice system is transparent, well-staffed, subject to civilian review, and protects valuable intelligence. Above all else, it is built around the notion that we are a nation at war."
In an interview with The New York Times published Monday, Holder said that he is reconsidering his original position, and is "flexible" with regard to changing the venue of the trial and the possibility of trying Mohammed in a military tribunal.
Senator Graham has been the leading Republican voice on national security issues and detainee treatment, as well as sponsoring the Military Commissions Act of 2009, which modified rules pertaining to evidence gathered by unlawful coercion, the definition of an "enemy combatant" and the right of defendants to examine evidence and witnesses. Critics have generally seen the act as an improvement on the old commissions system.
He is also one of the few Senate Republicans to indicate a willingness to work with the White House and Senate Democrats on legislative issues, including the promotion of renewable energy. On Tuesday, he started on the campaign trail in California to promote Carly Fiorina, a Republican challenger to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-California).
Graham's rightward shift and increasingly vocal opposition to a civilian trial may be due in part to an internecine struggle with Sen. Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina), who is backing a series of ultra-conservative Republican Senate candidates, including Marco Rubio in Florida and Chuck DeVore in California - who is running against Fiorina in the Republican primary.
The legislation Graham and the White House are considering would allow them to detain suspected terrorists instead of transferring them to another country or allowing them to take part in the criminal justice system.
"I think the Obama administration, after they looked at the cases at Guantanamo Bay, understands the need for a statute like that," he said.
In return, Graham would probably back President Obama's plan to close the Guantanamo Bay prison and transfer any remaining detainees to a state prison in Thomson, Illinois.

This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.



Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
All of these people who are
Thu, 02/18/2010 - 14:35 — Curtis (not verified)All of these people who are then in detention camps, should be put to work to pay for their keep.
As oil gets too expensive and technology drops back to an earlier era, all of the prisoners will be in place and be ready to start picking cotton.
Once again, a republican is
Thu, 02/18/2010 - 14:40 — Anonymous (not verified)Once again, a republican is at the forefront of another legislative attack on the Bill of Rights. Once again, the administration will cave in to the reactionaries instead of standing up for the values we claim to so cherish.
Obama is a a hollow man,
Thu, 02/18/2010 - 15:06 — Anonymous (not verified)Obama is a a hollow man, devoid of principle.
Cheney is correct.
He'll be a one-term president--unless Dick Cheney rund against him.
Why the hell does Obama even
Thu, 02/18/2010 - 15:17 — Anonymous (not verified)Why the hell does Obama even listen to this guy? Have the guts to steamroller him. The American people can't afford fascists like this.
I am at war with anybody who
Thu, 02/18/2010 - 15:41 — Anonymous (not verified)I am at war with anybody who says we are a nation at war.
This article sounds
Thu, 02/18/2010 - 16:29 — S. Wolf Britain (not verified)This article sounds suspiciously like a defense of Graham, one of the most right-(really-left)-wing corporate-fascist extremists in the U.S. Congress.
And that's B.S. about the Military Commissions Act of 2006 supposedly being considered an improvement. It is a deeply flawed and extremely unconstitutional "law" which most human rights and civil liberties proponents are against. In fact, in addition to the so-called "Patriot Act", it is one of the final nails in the coffin of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
So, please, Kyle Berlin, get your facts completely straight and stop defending "neolibCON" extremists like Graham, or please cease and desist all such propaganda as this article appears to be.
Yah, very good point,
Thu, 02/18/2010 - 16:39 — S. Wolf Britain (not verified)Yah, very good point, "Anonymous -- Thu, 02/18/2010 - 20:41", Congress is the only body or branch of the U.S. government that can declare was, and they have NOT declared war. The "Authorization for the Use of Military Force" which Congress 'granted' is NOT a declaration of war, and its alleged authorization for the President to declare war is completely unconstitutional and preposterous! All such "Authorizations" should have been totally overturned long ago; so this article author's claim in this regard is also fallacious!
Indefinite detention
Thu, 02/18/2010 - 18:47 — Anonymous (not verified)Indefinite detention legislation. LEGISLATION. Licking ass and making pretty doesn't change the illegality of what you're doing, wankers. Since we aren't litigating the past, let's start litigating the present then.
I hear there's a new prayer out, Psalm 109-8, so here's one for you Lindsey, and don't want to leave out DeMint! Bet you'll be buddies down there.
I shouldn't have to spell it
Fri, 02/19/2010 - 08:54 — S. Wolf Britain (not verified)I shouldn't have to spell it out (no offense intended), but since most Americans don't know the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land of the the United States, I will do so, as follows:
No matter how much they, the Congress, claim(s) that they allegedly made it "legal" through passing legislation that codifies its supposed "legality", it is a violation of the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, at least, to allegedly make indefinite detention(s) "legal".
Therefore, again, no matter how much they make it appear "legal", it is NOT legal because it violates the Supreme Law of the U.S., the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. As a result, obviously, all people like Lindsey Graham are complete traitors, and are guilty of treason, by violating the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution. And even submitting and seeking to pass such bills is a very serious, completely impeachable offense; not to mention one they can be criminally prosecuted for as well.
Look it up, at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Bill_of_Rights
- and/or -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution
What about our constitution?
Fri, 02/19/2010 - 10:01 — Anonymous (not verified)What about our constitution? Can the U.S. legally detain anybody without giving them a trial?
This will surely end up in the Supreme Court. But, after the Supreme Court gave corporations the same rights as people, what they will do is unknown.
South Carolina is a bad state for reasonable politicians. All you have to do is look at DeMint, Mark Sanford, Joe Wilson, and the guy with the horse to know that reasonable politicians are likely to be voted out.
The problem is the media,
Fri, 02/19/2010 - 10:06 — Anonymous (not verified)The problem is the media, who treat nut cases at Tea Parties as if they actually have a brain. When fringe opinions are given so much publicity, it makes it so much more difficult for moderate politicians -- and Senator Graham is being attacked by the fringe.
Until the media begin allowing moderate middle-of-the-road politicians as much air time as the far left and the far right, President Obama doesn't have a chance of taking a reasonable stand on this issue.
A parallel issue if the
Fri, 02/19/2010 - 10:14 — Anonymous (not verified)A parallel issue if the trial of Khalid Sheik Mohammed is held by the military, we probably don't have enough evidence to convict. Because he was water-boarded 183 times, all the evidence collected is likely to be thrown out -- even by the military courts.
But, if he is tried in a criminal court, other countries have come forward with evidence that is not tainted. These countries came forward with evidence only after Holder decided to use a criminal court. The evidence may not be available in a military court.
What this really means is that Mohammed e will be convicted by a criminal court and can not be convicted by a military court.
OMG, Mr. President: If you
Wed, 02/24/2010 - 15:13 — Frances in California (not verified)OMG, Mr. President: If you listen to this self-serving blowhard (Glass Steagall protections were lost because of him), we are all lost. It won't matter if you win or lose in 2012; America will be utterly ruined.