Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
Tue Apr 30, 2013, 11:08 AM Apr 2013

Four Republicans Who Don't Understand the Constitution They've Sworn to Defend

http://m.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/04/four-republicans-who-dont-understand-constitution-theyve-sworn-protect

Rep. Peter King (R-NY): The former chairman of the House homeland security committee told CNN the fact that Tsarnaev was read his rights was "disgraceful" and said "It is the matter of life and death. I don't know of any case law which says that magistrate has a right to come in to a hospital room and stop an interrogation." Rep. King, let me Google that for you.

Senator Dan Coats (R-Ind.): On CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday, Coats said that he "was very surprised that they moved as quickly as they did. We had, I think, legal reasons and follow-up investigative reasons to drag this out a little bit longer...I think the AG, attorney general, should have sent a signal basically saying we're within our legal bounds in doing this for the public safety exemption." This seems to be a popular misconception. Again, the public safety exception affects the admissibility of statements in court. It does not magically eliminate a suspect's constitutional right to a speedy trial.

Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas): Rep. McCaul is the current chairman of the House homeland security committee, and a former federal prosecutor, so it's difficult to believe he doesn't know the federal rules of criminal procedure. "The only other avenue we had to get this intelligence is through this emergency exception to the Miranda warning," McCaul told CNN. "But in my judgment, the FBI was cut short in their interrogations when the magistrate judge decided to Mirandize him within 16 hours...I think that cost us dearly in terms of valuable intelligence." Yes, that's a former federal attorney mangling not only the nature of the public safety exemption and the requirement to bring the suspect before a judge, but also constitutional separation of powers. The FBI does not get to tell judges when they should see suspects.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich): Probably the only thing more embarrassing than being a federal prosecutor who doesn't understand the federal rules of criminal procedure is being a former FBI agent who doesn't understand them. Enter Rep. Rogers, chair of the House intelligence committee, who in an interview with MSNBC last week slammed the judiciary for "interceding" in an interrogation, referring to Tsarnaev being read his rights as "confusing" and a "horrible, God-awful policy" that is "dangerous to the greater community." It's not that confusing: The public safety exemption does not allow interrogators to indefinitely detain and interrogate suspects in violation of their constitutional rights.

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Four Republicans Who Don't Understand the Constitution They've Sworn to Defend (Original Post) Scuba Apr 2013 OP
Only 4"? I'm willing to bet the number is much higher. hobbit709 Apr 2013 #1
I wouldn't bet against you Progressive dog Apr 2013 #2
More to the point.... Purplehazed Apr 2013 #3

Purplehazed

(179 posts)
3. More to the point....
Tue Apr 30, 2013, 12:37 PM
Apr 2013

The former prosecutors and agents do understand constitutional rights and do understand federal criminal rules. They are actually saying that constitutional rights shouldn't extend to this suspect in the same way they apply to all other suspects. Yes, the bombing was abhorrent, but you can't pick and choose who has rights.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Four Republicans Who Don'...