If you, gentle readers, ever had any doubt that Democrats cannot be trusted with the safety of the American people and the national security of America, lay that doubt aside.  There can no longer be the slightest question.  But before I provide the latest outrage, a brief side trip into the Twilight Zone that is the brain of our Secretary of State–America’s top diplomat–John Kerry.  Via Fox’s Greta Van Susteren:  

We just had a young person [Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarvaev] who went to Russia, Chechnya, who blew people up in Boston. So he didn’t stay where he went, but he learned something where he went and he came back with a willingness to kill people. I think the world has had enough of people who have no belief system, no policy for jobs, no policy for education, no policy for rule of law, but who just want to kill people because they don’t like what they see. There’s not room for that.

What?!  And this is our top diplomat?  The man responsible for formulating and executing our foreign policy?  Is is possible that Kerry is really so stupid as to actually think that Boston bombers had no belief system and wanted to kill Americans because they “don’t like what they see?”  And if he knows better and spouts such nonsense anyway, which is worse for our safety and security?

Now we learn, via Megan Kelly at Fox and from former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy at PJ Media that the FBI is less than thrilled with its bosses.  Why?  Read on, but take your blood pressure medication first.

On Monday, 04-22-13, The FBI was in the midst of a productive interview of the surviving bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarvaev when, unannounced, a federal judge, a US Attorney and a federal public defender walked into Tsarvaev’s hospital room and read Tsarnaev his Miranda rights.  Tsarnaev immediately shut up, cutting off the flow of vital and useful intelligence after only about 16 hours.

We know about this because the FBI, in closed door briefings to Congress this week, testified that not only were they gathering useful and important intelligence information, they were not told that the judge and two attorneys were coming or what they intended to do.  They tried to stop the giving of Miranda, telling them that they were not done and were gathering necessary intelligence information, but they disregarded the FBI–and presumably CIA–interrogators and ended the flow of intelligence.  This was confirmed by Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) on Kelly’s 04-25-13 show.

As I recently pointed out in “To Mirandize or Not To Mirandize; That Is The Question,” Miranda applies only in criminal investigations, and only if the prosecution wants and needs to use any statement given by a suspect against them in court.  If there is additional, non-statement evidence, it remains unaffected and can be used against the suspect.  That is very much the situation here.  There is more than sufficient evidence against Tsarnaev to convict him of multiple capital crimes without his communicating a single word.  In very real ways, Miranda is superfluous–in the criminal case.

Unfortunately, Miranda is not superfluous in this case in terms of national security and the protection of American lives.  As McCarthy points out in his article, the unannounced Monday visit was a foregone conclusion because the Holder Department of Justice, over the weekend, unnecessarily rushed to file a criminal charge against Tsarnaev.  Once that was done, the federal rules of procedure were invoked and what’s known as a presentment hearing had to be held within a very brief time frame.  In brief, Tsarnaev had to be brought before a federal judge to be told of the charges against him, and of course, to be told he can–and should–stop cooperating with the FBI.  Because Tsarnaev couldn’t appear in court, the DOJ took pains to bring the court to his hospital bedside.

The FBI believed it had at least 48 hours to interview Tsarnaev.  AG Holder ensured that they did not, and did not coordinate with them to ensure they would be able to make the most of the greatly truncated time they had.  Rather, he ensured they’d be blindsided, surprised by the unannounced intrusion of a federal judge and two lawyers, all working ostensibly in the interests of justice, but in effect, against the security of America and the safety of the American people.

As any competent police officer knows, when one reads Miranda to a suspect, they run the very real risk that suspect will shut up.  Remember that the goal of the FBI was to keep Tsarnaev talking.  They did not need his statements to convict him.  Under the public safety exception to Miranda, which applies only in criminal cases, and which is generally acknowledged to provide 48 hours of leeway for interrogation, the FBI believed it had another 32 hours of freedom to gather intelligence.  Fortunately, Tsarnaev was lucid and could communicate.  If he had been unconscious or otherwise unable to communicate, Holder’s actions would have ensured the FBI would have learned nothing at all.

There is no reason Mr. Obama could not have declared Tsarnaev an enemy combatant and turned him over for interrogation.  This would not, in any way, have prevented his eventual prosecution in the criminal courts, and in any case, Miranda would not have been an issue.  But because he has been handled exclusively as a criminal defendant, and because the Holder DOJ rushed to ensure he would be shut up, he has been shut up and vital intelligence is almost certainly lost forever.  Lives very well may be lost because of this politically correct thinking.

Why would the Obama Administration do this?  Why would it take unnecessary steps that would ensure we are less rather than more safe?  The issue could not have been any possible harm to a criminal prosecution.  We have Tsarnaev on video planting a bomb, and the testimony of multiple police officers pursuing him and his brother as they threw bombs from their vehicle and shot at the police.  We have the statement of their carjacking victim that they identified themselves as the bombers.

There is no question that Mr. Obama and Mr. Holder sympathize with Muslim terrorists in particular and the enemies of America in general.  But the most likely explanation is the narrative.  As we have learned only this week in the Benghazi affair, the State Department, including Hillary Clinton, did in fact know of the deteriorating security situation there, and denied upgraded security.  We also know she lied to Congress about her knowledge and actions.  This, of course, indicates that she–and the Obama Administration, know their actions are immoral and illegal and would not be countenanced by most of the public (for some portion of the public, Mr. Obama will always be a god), hence their determination to cover up their fecklessness and malfeasance.

As in that pathetic situation, the same dynamic is at play here.  The Obama Administration’s narrative is that Barack Obama is a terror warrior without peer, and his brilliant handling of such matters has resulted in the virtual destruction of terror networks around the world with resultant safety for the American people.  Our southern border is better than it has ever been, and the Middle East is also better than it has ever been, all because of the transformative powers of the personality of Mr. Obama who calms the seas and heals the planet.

Successful terror attacks around the world and on American soil, therefore, cannot be terror attacks, but something else, something requiring linguistic contortions of previously unimaginable proportions.  If they are terror attacks, the narrative is manifestly false and even the soaring rhetoric of The One may not be able to stand against that reality.

Would our President knowingly shut off the flow of intelligence necessary to protect our people to maintain a ridiculously transparent and false narrative?  Would he endanger lives to protect himself and his acolytes and to conceal their lies?  Could he truly be that dishonorable and narcissistic?

Anyone that does not know the answer to those questions is as clueless, and as dangerous, as Mr. Obama, who to this day calls the Ft. Hood terror attack “workplace violence,” and who continues to stonewall the truth about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, and innumerable other debacles that are the entirely predictable–and preventable–result of his progressive delusions.

Abandon all doubt.

About these ads