Holder: GITMO On Track To Close, Detainees Could Transfer To Illinois

By Benny Martinez - University of New Mexico/Talk Radio News Service

Attorney General Eric Holder, Jr. told the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday that a new facility must be opened in order to hold detainees currently occupying the Guantánamo Bay detention facility before the Obama administration can shut it down.

“It is still the intention of this administration to close the facility at Guantánamo,” Holder said. “It serves as a recruiting tool for those who have sworn to harm this nation [and] we will close GITMO as quickly as we can, as soon as we can.”

Holder said that the Department of Justice is continuing to eye a $145 million maximum security prison that remains unopened in Thomson, Illinois as a possible replacement. The prospective site currently belongs to the Illinois Department of Corrections.

The Illinois maximum security facility will hold the 240 detainees currently held in Cuba, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-defendants in the 9/11 terror trial if found guilty.

Holder touched upon Mohammed's trial, which was initially proposed to be held in a New York civilian court but is now under consideration again after New York officials raised questions concerning security issues.

“The administration is in the process of reviewing the decision as to where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-defendants should actually be tried,” Holder said. “New York is not off the table, though we have to take into consideration the concerns that have been raised by officials and the community.”

Holder told the committee that he expects a decision regarding the trial to be made in the coming weeks.

“As I’ve said from the outset, this is a close call. It should be clear to everyone by now that there are many legal, national security and practical factors to be considered here. As a consequence, there are many perspectives on what the most appropriate and effective forum is.”

Congress Questions Napolitano On Role Of DHS

By Julianne LaJeunesse, University of New Mexico-Talk Radio News Service

If you could count all of the concerns that were thrown at U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday, it might make you more than a math whiz, it might make you curious. Curious as to why and how the department is going to handle international border issues, cyber terrorism and how the U.S. legal system will adequately handle Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s New York City trial.

The committee hearing was intended to provide oversight over DHS, and several times the role of the department was questioned. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) asked Napolitano about the department’s role in protecting cyber security, suggesting the entity may not be the best group for the job.

“When you take out the technical aspects, and the legal aspects, it’s hard to see how Homeland Security ends up with a very strong platform for persistent leadership, unless there’s some vehicle for coordinating the DNI [Director of National Intelligence], and you, and the Attorney General, and everybody together, and I’m not comfortable that that presently exists,” Whitehouse said. “I think the NSC [National Security Council] is a good interim measure, but it would seem that that should evolve into a more formal cyber-specific government structure at some point.”

Though Whitehouse suggested that cyber security could be handled by another government arm, too much government role was a theme that Senators Arlen Specter (D-Penn.) and Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said may be unnecessary. The two said transportation measures, such as some airport securities and aggressive border patrol practices, could be safely downgraded if proof of their need doesn’t exist.

“I wonder, do you have results as to what all of these elaborate tests at airports show?” Specter asked. “Is all of it really necessary? Because if it is, fine.”

Generally, however, the committee was not ready to dismiss the precautions taken by the department, and indeed did call for more action from Napolitano and her staff in regard to answering questions about how best to deal with issues of illegal immigrant labor and its good and bad effects on U.S. farming. Napolitano didn’t have a direct comment on the utility of illegal immigrant employment, but did say that the DHS is starting to better track immigrants who have overstayed the Visa allowance.

Similarly, the Secretary left Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to prosecute Khalid Sheik Mohmmamed, one of five suspected September 11th terrorists, to the U.S. Department of Justice, saying, “that is a prosecution decision, as to where, and in what venue to bring a case.” “I believe that is properly held by the AG.”

New York Congressman Defends Trying Alleged 9/11 Mastermind In U.S. Court

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), whose district is home to the courthouse where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is facing trial, defended trying the suspected 9/11 mastermind in a U.S. court.

“I very strongly agree with the decision to bring the alleged terrorist to trial in a Federal District Court in New York City,” said Nadler during a conference call with reporters Friday. “Our federal courts have proven themselves repeatedly that they are up to the task of trying terrorists.”

Nadler added that trying Mohammed in a federal court was wiser than relying on a military tribunal.

“After eight years the Bush administration managed to get three pleas from three individuals who got short sentences. Around the same period 195 terrorists were convicted and given long sentences by the federal court,” said Nadler.

Attorney General Defends Prosecution Of 9/11 Mastermind In Federal Court, Discusses Prison Reform

By Ravi Bhatia-Talk Radio News Service

During his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder defended his decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, through the federal court system in New York rather than through military commissions.

President Barack Obama revived former President George W. Bush’s military commissions, also known as military tribunals, in May 2009 for a small number of Guantanamo Bay detainees. Obama's tribunals, deemed “Bush Light” by critics, provided terror suspects and war prisoners with more legal protections. However, the tribunals have been criticized for sacrificing American judicial values in order to prosecute prisoners quicker.

In his argument for employing federal courts rather than military courts, Holder cited the 300 convicted international and domestic terrorists currently in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons. He claimed that the United States could prosecute terrorists “safely and securely” in the federal system because “we have been doing it for years.”

“I studied this issue extensively,” Holder said in his opening statements. “I consulted the Secretary of Defense. I heard from prosecutors from my Department and from the Defense Department’s Office of Military Commissions. I spoke to victims on both sides of the question. And at the end of the day, it was clear to me that the venue in which we are most likely to obtain justice for the American people is in the federal court.”

While Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) defended Holder, saying that “we can rely on the American justice system,” the decision was met with criticism from Republican members of the committee. In one instance, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called Holder’s choice “a perversion of the justice system.”

“You’re a fine man,” Graham said to Holder. “I know you want to do everything to help this country be safe but I think you’ve made a fundamental mistake here.”

Senator Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) mentioned that Mohammed had already said he would plead guilty to the terrorists acts.

“How could you be more likely to get a conviction in federal court when Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has already asked to plead guilty before military commission and be executed?” Kyl asked, garnering scattered applause and laughter from some audience members. “How can you be more likely to get a conviction in an Article III [federal] court than that?”

In response, Holder said, “the determination I make ... does not depend on the whims or the desires of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. He said he wanted to do that then. I have no idea with what he wants to do now with regards to these military commissions that now [have] enhanced protections. My job is to look at the possibilities."

Holder also touched on issues such as prison reform legislation, claiming that drug courts specifically established for non-violent crimes have so far been effective, responding to Senator Al Franken's (D-Minn.) opinion that too many prisoners were in prison for drug possession.

“We’re essentially [taking] kids who are in possession of drugs and sending them to crime school," Franken said. "They learn from other criminals how to do crime, and two-thirds of them come back [after] they’re released within three years.”

“I’m familiar with the [drug court] we have here in Washington, D.C.... that has [proven] to be very successful in dealing with people who are selling drugs because they are addicted to drugs,” Holder said. “These are low level dealers, not the people who live in penthouses and drive big cars and all that.”

Holder recommended a data driven analysis of the U.S. prison system. He said that a “sentencing group” is looking at a “wide variety” of issues in U.S. prisons.

“Who is in jail?” Holder asked. “Are they in jail for appropriate amounts of time? Is the amount of time they spend in jail a deterrent? Does that have an impact on the recidivism rate? This group will be reporting back to me within the next couple of months. It is on that basis that we’ll be formulating policy and working with the Committee.”