Reply With Quote
they are reserved for citizens, that's their original intent. There are exceptions.
WIll this make you feel better.
Federal courts deal with federal law. There are federal statutes regarding terrorism. I couldn't tell you the exact history of all the statutes ever written about it.
But none of that has anything to do with what you asserted.
You said federal courts were reserved for citizens. That was your assertion. You were wrong.
they are reserved for citizens, that's their original intent. There are exceptions.
WIll this make you feel better.
Nothing I have read supports this.
In fact, many of the initial cases brought to US District Courts dealt with maritime issues, which certainly involved foreigners.
You need to back up your words. Show us something that backs up your assertion that federal courts were at any time excluded from trying anyone but US citizens.Yeah, like any foreign citizen breaking federal law in a US federal district.There are exceptions.
Are maritime traders war criminals or terrorist?Nothing I have read supports this.
In fact, many of the initial cases brought to US District Courts dealt with maritime issues, which certainly involved foreigners.
You need to back up your words. Show us something that backs up your assertion that federal courts were at any time excluded from trying anyone but US citizens.Yeah, like any foreign citizen breaking federal law in a US federal district.
Are foreign citizens able to be tried in federal courts?
You said they couldn't be.
You were wrong.
It was a spectacular failure on your part.
Now you are trying to change what you said, and failing miserably at that as well.
SO when one logs in to discuss with you, that's them failing utterly dispacably miserably right?
It must be an extreme.
Utter failure.
Reserved does not equal exclusive.
Terrorist in Guantanamo for a time didn't have the rights to a federal court.
the subject is Terrorist in federal courts.
You utterly fail miserably with content at mediocrity to understand that point.
I'm glad i could help.
And there lies the problem with this entire Obama administration.
Wait until some silver tongue lawyer gets these guys off on some technicality, and then Obama and Holder keeps them locked up anyway. Then we may see the entire administration put on trial for breaking the law.
That would be something to see. Obamas huge ego causing him to be tried as a criminal.
No, there are many degrees of failure.
Your failure here was laughably complete. Making such a stupidly ignorant statement was hilariously wrong. I can tell it is grinding you up inside that you posted such idiocy because you are feverishly trying to qualify it after the fact or change the subject of contention altogether.
Sorry, gtown. You said that US federal courts were reserved exclusively for the trials of US citizens. You were demonstrably wrong on a very simple matter of fact. It was so easy to disprove using Bush's DoJ as an example that it made you scramble to save face and try to mitigate the damage of this latest failure.
lol @ you and your inability to simply say you were just plain wrong.
Actually, there was always the potential that most of the detainees could be tried in a federal court -- it was and is at the discretion of the executive whether to actually follow that route or pursue others.Terrorist in Guantanamo for a time didn't have the rights to a federal court.
And the bleeding continues...
So you have no comment on the actual topic.
Your bleeding continues.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
