I was going to attempt to Fisk this from Bill Clinton:
"Former President Bill Clinton weighed in on capital punishment on Thursday, saying courts need to slow down appeals processes to consider DNA evidence that could potentially prove a defendant is innocent.
Clinton's comments came less than 24 hours after the state of Georgia executed Troy Davis, a man convicted of shooting an off-duty police officer. Davis' case sparked protests around the world from supporters who believed he was innocent, due to a lack of physical evidence tying him to the crime and seven witnesses recanting their original testimony.
'In any case where there's any chance that any DNA evidence could change the outcome of the trial -- I think that -- this is just me now -- I think that the appeals process has to be slowed down and organized so that any evidence of innocence can always be presented and then acted upon,' said Clinton..."
But, I realized this does it better:
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996
Crow's Eye: Maintaining a commitment to Pointless Acrimony™ and Hate Filled Invective™! Also available in corvid mischief and traditional sly dog's mistrust.
11 comments:
That was different, Jack.
He was running for Preznit again.
~
Plus, Oklahoma. It all makes sense, now. Making it easier to kill people was an important and necessary reaction to Timothy McVeigh getting his murder on.
Excellent point Jack. Clinton laid the groundwork for this brave new legal future we are currently living in. This 1996 law "streamlined" the centuries old right of habeas corpus, at the very time when DNA evidence had become prevalent and was leading to questions about a lot of convictions. So instead of challenging the laws that were sending innocent people to the gallows in a racist manner, Clinton streamlined the process to quicken the executions (make them more "effective"), and put a stop to those pesky questions about guilt. The law gave prisoners one year to file their writs or else they lose out on this constitutional and human right forever.
Plus, the 1996 law introduced the secret FISA courts and introduced very extreme curtailments on our liberty. The law laid the groundwork for Bush and Obama to expand these laws even further in the name of fighting terrorism. If you wonder how a lawyer representing a Palestinian can now be imprisoned for "providing material support" to "terrorists", while the U.S. freely sells cluster bombs and grim reapers and hellfire missiles to the Israelis, look on further than this bill. This really is an odious bill passed by an odious Bill.
The timing could not have been more perfect for the fascists either. They needed a new enemy and Clinton sneaked these extreme legal concepts in this bill, which made Bush and Obama's later overreach seem normal. The transition from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism now seems seamless . . . it didn't at the time though.
Combined with Clinton's willingness to illegally attack other countries (like Sudan or Somalia), his embrace of extraordinary rendition, and his support of economic war via sanctions (like against Iraq, Cuba, and Iran), Clinton should be seen as the first terror warrior president.
Can someone please tell him to shut up? This from a guy who executed a mentally disabled guy to become President in 1992.
Walter: "...the 1996 law introduced the secret FISA courts..."
IIRC, FISA was a gift-that-keeps-giving from Jimmy Carter in 1978.
You're right nasrudin . . . Carter signed the law in 1978. I'm mixing up my Democratic villains and the law. I may have been thinking about Clinton's expansion of the law in 1995 to include "black bag" searches.
Would it have been reckless or unseemly to say something before the execution?
Jack: 3 words ---- Rickey Ray Rector.
Fantastic Jack!
Glad to be of some middling use.
Yes yes... paragraph number 2 is quite good. Anecdote:
A day or so ago, a kid, student of mine, told me he didn't like my personality (hilariously, his complaint was that I was "too laid back", not rigorously pushing him into doing class work (that's how he "works best", he said... basically complaining that I wasn't coercing him, offering rewards or punishments for playing along with my assignments)...
Anyway, before this hilarious explanation, another teacher jumped down the kid's throat, reprimanding him for how "rude" he was... suggesting he didn't like my disposition — NEVER BE HONEST WITH A SUPERIOR!! Being the obvious message. Thankfully, I was there to tell that teacher, as politely as good society calls for, to shut the fuck up and stop being a shitbird.
Post a Comment