Obama Gets Easy Out of NYC KSM Trial Fiasco

Why do you think Feinstein, Schumer, and Bloomberg suddenly came out against the New York City trial of KSM? Is it because they suddenly had a stroke of genius in realizing that this whole ridiculous stunt will cost the American people an estimated half billion dollars? Doubtful, since that data has been available since day one. Since well before Holder made the decision to hold the trial in NYC.
Is it because of the inherent risk to the lives of American people by making NYC and it’s population an even more tempting target to radical muslims? Absolutely not, because it was never a concern to Holder, Obama, or the others who would like to see this country embarrassed and punished.
The change in attitude didn’t happen until after the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. With this wave of public discontent with obama and his marxist/totalitarian/anti-American policies, the President realized that an attack on NYC would likely be blamed on him and his wreckless policies against the United States.
Feinstein, Schumer, and Bloomberg were called upon to provide cover for obama and his decision to hold the trials in New York City. Apparently obama isn’t quite ready to throw Holder under the bus as he will be a key player when the President enacts his gun control tactics later on in his term.
Obama could have easily used Holder to provide cover for this major screw up, since it was originally designed to he Holder’s decision alone, but instead he sent out Bloomberg, Feinstein, and Schumer to oppose the idea so obama could look like the ever so concerned logical thinker when he comes out against holding the trials in NYC.
First he can blame Holder for making the decision, then he can claim to be working with the Congress and Mayor Bloomberg in reversing “Holder’s decision.” Even though it was obama’s policy, he can walk away protected from any blame thanks to his cronies.



The upcoming special election in Massachusetts next Tuesday could be as pivotal as the battles of Concord and Lexington were at the beginning of the Revolutionary War.



Victoria Taft 3:05 pm on February 1, 2010 Permalink
I have a question: if another blogger, me perhaps, concludes independently that moving the KSM trial is in response to the Scott Brown election, will you allege plagiarism?
Brian K. Shoemake 9:12 am on February 2, 2010 Permalink
I get the misplaced sarcasm. It is somewhat snarky and offensive considering what you already did. The answer is no. I’m not an unreasonable person. However if you choose to plagiarize* my work and post it as your own again as you did on your blog Victoria Taft (Captured Sunday Jan. 31, 2010), I most certainly will make an issue of it. The correction you made to the attribution of the article since I contacted you about it 2 days ago has been duly noted and is appreciated. Hope that helps to clarify for you. Thanks.
*From Miriam-Webster
Main Entry: pla·gia·rize
Pronunciation: \ˈplā-jə-ˌrīz also -jē-ə-\
transitive verb : to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own : use (another’s production) without crediting the sourceintransitive verb : to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source
— pla·gia·riz·er noun