White House: Republicans Were Briefed Abdulmutallab Was In FBI Custody — Did They Think That Didn’t Mean He Was Mirandized?

it took ABC 2 years to stop covering up for Edwards, how many years will it take before they stop covering for Obama

…the four Republican leaders, “who claim leadership on national security, know less about FBI procedure than the average movie-goer.”
Entirely possible and the inevitable result of a party whose base honestly believes calling someone an elite is an insult and that the scientific method is open for debate.

Why is the White House trying to spin this into “it is the Republicans fault”?
If the White House can`t do the right thing, then resign and get in some people who can.

Actually, when President Obama created that new group of “elite” interrogators in late August of last year that was to be housed at the FBI here’s what an administration official told the press about the questioning by the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group in regard to Miranda rights-
“It is not going to, certainly, be automatic in any regard that they are going to be Mirandized”.
So, saying that the members of Congress “knew what being in FBI custody meant” is misleading. No longer did it automatically mean being read your Miranda rights.

Calling someone an ‘elitist’ or a ‘european elite’ is an insult. The first signifies someone, who believes they have an inherent superiority over the general public. The second signifies a person who holds contempt, for the American public.

Actually, when President Obama created that new group of “elite” interrogators in late August of last year that was to be housed at the FBI…
So, saying that the members of Congress “knew what being in FBI custody meant” is misleading.
Lalyvie | Feb 8, 2010 11:13:33 AM
But that group was not created in August – it was just announced. It did not exist at the time the underwear bomber was detained (a perfectly reasonable line of criticism against the Obama administration actually). And it is not the same as FBI custody.

The GOPers didn’t think that even Obama was stupid enough to Mirandize him.

>>One administration official expressed agreement with a statement from Spencer Ackerman of The Washington Independent, who wrote that the four Republican leaders, “who claim leadership on national security, know less about FBI procedure than the average movie-goer. Obviously the FBI Mirandizes suspects in their custody.”>>
Abject idiocy.
Just because the FBI had him in custody
does not mean that they automatically we required to officially arrest him and read him his attendant rights.
The fact that they allowed him to talk, possibly incriminating himself and others, obviates Ackerman’s claim. No, it demolishes it.
He clammed up after being Mirandized.
Nothing…nothing he said prior to that would be admissable in court.
We are getting differing accounts daily from the WH. They’re more incompetent than the Keystone Cops.

He clammed up after being Mirandized.
Nothing…nothing he said prior to that would be admissable in court.
Barney | Feb 8, 2010 11:40:45 AM
Wait – so are you saying he shouldn’t have been debriefed before Mirandizing him? I get you hate Obama, but could you state coherently what you would prefer to have seen done? And do note that he’s been talking quite nicely since his family was flown in to lean on him (a classic example of a successful ‘soft’ interrogation technique).

jhw539- Do you know what knowledge by citation is, apart from being the only way that the ‘scientific community’ can learn anything?
MarkLeavenworth | Feb 8, 2010 11:46:57 AM
Again, can you at least define ‘scientific community’? Because by your above you appear to be arrogantly dismissing the massive body of direct experimentation, measurement, data collection, analysis, and primary-source research that is done by what most people call the scientific community.

omitted from previous post:
High-Value Interrogation Group” (HIG) would not necessarily Mirandize suspects it was questioning.
In its story on the announcement, the Washington Post reported:
Interrogators will not necessarily read detainees their rights before questioning, instead making that decision on a case-by-case basis, officials said. . . . “It’s not going to, certainly, be automatic in any regard that they are going to be Mirandized,” one official said, referring to the practice of reading defendants their rights. “Nor will it be automatic that they are not Mirandized

You missed the definition, or else you don’t know how to render one. I estimate that 98% of the ‘scientific community’ is not both PhD AND engaged in original research. Most are either engaged in ‘citing’ and reprinting previously accepted material (which is neither knowledge nor scientific method) or else repeating testing that has already been done or is debated. That’s why I classify the modern ‘scientific community’ as a kind or form of group communication, or the form that a group adopts for communicating. A definition, then, would be something like ‘A group that communicates through passing along previously printed words’.

1. What would it have helped if Republican’s had objected when they received their Christmas night “courtesy” call (that the administration and their MSM puppets are now comically calling a “briefing”)? Even if they somehow knew with certainty that Abdulmutallab had already been Mirandized, you can’t un-Mirandize someone. Once the decision was made, it really didn’t matter what Republicans thought. And, that was likely the idea. Also, a late-night “courtesy” call on a holiday regarding the details of an already detained terrorist can hardly be considered a proper forum for such policy debate. Further, Brennan doesn’t make the policy anyway, Obama does. This makes Brennan’s latest political defense all the more weak.
2. If we are to believe the administration’s claim that they are only following a Bush-era policy granting the Attorney General lead authority in handling terrorists, then what authority would Republicans have in requesting they be handled through the military? They have no authority in the matter and their preference for trying non-citizen terrorists in front of a military tribunal is well known. This is the heart of the debate. It is completely dishonest to act as if Republicans missed their chance to disagree and, therefore, any future disagreement is to be considered politically motivated. The disagreement was and continues to be well known as is evident by this news story.
3. Now, the Obama administration is the pot calling the kettle black as they attempt to accuse critics of playing politics after they were caught doing just that when they released confidential information regarding Abdulmutallab’s apparent recent cooperation. The only reason to release the information was to combat the political position of those that claim we can gather better intelligence when terrorists are handled through the military without Miranda rights. There was no other reason to release the information other than for political gain. While Obama played politics, any actionable intelligence gained from Abdulmutallab would be rendered useless. This is precisely why Democrats are often associated with poor national security — because they consistently put their selfish political interests above the interests of the country. At the same time, they accuse critics of the same politics they’re engaged in. I guess it’s difficult to see honest disagreement in others when you aren’t frequently honest yourself. Fortunately, the American people know the score and they are going to let everyone know come November and 2012!

“1. What would it have helped if Republican’s had objected when they received their Christmas night “courtesy” call ”
They wouldn’t look like they’re playing petty partisan politics with an important matter of national security for one. But what do we expect from the party who attacked President Clinton for (belatedly) trying to kill Bin Laden in the ’90s? It is well documented Republicans believed a “Monica Missiles!” soundbite was worth providing Bin Laden with political protection from further attacks.

jhw539: “They wouldn’t look like they’re playing petty partisan politics with an important matter of national security for one.”
You aren’t convincing anyone. The Republican position on handling terrorists is well known, and the administration wasn’t asking for opinions that night. Remember, it was giving a “courtesy” call after-the-fact. Be reasonable. The “courtesy” call clearly wasn’t a proper forum for policy debate. The Obama administration is simply covering for the politically-motivated release of confidential information regarding Abdulmutallab’s apparent recent cooperation, and only delusional liberals like you don’t see it.

But what do we expect from the party who attacked President Clinton for (belatedly) trying to kill Bin Laden in the ’90s?
You mean the guy that blew up the aspirin factory in Sudan? Success! We were a donor.

It is well documented Republicans believed a “Monica Missiles!” soundbite was worth providing Bin Laden with political protection from further attacks.
==========
Can you provide any of this documentation that proves the Republicans wanted to or did provide Bin Laden from any further attacks, and what attacks Clinton wanted to make against Bin Laden?

Mark Thiessen says when the HIG was introduced by Obama, he said they WOULD NOT NECESSARILY MIRANDIZE SUSPECTS IT WAS QUESTIONING. For Brennan to say everyone should have assumed he would be means he’s not familiar with the administration’s own public pronouncements on the issue.
The WaPo said such a decision would be made on a case by case basis. “In other words, Republicans were assured by the Obama administration that the decision on reading Miranda rights to captured terrorists would be made on a case by case basis.”
At The Corner, Thiessen says, “So if Brennan is wondering why the Republicans he spoke with did not just assume Abdumutallab would automatically be Mirandized, it’s because the Obama administration told them so.
“Of course, the HIG was not interrogating Abdulmutallab because — despite all the fanfare with it’s announcement, it hadn’t been stood up. But how were Republicans to know that? Especially since Obama’s own director of National Intelligence didn’t know that either?”
This is a wild shotgun blast on Brennan’s part, not the sober, surgical smack down he thought it would be. And like Spencer Ackerman, most media aren’t on their toes enough to call him and the administration out on it, instead buying the administration view lock, stock and barrel.
Apparently the Republicans did have in mind what the admin. previously told them, while Ackerman had not a clue. In fact, the Republicans DID know about FBI procedures here, and that’s why they asked the questions. Once again, the GOP stands strong on national security while the libs obfuscate, spin and pile on with cheap shots.
Question, research and challenge, Spencer. Don’t just pile on with a criticism because the WH says it’s so. And, I’ll take the GOP in a war against terrorism over the Democrats any day of the week.

The Administration should mirandize Mr. Brennan — maybe that would quiet him down. Everytime he appears on TV with his combative attitude the administration loses points.
Isn’t this the guy whose company is a contractor to the Government in the area of security who at the same time is a national security cosultant to the Obama Administration? Conflict of interest?
Where is the news media on this guy?

I don’t really get why that reading this guy his rights is a big deal.. he’s a peon.. probably doesn’t know all that much.. but you know, there are one hundred morons to take this morons place.. and success is as much in the panic as in the plane crash.
I doubt that McCain would or could have done much better.. or W
______________________________________
sorry but can’t quite have the same laissez-faire attitude. Actionable intel can come from peons especially when interrogated by knowledgeable interrogators (something the admin didn’t do because the never notified those who had background files on this guys of his capture according to their COngressional testimony). I also think about 300 people who landed in Detroit see the diff between panic and plane crash.
One last comment while I do agree there are A LOT of ways McCain is the same as Obama I have to say his take on Nat’l security/war on terror would not be one of them.

Are these people insane? Of course terrorism is a crime! What a bunch of yahoos.

This corrupt administration has no problem governing “against” the will of the people of America. The entire 2008 campaign was based on lies. Obama, Pelosi, Reid and other liberals made promises and pledges they did not keep. Now, Obama is campaigning for 2010 and 2012! Americans are fed up with HCR and Cap and Trade. We want them to create jobs and reduce debt, among other things. Obama and the liberals in Congress plan to cram this down our throats, regardless of what it takes.