One Off: Terrorism’s political lines drawn anew

By Rick Klein: What happens when a lone wolf gets some company? (Can you get a recount when a “one-off” is just a little bit off?) It’s a week where the full resources and policy stances of the federal government are being tested — a pair of unexpected events, on opposite sides of the East Coast, forcing quick judgments and real-world applications of sometimes vague and legalistic principles. It could have been a lot worse — both in terms of the human toll in Times Square, and the political toll that would have come had a suspected terrorist escaped the country, only days after a worsening oil spill brought new scrutiny on a certain hulking department. Events are driving policy this week: Expanded offshore oil drilling won’t be happening any sooner than 9/11 trials in Lower Manhattan. As for the politics, the debate over rights and treatment of terrorist suspects has not been a comfortable one for Democrats in the past. And Republicans would love to get back into that groove — but there’s a hint of hesitation, maybe stemming from the fact that, once again, the system (for all its flaws) seems to have worked. The split-screen crises present “a delicate challenge of management and message at a moment when the country's mistrust of government is running high,” Karen Tumulty writes in The Washington Post. “There have been times when you could practically hear the gears grinding as administration officials dodged the potholes appearing before them.” “For many Americans, this could go down as the scariest week of the Obama presidency. But depending on how well Obama and his team do, it might also be an opportunity.” Peter Baker, in The New York Times: “The arrest of a suspect in the attempted Times Square car bombing revived the volatile political debate over terrorism policy on Tuesday, as President Obama’s supporters and critics squared off over how the nation should handle those plotting against it. … The handling of Mr. Shahzad touched off the same sort of argument that followed the attempted Christmas Day bombing of a passenger jet bound for Detroit.” Time's Tony Karon, Massimo Calabresi, Mark Thompson: “The Times Square car bomb failed to detonate, but it could yet cause political reverberations around two questions: Should the government have known about the plot and its alleged perpetrator? And does using the rules of the criminal-justice system against a man accused of plotting a terror attack against America leave the country more vulnerable? So far, the answers to both questions seem to be breaking in favor of the Obama Administration, but it's early days yet. Stephen F. Hayes and Thomas Joscelyn, in The Weekly Standard: “Why does the Obama administration — and its allies on the left — go to such lengths to portray these kinds of attacks as the work of isolated extremists?” (Flashback to Sunday: “Right now, we have no evidence that it is anything other than a one-off, but we are alerting state, local officials around the country, letting them know what is going on,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told Jake Tapper, on ABC’s “This Week.”) New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, to ABC’s Robin Roberts on “Good Morning America” Wednesday: “He was lost for a period of time. That’s not unusual in these investigations.” If Shahzad’s plane had taken off, “he would have been detained in Dubai,” Kelly said. “I know it’s an exciting part of the case and easy to second-guess, but the fact of the matter is he was apprehended in 53 hours. I think that’s pretty good work.” Pre-positioning some assets… Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.: “Don't give this guy his Miranda rights until we find out what it's all about.” Senate candidate Marco Rubio, R-Fla., doing the rounds in Washington: “If this individual has information that helps prevent future attacks and loss of life, nothing should stand in the way of that including Miranda.” Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn.: “If they [investigators] make a judgment that this was a terrorist act, the person should be turned over to the military.”
And/but… Glenn Beck: “He has all the rights under the Constitution. We don’t shred the Constitution when it’s popular.” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md.: “We’re tough on terrorists. That’s our policy. That’s our performance. And, in fact, we’ve been more successful.” The pushback: “Administration officials said Shahzad, who, like Abdulmutallab, was initially responsive to questioning under a ‘public safety exception’ to the Miranda rule, continued to cooperate after his rights were read to him. They also pointed out that Shahzad is a U.S. citizen and must be tried in civilian, not military, court,” The Washington Post’s Jerry Markon and Spencer S. Hsu report. “Officials canceled Shahzad's scheduled appearance in Manhattan federal court amid his reported dialogue with agents. It was unclear whether a lawyer had been appointed for him; he is scheduled to face a judge on Thursday at the earliest.” “Officials refused to say how long the questioning took place before federal agents administered Miranda warnings – informing Shahzad of his right to remain silent and consult a lawyer. They said that sometime on Tuesday he was transported from his initial interrogation site to a different location, where Miranda warnings were given,” Walter Richey writes in the Christian Science Monitor. Wanting answers: “The decisions the administration has made in this case may have been well considered by all responsible parties and well founded. But the public is entitled to understand in greater detail what choices the administration made, through what process, and why,” The Washington Post editorial reads. This is the new, enhanced system? ABC’s Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller: “Senior administration officials say that Faisal Shahzad was put on the no fly list on Monday at 12:30 pm ET. So how was he able to board the Emirates Airlines flight to Dubai?
‘It takes a few hours for the airlines system to catch up,’ a senior administration official tells ABC News.” Lee Hamilton, to ABC News: “We’ve done a pretty good job on the first part of it people entering the country. But with regard to those exiting the country we simply have not been able to set up a system to deal with that and it showed in this case.” The New York Post ID’s a motive: “It was payback… Admitted terrorist Faisal Shahzad — who copped to training in explosives in the past year with Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, the leading extremist Islamic group in his native Pakistan — said he was driven to evil by the slew of deaths among leaders of the terror group, law-enforcement sources revealed yesterday.” The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank counted to 11: “That's the number of times the people onstage thanked one another and everybody else, from the street vendors in New York who spotted the smoking SUV to the reporters in the room. Add in the various other forms of commendation and attaboys/attagirls, and a whole lot of celebrating was going on in the halls of Justice on Tuesday.” Politico’s Josh Gerstein: “The public statements about comments Shahzad made during questioning are unusual and go against the grain of usual Justice Department practice. But such details have been discussed more in public since Holder and others in the Obama administration faced withering criticism over the brevity of the 50-minute interrogation of Christmas Day airplane bombing suspect Omar Abdulmutallab.” Lingering out there…. “Faisal Shahzad, the Pakistan-born American citizen arrested on suspicion of being Times Square's would-be May Day bomber, did not act alone,” Timothy Noah writes for Slate. “It would appear that a second shoe has dropped.” And — if he says so… Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad tells ABC’s George Stephanopoulos: “I heard that Osama bin Laden is in Washington, DC. … He’s there, because he’s a previous partner of Mr. Bush. … Rest assured that he’s in Washington.” He sees daylight inside the administration: “Mrs. Clinton is interested in speedily moving relations with Iran to the point of a clash. Based on the information we possess, Mr. Obama does not have such an opinion,” Ahmadinejad said. About that other crisis — moving things along? “Some environmentalists and liberal lawmakers believe the BP oil spill has handed President Obama a significant political opportunity to renew his stalled energy and climate bill, and are urging him to push for sweeping legislation to move the country away from reliance on oil and other fossil fuels,” the Los Angeles Times’ Jim Tankersley reports. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.: “I think it should spur it on. We have to — we have to take care of this issue. I am amazed at how difficult it seems to be to get people interested in alternative energy.” Unless: “Lawmakers said the catastrophic spill could further dim the White House's hopes for securing legislation aimed at reducing U.S. consumption of oil and other fossil fuels, by making it impossible to forge a compromise that includes expanded undersea drilling,” Jonathan Weisman reports in The Wall Street Journal. We’ll have some time to think about it… “As British Petroleum executives fanned out across Capitol Hill Tuesday in an effort to contain the growing political fallout from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the company's CEO acknowledged it could take three months to fix the damaged well,”Patricia Murphy writes for Politics Daily. White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer: “BP is responsible for — and will be held accountable for – all of the very significant clean-up and containment costs. They will pay for the mess they’ve made. … Beyond clean-up and containment, BP must be held responsible for the damages this spill causes. To help make sure of that, the Administration – in the context of a comprehensive energy bill which would help move us to a clean energy future — strongly supports efforts on Capitol Hill to raise the Oil Pollution Act damages cap significantly above $75 million.” Testing the tea — after a day where the establishment ended up doing OK… ABC Polling Director Gary Langer, on the new numbers: “Twenty-seven percent of Americans support the Tea Party, this ABC News/Washington Post poll finds, including 17 percent who back it ‘strongly’ and just 2 percent who say they're active participants. Its backers overwhelmingly reject the Obama administration, and many voice dissatisfaction with Washington, favor smaller government and express economic anxiety.” “While that reflects a motivated political base, the movement's broader appeal is in question. Nearly as many Americans oppose the Tea Party as support it. More say they like it less, rather than more, as they hear more about it. Far more are tuning it out than are highly interested. And association with the Tea Party may cost congressional candidates more votes than it attracts, particularly among better-educated Americans, whose election turnout tends to be high.” Rounding up the first big primary day of the year… ABC’s David Chalian: “The primary voters in Ohio, North Carolina, and Indiana didn’t put much for that anti-Washington, anti-establishment fervor on display Tuesday. The national party committees came out on top in all three states.” “Neither former Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.) nor Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher (D-Ohio) scored terribly convincing victories over their underfunded primary opponents but, in winning, they cleared a necessary hurdle and in so doing beat back challenges from their party's activist base,” Chris Cillizza writes at “The Fix” blog. “Turnout was exceptionally light in Ohio and North Carolina, a possible indication that the anger fueling voters across the country over economic woes, persistently high unemployment and Congress itself wasn't translating into votes — and, perhaps, the limited influence of the conservatives and libertarians who make up the fledgling tea party coalition,” the AP’s Liz Sidoti and Deanna Martin write. In North Carolina: “Democratic U.S. Senate candidates Elaine Marshall and Cal Cunningham will settle their campaign rivalry in a head-to-head runoff,” the AP’s Mike Baker reports. “Marshall and Lewis rose to the top of a crowded primary Tuesday that drew a half-dozen candidates looking to unseat Republican Sen. Richard Burr. Marshall, the secretary of state, led Tuesday night's unofficial results with 37 percent of the vote and Cunningham, a former state senator, ran 10 percentage points behind. Attorney Ken Lewis was in third place with 17 percent of the vote.” In Indiana: “Former Sen. Dan Coats won the Republican Senate nomination, but not in the commanding fashion that might be expected for a political veteran with the strong backing of the Republican establishment. Coats, who was a senator from 1989 to 1999, ran up against Tea Party activists and conservatives who backed Marlin Stutzman, a small businessman and former state senator, and former Indiana Rep. John Hostettler,” McClatchy’s Steven Thomma writes. In Ohio — though it’s not just the case there… “Tea Party activists who had rallied against the Ohio Republican Party didn't make a significant difference in statewide races on Tuesday, as GOP-endorsed candidates cruised to victory,” Joe Guillen reports in The Plain Dealer. Looking ahead — Politico’s Alexander Burns: “Last night wasn't an easy one for establishment favorites, but just wait until the Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Arkansas primaries 13 days from today. Polls released Tuesday from both the Pennsylvania and Kentucky Senate races revealed unsettling numbers for both parties' preferred candidates.” On the air — President Obama has cut a radio ad for Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., and a robocall for “a Democrat” in the Hawaii special, ABC’s Teddy Davis and Matt Loffman report. (How does that help things, exactly, when the fact that there are two Democrats on the ballot is the problem?) More of what’s mixing it up in Arkansas: “Americans for Job Security … this week it unrolled a spot that can’t help but be described as racist,” Neera Tanden writes for The New Republic. “The ad targets Bill Halter, who is running in the Arkansas Democratic primary against Senator Blanche Lincoln. It features Indian actors — in Indian outfits, with Indian accents, with images of India behind them. They thank Halter for his support of outsourcing to Bangalore while he served as the director of an unnamed company.” More Florida fallout –per the AP: “Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is endorsing Marco Rubio's campaign for U.S. Senate. Bush, still popular and influential with Florida Republicans, has long been rumored to be a Rubio backer, but his endorsement comes less than a week after Gov. Charlie Crist decided to run as an independent rather than face Rubio in the GOP primary.” Laura Bush sits down with USA Today’s Susan Page: “She singles out Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for calling her husband a ‘liar’ and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for questioning his judgment, knowledge and experience,” Page writes. “I think it's really important for public officials to use some sort of decorum, for all of them to,” Laura Bush said. “George did. He would have never called anyone names like that, ever — certainly not the Leader and the Speaker. I mean, that's just not constructive. And we see it today. It's still happening today. It wasn't just about George. Now it's about the other side.”
The Kicker: “Anyone who has ever used email understands that you don’t control all incoming messages, and that subject lines often are used to mislead people into opening messages that defy decency.” — Florida state Sen. Mike Bennet, after a reporter caught him looking at a pornographic picture on his computer during a legislative debate. “Now we know that Jack Bauer can do it in 24 minutes. But in the real world, 53 hours is a — is a pretty good number.” — New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, almost getting a pop culture reference right.
For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s blog . . . all day every day: