Obama’s weak grasp of the Constitution
It’s becoming apparent that Obama was greatly oversold as a Constitutional scholar. He has now explicitly declare Bradley Manning (who has yet to come to trial) to be guilty—and note that the persons who will be judging Bradley Manning are under Obama’s command, so his declaration is likely to have impact.
Here’s an analysis. How can Obama have such a poor grasp of the Constitution? From the link:
. . . It’s long been clear that this is Obama’s understanding of “a nation of laws”: the most powerful political and financial elites who commit the most egregious crimes are to be shielded from the consequences of their lawbreaking — see his vote in favor of retroactive telecom immunity, his protection of Bush war criminals, and the way in which Wall Street executives were permitted to plunder with impunity — while the most powerless figures (such as a 23-year-old Army Private and a slew of other low-level whistleblowers) who expose the corruption and criminality of those elites are to be mercilessly punished. And, of course, our nation’s lowest persona non grata group — accused Muslim Terrorists — are simply to be encaged for life without any charges. Merciless, due-process-free punishment is for the powerless; full-scale immunity is for the powerful. “Nation of laws” indeed.
One final irony to Obama’s embrace of this lofty justifying term: . . .
