I first heard this on Laura Ingraham’s radio show this morning on my way into work.  I was just astounded.

Now, I know I’m hardly a legal expert by any stretch of the imagination, but can we say mistrial or tainted jury after this remark by President Obama?  This was from Politico:

During a round of network television interviews conducted during Obama’s visit to China, the president was asked about those who find it offensive that Mohammed will receive all the rights normally accorded to U.S. citizens when they are charged with a crime.

 

“I don’t think it will be offensive at all when he’s convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him,” Obama told NBC’s Chuck Todd.

It gets better, as the backtracker in chief was given the opportunity to clarify his remarks.

When Todd asked Obama if he was interfering in the trial process by declaring that Mohammed will be executed, Obama, a former constitutional law professor, insisted that he wasn’t trying to dictate the result.

 

“What I said was, people will not be offended if that’s the outcome. I’m not pre-judging, I’m not going to be in that courtroom, that’s the job of prosecutors, the judge and the jury,” Obama said. “What I’m absolutely clear about is that I have complete confidence in the American people and our legal traditions and the prosecutors, the tough prosecutors from New York who specialize in terrorism.”

So, let me get this straight.  You lawyer types help me out with these questions.

1. If the point was to give these scumbags full Constitutional rights and a fair trial, has the process not already been tainted when the President of the United States pretty much guarantees a conviction and execution?  Isn’t this more fodder for the ACLU-types to scream that there’s no way KSM can get a fair trial?
2. If the terrorists weren’t mirandized, then does that mean that normal citizens can get arrested at any time now without their Miranda rights read to them?
3. Will the prosecutors be forced to share evidence such as classified military intelligence with the defense attorney so unpatriotic to defense these scumbags?
4. How will we be able to protect witnesses that will testify for the prosecution?  Are there plans in place to make sure that they or their families aren’t threatened or killed during this fiasco?
5. And finally, is this a hidden attempt to put the Bush administration on trial and to open up the door for them to be tried on war crimes?

It sounds like the “fair trial” has already been tainted.  And none of my concerns, although I’m just a simpleton conservative redneck, have been asked by the media, nor even addressed in detail from this administration.    How the hell does he not even think he’s putting us in danger?

To borrow from a well broadcasted line from the 2008 campaign, I can now honestly say for the first time in my adult life, I am absolutely ashamed of my president for allowing this to happen.  Ashamed.  I couldn’t even say that about Bill Clinton.