I think Todd's turned into a complete schmuck, but I've never heard anything about him being a "republican analyst". As a matter of fact, his wife is a democratic strategist. You got anything to back that up your assertion?

Hilarious. The previous administration was so inept and corrupt that it couldn't even stage a show trial. And now you're complaining?

What is it with Republicans and projection?

And Bush couldn't manage a show trial or a military trial. They kept up the good work for 8 years.

shooter is outraged on behalf of the violated trial rights of the terrorists? Now I've seen everything.

Of all the incoherent freeper nonsense you've gabbled here, this has to be the most incoherent thing yet.

A public trial by jury before an Article III judge (that's Article III of the Constitution, which you guys fervantly purport to revere yet seem to abhor when it's actual provisions are actually applied) in which KSM is given all the protections accorded to the accused by the Constitution is a "show trial" like under Stalin, so, instead, we should try him him in secret before a military commission? That's what you're saying? Really?

And, no, "the rest of them" won't be tried by military commissions. Just the ones who are too dangerous to let go, but whose cases were hopelessly tainted by Dick Cheney's perverted need to feel tough and powerful by having them tortured.

It's one thing for you nutters to say that military commissions are a good thing because they let us sidestep the consequences of Cheney's depravity, and even to fantasize yourselves into believing that the torture was justified because of imaginary actionable intelligence we obtained. But to say that trial by jury is like a Stalinist show trial while a secret trial by military officers under loosened rules of evidence is just fine and dandy is illustrative of the ongoing assault on reason that is the sole remaining "principle" of modern conservatism.