Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

Book: Obama Hoped to Put Bin Laden on Trial With Full Rights of a Criminal Defendant

Oct. 3, 2012 1:37pm Madeleine Morgenstern

Image source: Atlantic Monthly Press

WASHINGTON (The Blaze/AP) — A new book says President Barack Obama hoped to put Osama bin Laden on trial if he had surrendered during a U.S. raid.

In a book on the raid that killed bin Laden, author Mark Bowden quotes Obama as saying he thought he could make a strong political argument for giving bin Laden the full rights of a criminal defendant, to show U.S. justice applies even to him. In the book, purchased by The Associated Press, Bowden says Obama said he expected the terror leader to go down fighting.

“We worked through the legal and political issues that would have been involved, and Congress and the desire to send him to Guantánamo, and to not try him, and Article III,” Obama said, according to an adaptation of the book published in Vanity Fair. “I mean, we had worked through a whole bunch of those scenarios. But, frankly, my belief was if we had captured him, that I would be in a pretty strong position, politically, here, to argue that displaying due process and rule of law would be our best weapon against al-Qaeda, in preventing him from appearing as a martyr.”

“The Finish” is due out Oct. 16.

Obama’s remarks are the first time the president has discussed putting the terrorist on trial.

U.S. officials have said the raiders were ordered to capture bin Laden if he surrendered, or kill if he threatened them.

This post has been updated.

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (44)

asmurff
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 6:19pm
More proof Obama isn’t fit to lead America! Bringing Bid Laden here would have cause a major increase in terrist attacks against Americans around the world.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
fancynancy
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 6:05pm
It’s a good thing the guy did not survive then. I can’t imagine the havoc trying him in court and giving him criminal rights would have caused. So glad he died.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
thegreatcarnac
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 4:01pm
Of course,…….we all know that obama is an effing idiot.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Samwise636
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:54pm
Radical Islam’s end game?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdnirTQVNX4&feature=related

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- AvengerK
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 3:02pm
  Look….there was no way Obama was going to put Bin Laden in Gitmo, he’d have been a world wide laughing stock after ordering it closed in 2009. Yet Gitmo is the only facility that’s set up to house a prisoner like Bin Laden. And lo and behold..as if to vindicate me Holder’s proposal to move Gitmo prisoners to a facility in Illinois only provides for Americans to be moved there, foreign nationals are to remain in Gitmo. The Keystone Kops/Benny Hill Obama adminstration is all over the place on this.
  
  Obama didn’t want Bin Laden taken alive or the order would have been “taken alive, dead if necessary”. Not “alive if he doesnt’ resist”. Then again…Valerie Jarrett was calling the OBL plays anyway. Obama was doing his customary hand wringing since January that year.
  
  Report this comment
Valezka.Vidra
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:48pm
Since when do America-hating terrorists get equal rights in a country considered their target? Especially the non-US citizen variety of terrorists?

That’s kind of like… giving Satan a chance. Or am I way off course?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- MIBUGNU2
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 3:19pm
  Things have CHANGED since GayBama took office..
  
  Report this comment
IMCHRISTIAN
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:42pm
Probably would have let him out for good (?) behavior.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Valezka.Vidra
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:54pm
  Not even! They probably would have just cited him for a misdemeanor.
  
  Report this comment
hades3
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:37pm
Just imagine, if Bin Laden had been captured, how the Obama regime would have used that for political gain. After Bin Laden was killed instead of captured, Obama kept his death in the news by “spiking the football ” at every opportunity. Had ther been a trial, Obama and the media would have “spiked the football” 24/ 7, at the same time they would have attempted in a subtle way, to make us believe that the USA , particulary GW Bush, was the root cause for 911. Can anyone imagine Holder being in charge of the prosecution ?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Valezka.Vidra
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:50pm
  Hell, they probably would have tried to persuade the whole world that GW was bin laden’s father.
  
  Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:20pm
“U.S. officials have said the raiders were ordered to capture bin Laden if he surrendered, or kill if he threatened them.”

Good thing SEAL Team 6 didn’t follow “those” orders…..

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Ziggy
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:20pm
It is OK to lie to advance the stealth Jihad agenda.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/summary.asp?object=Persons&category=

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
KickinBack
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:20pm
And the insane don’t learn from their mistakes. Since when has putting a terrorist on trial resulted in anything other than a circus…I mean really…You’ve got the hairy terrorists for the animals, the lawyers acting like the three-ring announcers, and the people are the clowns for having to pay for it all.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Bluenoser
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:19pm
If the only way to get him was to kill him ….then that is the job at hand. But, if he could be brought to trial for his crimes, even better. It’s civilized.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The-Monk
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:18pm
“Hey, he ain’t heavy….. he’s my brother.”

BHO

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
wordsofwisdom
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:14pm
Their is only one reason for this administration to keep trying to put high level detainees on trial in U.S. courts. That is to discredit the military courts & get bad guys released on lack of evidence under domestic laws. Unless you are a complete idiot you can determine that their is a big disconnect between the way we deal with crime in the U.S. and war crimes committed on the battle field. I can just imagine the government standing in court & trying to prove a case beyond a shadow of doubt based on no crime seen or physical evidence, with no eye witness to the crimes. People this is a “declared war on the U.S.” not a gangland killing! It is stuff like this that makes me think about this song called “The End Times” http://www.twitmusic.com/cyou_in_song/songs/the-end-times

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
freenj
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:12pm
Another story that will get little play in lalaland.
My mind about 0 has been made for over three years.
I pray that those on the left begin to awake before it’s to late.
If he should win another 4 years, these United States will begin to resemble
Europe, Russia, South America, Asia. It will be difficult to reverse, however,
I hope there is a younger generation behind me that understands what makes the
United States an exceptional Nation.
I try to keep a positive mind set, that those that accept government charity will throw
their chains off and vote for FREEDOM on Nov. 6th. Romney/Ryan is the logical choice.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The Third Archon
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:10pm
When conservatives complain about giving trials to potential defendants, they only reveal a profound hypocrisy between their RHETORIC which praises the U.S. constitution (which is the BASIS of the American legal system), and their ACTIONS criticizing the judicial system this (supposedly beloved by them) this VERY SAME constitution established. What PROFOUND faith they have in the constitutional principles they profess to be the best in history.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- AvengerK
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:56pm
  funny..and not a few posts further down ARCHIE you’re bleating about putting on trials for “moral bragging rights” where the verdict is already established before the trial even takes place.
  Idiot much?
  
  Report this comment
- endthemindlessspending
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:57pm
  There is one very big difference between the two things you’re comparing. Yes, conservatives are all for constitutional trials for an American citizen, not for a crime committed by a foreign that is not protected by the constitution for their crimes. The constitution protects American citizens not foreign terrorists.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 3:48pm
  Hey bud, just giving you a heads up. Bin Laden was not a US Citizen, and he was an enemy combatant/terrorist. They don’t exactly get afforded the same right to a trial by jury that we get. I know, I know, you think “We’re all citizens of the world” and whatnot. Get over it. Your worldview is incorrect, and you need to come to terms with that.
  
  Report this comment
CWPrequired
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:06pm
He was put on trail, convicted, and shot. No way in heck those special opps guys were bringing him back to the states alive. They know this president and holder are criminals. Way to go guys!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The Third Archon
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:06pm
“BOOK: OBAMA HOPED TO PUT BIN LADEN ON TRIAL WITH FULL RIGHTS OF A CRIMINAL DEFENDANT”
It certainly would have given us moral bragging rights. And it’s not like he would have been ACQUITTED–we’re talking about an AMERICAN jury here; they’d go INTO to trial knowing their verdict, and would have convicted him REGARDLESS of what the prosecution said or did (and there’s would have been MORE than enough evidence).

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- wordsofwisdom
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:19pm
  You truly live in a alliterative universe. This administration is not on your side!
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:23pm
  @3rd
  “….we’re talking about an AMERICAN jury here.”
  
  Are you sure it wouldn’t have been an “American Muslim” jury.
  
  Holder most likely would have upheld the “jury of your peers” in that manor.
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:54pm
  Interesting how you contradict yourself so easily ARCHIE but yet you meander along in your piety as if no one has noticed (including your dimwitted self apparently). You bleated earlier about the constitution and abusing it…and then scant moments later you’re talking about “moral bragging rights” (as if the muslim world cares whether a trial is put on or not after we’ve seen embassies attacked on the anniversay of 9/11…but you’re obviously unteachable) for what clearly to you is a show trial where the verdict is a foregone conclusion (because it’s an AMERICAN jury according to you) before the trial has even started. You’re the hypocrite here champ..nobody else.
  
  Report this comment
- 00100111
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 3:49pm
  Ahh, the words of an early 20s college drop out idealist. So cute, yet so uninformed. There, there. There, there.
  
  Report this comment
banjarmon
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 1:57pm
Stupid is as stupid dose!!!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
term limits for congress
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 1:55pm
Assuming UBL was convicted, his muslim brother, BHO, would give him back to Pakistan for humanitarian reasons.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- JRGJR
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:07pm
  He knew by his trial being here he would get Life not Death. He would still be able to run things from his cell and would be given up in a hostage trade in a few years.
  
  Report this comment
LibertarianYankee
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 1:51pm
what a hypocrite, considering the items Barack signed giving citizens of the US less rights.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Baja
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 1:49pm
After the trial, make him the head of NASA for that Muslim outreach mission.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Gonzo
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 1:43pm
I hope to put Obama on trial with the full rights of a criminal defendant.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 1:46pm
  Dittoes
  
  Report this comment
- progressiveslayer
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 1:59pm
  Yes indeed
  
  Report this comment
- 13th Imam
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:03pm
  I’d rather see him waterboarded at Guantanamo. It would make a great history channel expose.
  
  Report this comment
- Anonymous T. Irrelevant
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:10pm
  I heard he was “water-poled” many times in the Chicago bath-houses he visited.
  
  Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on October 3, 2012 at 1:40pm
Wonder which major American city 0bama planned to destroy to have had such a trial?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Carpy1
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 1:59pm
  Hopefully Chicago
  
  Report this comment
- LoveMyFreedom
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:16pm
  Chicago gets my vote too!
  
  Report this comment
- Valezka.Vidra
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:42pm
  Where would the Bears have moved to, then?
  
  Not like I care: I’m a Raider fan! :D :D :D
  
  Report this comment
- Dismayed Veteran
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 2:42pm
  Detroit.
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on October 3, 2012 at 3:14pm
  RJJING…Obama never planned on having OBL on trial regardless of what this book asserts. OBL could only be detained at Gitmo (after any “rendition” in a foreign country). For Obama to put OBL in Gitmo he’d have become a laughing stock all over the globe after ordering it closed in 2009. Even with the news today about Holder planning to move detainees to a prision in Illinois it specifies that the foreign nationals would remain in Gitmo while only the American prisoners would be moved.
  
  Obama wanted OBL dead for political reasons this is why Valerie Jarrett was calling the shots on this. The order should have been “taken alive, dead if necessary” not “alive if he doesn’t resist”. What do you think the chances were of OBL walking into the open, hands in the air and saying..”ok guys..you got me”? Of course he was going to resist in some way either personally or through his body guards. Obama would have looked like a bigger idiot than he is already had he captured Bin Laden and had no clue where to house him other than Gitmo…thus..OBL is dead. It’s a lot cleaner politically for Obama that way. For our intelligence community it’s the loss of a great opportunity but we’ve seen how Obama handles the intelligence community and security concerns with the debacle in Benghazi…blame it on the movie apparently.
  
  Obama doesn’t have a foreign policy anyway so how do you comment on something that doesnt’ exist?
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.