(Image source: U.S. Department of Defense)


BY CHRISTINA HARTMAN


Critics call it a major about-face. Attorney General Eric Holder announced the accused 9/11 plotters will be tried by a military tribunal rather than a civilian court in New York.

Analysts say it’s another sign the controversial detention center at Guantanamo Bay isn’t closing any time soon.
(Photo credit: Department of Defense)

U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER: “I respect their ability to disagree, but I think they should respect the fact that this is a unique executive branch function. I have to deal with this situation as I find it, and I have reluctantly made the determination that these kids -- these cases should be brought in a military commission... We took into account a whole variety of things when trying to make this determination as to where these cases should be brought...” (C-SPAN)

The president’s supporters are calling the announcement disappointing -- after repeated campaign promises from Mr. Obama that he’d close Guantanamo. Slate’s David Weigel calls it a “conservative win.”

“I guess it's fitting that a key, early civil libertarian promise of the Obama administration goes kaput on the same day he announces re-election. … Basically, Holder and DOJ got rolled. … The administration missed its own deadlines. And now it finally surrenders.”

Holder said he still would have preferred civilian trials for alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Skeikh Mohammed and his four alleged co-plotters - but he blamed Congress for restrictions on civilian trials of Gitmo inmates.

Mohammed was arrested in 2003 in Pakistan - and according to AFP was held in secret prisons for three years before American officials sent him to Guantanamo in 2006 - where he’s awaited trial ever since. (Photo credits: Wikimedia Commons)

On MSNBC - Justice Correspondent Pete Williams reiterates Holder’s suggestion Congress is to blame.

“Congress passed a law saying that they couldn't be brought here for trial. It then refused to give the government any money to refurbish a prison in Illinois where the 9/11 defendants would have been brought... (FLASH) Ultimately I think it's basically the decision by the Obama administration that it's better to put them on trial somehow, if they can't be brought to the U.S. which was their first choice...”

But The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer isn’t buying it.

“Today’s news ... may indeed be the defining moment for the Obama Justice Department, defining it, unfortunately, as incapable of standing up to the political passions still stirred by the threat of terrorism.”

That’s where many critics’ chips are falling -- painting the announcement as pure politics. Fox News’ Megyn Kelly notes the announcement came the same day President Obama officially announced his intent to run for re-election.

But a Democrat tells her - any attempt to paint the announcement as political cheapens the debate.

“We have got to understand whatever happens here is heard over there. This idea that somehow trying these Arab terrorists in military court or civilian court is a political move as opposed to the American system working the way it should I think gives aid and comfort to our enemies and gives them ammunition.”

CNN’s Brooke Baldwin observes - Holder looked - in her words - almost “bitter” at having to make the announcement. The network’s legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin agrees - the Obama administration wasn’t given any better options here.
 

“They had to fold, because they would not have a civilian trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohamed. That is simply not legally or politically possible at this point because of the rebellion that was set off in Congress. So they are doing what they can which is have a military tribunal which is a real trial with defense lawyers and rules of evidence...”

'Like' Newsy on Facebook for updates in your news feed

Get more multisource video news analysis from Newsy

Transcript by Newsy