As the year winds to a close and the holidays approach, Congress is still locked in debates about pushing government-run health care down our throats, taxing American energy, and repeating their mistakes by passing another costly and ineffective stimulus.

This is the time for immediate action, and you can help.

But first, here are the stakes:

Historically, recessions have been times for global economic realignment, where some nations emerge as new leaders while others fall and begin a march toward decline.  The way for America to remain a world leader is not to abandon the free market principles that have been the source of our prosperity, but rather to embrace and defend them. 
The job-killing politicians in Washington, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Leader Harry Reid, and the Obama administration, are trying to guarantee the march toward decline by ignoring the true source of job creation: American economic freedom. 

Already this year, they have rammed through a $787 billion stimulus packaged, financed by taxpayers like us, that failed to create jobs as they promised.

They have rammed through the House, and are now debating in the Senate, a cap and trade plan that is nothing more than a huge new tax on energy, a tax that will kill millions of American jobs and raise all of our electricity costs by thousands of dollars.

They have rammed through the House a 2,000-page power grab disguised as "health care reform" that will cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars in the next decade.

And now they want us to believe they are going to focus on jobs...with the same failed stimulus concept that increased the unemployment rate to a 25-year high.

These new taxes on Americans will almost certainly guarantee that once the global recession ends, our country's position as an economic world leader will be seriously compromised.

But we can fight back. Newt recently shared with us an internal memo entitled "The Way Forward: A Roadmap for Enduring Prosperity," a series of initiatives that will return power to American taxpayers from Washington bureaucrats, while also promoting job creation and economic growth.

And we need YOUR help to turn this document into meaningful change in America.  Please read the Roadmap today so we can immediately begin mobilizing a grassroots army of supporters across the country.

Here are a few additional steps you can take today to save America from more job-killing legislation:
 

• Sign our "Jobs Here, Jobs Now, Jobs First!" petition located to your right.

• Share this document with all of your friends, family members, and co-workers.

• Call talk radio and tell them about how you support real solutions for job creation, as found in the Roadmap.

• Write letters to the editor in your local newspaper outlining your thoughts.

• And, as always, you should call your Congressman and Senators (the main switchboard for Capitol Hill is 202-224-3121, too.) Tell them you do NOT support another failed stimulus (regardless of what they call it) that borrows money from future generations and puts our economic well-being at risk. Tell them you support a true Roadmap for Enduring Prosperity, which restores power to you, the taxpayer and voter, and takes power away from career politicians.

The stakes are simply too high for us to stand idly by as our elected leaders debate and pass more job-killing legislation.

We will be outlining more steps in the weeks to come, so stay tuned... 

In 2010, Republicans across the country are going to be thinking about playing offense—looking to pick up seats in both houses of Congress from today’s majority Democrats. There is one important seat in Ohio, however, which we need to defend.

The Republican comeback in 2010 requires a strong slate of Republican candidates for every office. Ohio is setting the example with U.S. Senate Candidate Rob Portman. In a bid for an open seat currently held by Republican George Voinovich, Rob Portman has recently polled ahead of the leading Democratic contenders after trailing for some time. Gubernatorial candidate John Kasich is also faring well. This is all occurring a mere year after Obama carried Ohio by 5% and Governor Ted Strickland was featured as a major player throughout the Democratic primary.

The shift in the public mood cannot be discounted as a cause for Portman’s rise in the polls, but a strong candidate is necessary to capitalize on this trend. Rob Portman is a strong and compelling candidate. Portman is the son of entrepreneurial parents. In a beginning so resonant with many Midwesterners, Portman worked amongst his siblings in the family’s small business—a forklift dealership. With his family achieving success in business, Portman attended and graduated from Dartmouth and the University of Michigan Law School. He proceeded to distinguish himself as a business lawyer. Portman worked as Associate Counsel in the first Bush White House and in 1993 was elected to Congress. In 2005, Portman was appointed U.S. Trade Representative.  This is essentially the blueprint resume for Republicans—commitment to small business, competence in the private sector, accomplishment as a public servant, and proven understanding of technical policy, such as international trade.

In addition to playing up his roots in Ohio and his impressive resume, Portman is emphasizing the right issues to win the 2010 election. The campaign website stresses Portman’s positions on jobs, health care, energy, and the budget. These are the meat and potato issues that Republicans can win on. In a state such as Ohio, the energy issue may be the most paramount. Any sort of cap and trade energy tax would be crippling to budding industry in Ohio and the Midwest generally. Portman’s personal experiences in small business will certainly add credibility to any discussion of that issue. Furthermore, Portman’s extensive background in trade will help him articulate policies that benefit the domestic labor force and the domestic consumer. Unfortunately, we will have to deal with the Obama trade policies for a few more years, so it would be nice to have an informed voice of dissent in the Senate.

All of these traits make Portman a candidate to watch. The public mood is forever fleeting and unpredictable, supporting compelling candidates, such as Rob Portman, is vital for Republican success in 2010.

Sometimes, the best offense is a good defense. This is one of those cases—help Rob Portman in Ohio.

Tomorrow night's vote is being portrayed by Democrats as a small procedural one that will simply allow the Senate to debate its healthcare bill, but in fact, it is much more than that.

Others have blogged about this based on an interesting note sent out yesterday by the Senate GOP caucus, but it is an important enough statistic that I wanted to share it here with our readers, too. Read this release from Senator Coburn's office:

Democrat senators are trying to portray the vote to proceed to the health care bill as being different than a vote in support of the bill itself (story here).

History demonstrates otherwise.

According to an analysis conducted for this office by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, between the 106^th and 110^th Congress, there were 41 cases in which the Senate approved the motion to proceed to a bill that the Senate eventually held a vote on final passage.  Of those 41, 40 of the bills received Senate approval (S. 1805 in the 108^th Congress was the lone exception).  Based on these numbers, when the Senate votes to invoke cloture on a motion to proceed to a bill, that bill has a 97.6 percent chance of inevitably passing the Senate.

*This analysis excludes any bill that may have been pulled from the floor for whatever reason after the initial cloture votes or that may have passed by unanimous consent or a voice vote.

So, if the motion to proceed passes tomorrow night, which it will, then this thing is almost certain to pass the Senate and make its way into conference with the House. That's how important tomorrow's debate is. Depressing.

In the meantime, don't let these supposedly "moderate" Democrats like Ben Nelson play their little charade. What charade? Well, he's trying to act like this vote is of little importance, and that he could still be a "no" vote on this thing when the time comes. Read: Sen. Nelson Will Vote Yes on Saturday

In reality, he probably will be a no vote on the final bill. BUT, and this is the key, he will be a "yes" vote at the only times which matter-- when voting on cloture to end debate and shut off filibusters. He will simply never join Republicans in a filibuster against his own caucus. Don't count on the other moderates to, either.

In the end, he will get to say to his constituents that he voted no on Obamacare, which he'll be able to do when Democrats don't need his vote to obtain a simple majority, and he'll hope they won't notice that he enabled them to put the bill in position for final passage.

Don't let him get away with it. Senator Nelson, this is your healthcare bill now.

The Boy Scouts' motto is: Be prepared. Who knew it meant preparing to defend themselves against purple-shirted union thuggery over community service? Kids, pay attention. This is a teachable moment for all of you on power, politics and Big Labor's culture of corruption.

Last week at a city council meeting in Allentown, Pa., a top official of the local Service Employees International Union chapter ranted about 17-year-old Scout Kevin Anderson's park cleanup work. Anderson devoted some 200 hours to the job in order to earn an Eagle Scout badge. He picked up trash and helped clear a 1,000-foot walking path with fellow members of Boy Scouts Troop 301 of Center Valley.

But SEIU's Nick Balzano gave them hell instead of thanks.

Balzano disparaged altruistic efforts in city parks and asserted that "there is (sic) to be no volunteers" since his union members were laid off. He then issued a witch hunt threat: "We'll also be looking into the Cub Scout or Boy Scout who did the trails. We may file another grievance on that." Citing union rules, he gave the Allentown city council, the Boy Scouts and all potential volunteers an iron-fisted ultimatum: "None of them can pick up a hoe. They can't pick up a shovel. They can't plant a flower. They can't clear a bicycle path. They can't do anything. Our people do that."

That's right. Balzano was ready to bludgeon the Boy Scout because his gung-ho volunteerism posed a threat to the SEIU labor monopoly. The outrageous display of Boss Balzano's union protectionism provoked a national furor. SEIU headquarters in Washington immediately blamed "the disreputable Fox News and other right-wing outlets like Michelle Malkin's accuracy challenged blog" for the backlash. While decrying their critics' "fiction," SEIU distanced itself from Balzano, denying that he was a top union leader and dismissing his remarks as "unauthorized."

Fact: U.S. Department of Labor records from 2008 (their most recent filing) show that Balzano is no rogue rank-and-file member. He currently serves on the SEIU local's executive board and previously served as president.

Fact: The union tried to minimize Balzano's grievance threat as "inappropriate." But the dirty open secret is that public-sector unions have routinely attacked volunteer workers who threaten their stranglehold.

Last June, union officials in Baraboo, Wis., filed a complaint against volunteer firefighters who built sandbag barricades to protect the city from record flooding. They whined that city Department of Public Works employees should have been called first and demanded overtime pay (for work they didn't do) to compensate them.

Yes, kids, the city was knee-deep in water and the government union got mad that other people scrambled to work together in an emergency to put sand in bags, save homes and help their neighbors. Public-sector unions aren't about serving the public interest. They're about serving their people, their power and their self-preservation.

In Montpelier, Vt., several years ago, the teachers union went after a superstar educator, Bill Corrow. The students, staff and supervisors at his school loved the social studies teacher and Vietnam veteran. But the Vermont Education Association hated him because he was a volunteer who did not accept payment for his elective course. Teachers unions are all for parents and schoolchildren volunteering their time to engage in political lobbying and power-expanding initiatives on the union's behalf. But God help the community service-oriented individual with a passion for sharing his knowledge in their classrooms.

In California, union heavies in the Sacramento area sued a nonprofit environmental group for using college-age volunteers on a state-funded project to clean up a canyon and build a community trail. Big Labor dusted off an old law that requires community service volunteers to be paid prevailing wages for doing the same kind of cleanup that Allentown Boy Scout Kevin Anderson was punished for doing freely. The law was finally repealed, but not without a brass-knuckles fight.

As National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix, whose group monitors forced union abuses, pointed out during the battle: "Discerning California union bosses' real agenda … is not hard. Volunteer workers don't have to pay compulsory union dues to serve their communities, but most paid workers on public projects in California do. … (It) is yet another example of how government-authorized compulsory union dues corrupt the political process and furnish unscrupulous union officials with an enormous incentive to act against the public interest."

SEIU President Andy Stern in Washington speaks for all of Big Labor when he describes his organizing philosophy: "We prefer to use the power of persuasion, but if that doesn't work, we use the persuasion of power." President Obama, who has made national service an administration priority, has been and will continue to be silent about the Big Labor bullies who make public enemies of Scouts with trash bags and hoes.

You see, kids, Obama owes Stern (his most frequent White House visitor) and his union brethren. SEIU alone poured more than $60 million in compulsory membership dues into Obama's campaign and leaned on its workers to "volunteer" to knock on doors, place phone calls and send out mailers for the Democratic Party. No good deed goes unpunished by union bosses -- unless it benefits their political empire.

Mexico’s culture of corruption is synonymous with the drug dealers, Federales as well as the government. It is no secret business south of the border is handled with a greasy handshake full of money, but what’s surprising to most Americans are the major trade deals cut to benefit our neighbor to the south.

Why has America bent over backwards to create free trade and open borders with such an uncooperative neighbor? What has Mexico given up for the sake of our benefit? Still thinking? It could take awhile.

Mexico is a country filled with natural resources. There is plenty of fertile land for crops, it lays claim to a massive amount of oil and contains thousands of miles of sandy beaches for tourists to frolic on. So why does this country, so close to the successes of its North American neighbor continue to stagnate in corruption and remain an oligarchy?

For the meantime America is the sole superpower. But unlike the past, American administrations have made mistakes and those blunders translated into some bad deals for the American people.

So where did it begin to go wrong?

Beginning in 2002/03 the American government was in the business of trying to catch the bad guys in Juarez and in the midst of catching the murderous cartel members, ICE found itself involved in a dozen murders.

The murders took place in Juarez, Mexico at the now infamous ‘House of Death.’ Twelve murders should have shook Mexico awake and dealt a blow to the American law enforcement community. Strangely it did not. Mexico would hold on to that huge mistake and smartly use it to their advantage at a later date.

This would now become the first major law enforcement cover-up in the Bush “W” White House.

While 12 murders are taking place under the watchful eye of ICE, a mistake is made and it nearly cost the lives of several DEA agents assigned to the Juarez office. This would forever be known as the catalyst point. Once a senior DEA agent Sandalio Gonzalez learns of ICE’s shenanigans, he writes a letter and begins a paper trail.

When Gonzalez learned about the House of Death details he rightly knows something is afoul. He then writes his ICE counterpart and the office of U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton formally demanding accountability for the missteps that led to the U.S. knowing and allegedly participating in 12 murders.

It is worth pointing out that there is no statute of limitations for murder.

“Over the past five and a half years I found a trail that didn’t make sense regarding economic disparities and the undermining of national security. All paths led right back to the El Paso Region because everyone understood Mexico was holding something over us. The pattern was easily documented and verifiable. Ultimately it all led back to the House of Death,” says Andy Ramirez, president of the California based nonprofit Law Enforcement Officers Advocates Council, who documented a pattern of prosecutorial abuse by Justice, and misrepresentations of fact by Homeland Security.

With an internal cover-up in play, Mexico was in position to play the House of Death card in 2004 and thereafter due to the failure of the U.S. government to clean house. This would eventually somewhat play out in federal court in December 2006 where sworn testimony of Michelle Leonhart, then DEA Deputy Administrator places responsibility for the House of Death squarely on ICE.

When Leonhart was asked if ICE was responsible, she responded, “ICE was responsible, yes…ICE caused the incident.”

At this point, former U.S. Attorney Pete Nunez said, “heads should have rolled in this case.” Yet no high-ranking U.S. officials lost their jobs, nor were they prosecuted.

This simple fact, coupled with a massive cover-up and Mexico’s silence would allow Mexico to gain favorable economic and immigration related concessions while restructuring U.S. border security- with a very complicit Bush White House.

Uncovering the favors for the Mexican Government

Now that the cover-up is in full swing a pair of meetings would take place in Crawford, TX with Mexico’s President Vicente Fox and U.S. President Bush. During the first meeting in March of 2004, Mexico and the U.S. reached a critical agreement that allowed Mexicans with short-term visas to cross the border without being fingerprinted and photographed by U.S. authorities. The respective leaders also began a discussion of a “Guest Worker Plan” or amnesty.

In April of 2004 a plea agreement was reached regarding the murders in the House of Death case. The cartel leader, Heriberto Santillan pled guilty to drug trafficking while the murder charges were dropped. He accepted 25 years in a U.S. prison courtesy of Sutton. This plea deal ensured that Johnny Boy and the Bush Administration would not have to go into court where the gruesome tortures and murders, as well as the case mismanagement by Sutton’s office and ICE (the very things being covered-up) would be exposed in the light of day.

One can conclude that Sutton was placed all along in the position of gatekeeper to protect the White House. Along with his partner in crime Alberto Gonzales, who went from Special Counsel to the President to Attorney General, both would be able to protect all the Bush Administration’s policies regarding Mexico.

It was also during this time that Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, El Paso Border Patrol Agents, found themselves in a heap of trouble regarding shots fired at a known drug dealer. Sutton was the prosecuting attorney in this case, and in another case involving illegal aliens, that being Edwards County Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez.

“This case (Ramos-Compean) was a skunk. It had a terrible odor,” explains Congressman Walter B. Jones-R NC. “I always wondered why there was no investigation in this matter and why the Mexican Government had so much sway in this American case involving Border Patrol Agents.”

For Jones and a few other Senior Congressional members the story is becoming increasingly clear, referring to the House of Death. “This conspiracy, corruption and cover-up screams for immediate Congressional investigation,” Jones said matter of factly.

“Wrong is wrong, and after reading more about this case it was expected that Sutton would have shut down the House of Death case after the first murder. He did not. We need to remember we are a nation of laws,” Jones finished.

However, these favors for Mexico did not just involve the questionable prosecutions of law enforcement officers.

Marginalizing the Border Patrol

Soon after in June 2004, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge releases an internal memorandum, which prohibited race profiling as an enforcement method.

U.S. Border Patrol agents from the Temecula Border Patrol Sector were conducting interior enforcement operations in Ontario, CA, which resulted in condemnation by the Mexican government and Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus claiming race profiling. Such actions have continued to this day when it comes to immigration enforcement.

June would prove to be a busy month for the Mexican government.

A Social Security Totalization Agreement was signed with Mexico. This agreement would put millions of illegal Mexican workers into the U.S. Social Security system. It is alleged that they would collect U.S. benefits based on their U.S earnings under false or stolen Social Security numbers plus earnings in Mexico. Opponents claimed this pact would further lure illegal immigration, and remain a key component for the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.

On July 1, 2004 David V. Aguilar became Chief of the Border Patrol after being named to the position in May 2004. The appointment of Aguilar, Chief Patrol Agent of Tucson Sector, was key as he immediately began restructuring the patrol from which many controversial internal events began to inexplicably shape.

This brings us back to Andy Ramirez who stated, “It was the appointment of David Aguilar where the Border Patrol was destroyed from within. Very quickly, I had sources consisting of active duty and retired agents telling me that Mexico was running all the sectors and stations along the southwest border. In a very short time an agency who’s motto was ‘Honor First’ became one of ‘no confidence’ where their own employees would be filled with mistrust and fear of the very government they were willing to die for defending our front lines.”

By the end of summer 2004 a “gag” order was put in place by the Department of Homeland Security ending any unauthorized discussion or statements by its’ employees with the public and media. This was needed to stop any whistle blowing within the department or comments by agents to the media regarding the outrageous policies of the Bush Administration.

It is also worth pointing out that the formation of the Department of Homeland Security in 2003 was critical in bringing immigration and customs law enforcement agencies together under one umbrella and squelch any stray employees’ opposition to these types of matters.

DHS now had the Border Patrol, Customs, and ICE all within one roof. No one could step out of line under the Bush White House’s watchful eyes. Secretary Ridge and Attorney General Ashcroft would have a direct pipeline to the president, both of whom had full knowledge of the House of Death case as documented in Sandy Gonzalez’ civil suit.

Taking a cue from the 9/11 Commission Report, the Bush Administration released a new National Border Patrol Strategy, which made stopping the terrorists the top priority.

The reality was that such a strategy sounded good on paper, but accomplished very little other than giving Congress and the public a façade of smoke and mirrors to give a sense of “wow they’re doing something to control the borders.”

However, local Border Patrol sector chiefs were stripped of command and control over their kingdoms. All operations were subsequently centralized and placed under the control of headquarters and Chief Aguilar in Washington, DC. In effect, headquarters no longer served the field.

On November 16, 2004, a memorandum of understanding was completed between CBP and ICE in which ICE’ Office of Investigations was given control of key investigative responsibilities while ultimately neutering the Border Patrol by limiting enforcement to cross border traffic in “routine areas of patrol”.

Moving forward into 2005 the Congress was making a full-court press for immigration reform or amnesty.

In early spring another Bush Administration meeting took place in Texas with President Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Martin to outline the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.

This deal would further weaken border security and interior enforcement as well as denounce U.S. civilian border observers or Minutemen groups as vigilantes, and proposed Republican Congressional legislation calling for construction of a border fence. Discussions about a new “guest worker” plan for Mexican illegal aliens that experts have called a second amnesty also began to take shape at this tri-country pow-wow.

Throughout the summer the country would begin its grumblings about the McCain/Kennedy/Bush immigration reform bill.

Curiously the Mexican Secretary of Foreign Relations Official Website outlines all the activities by U.S. civilian groups including the Minutemen groups, and official investigations by Congressmen regarding border security and interior enforcement.

During this same time period numerous Chief Patrol Agents and other high-ranking officials in the Border Patrol suddenly began to retire early before their mandatory age-57 retirement requirement.

New Mexican President, Same Interference

In the interim, Mexican violence continued to spin out of control with the election of new President Felipe Calderon.

Meanwhile as word of the border fence made its way into the 2006 legislation it was becoming increasingly clear a fence would not be built as many Americans wanted.

“The Bush Administration was constantly dragging their feet. They wanted no part in clear language that put a mandated double fence in high traffic zones and they didn’t want a time certain for completion,” said retired Congressman Duncan L. Hunter, R-CA. “I finally just pushed for the double and triple fence in the San Diego region and left Arizona and Texas out.”

The Bush White House along with other Texas legislators would water down the required fencing in the 2006 immigration reform bill and to this day the fence has been plagued by delays, cost overruns, and bureaucratic obstruction due to immense pressure from Mexico.

However, Americans were having no part in the new amnesty talk and it would be the radio talk shows leading the charge to stop the final McCain/Kennedy/Bush legislation in its tracks.

A defeated White House and an empowered Mexican government wouldn’t end on that note.

The outgoing President Bush would get the Merida Initiative signed into law by June 30 of 2008. It provided $1.4 billion ($400 million immediately) financed through Congressional Appropriations (from U.S. taxpayers) to assist Mexico in combating transnational organized crime; Ambassador Garza and counterpart in Mexico City sign implementation agreement Dec. 3, 2008

Considering the mishandling and subsequent cover-up of the House of Death murder spree that began in El Paso and found its way to Washington, local Congressman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) oddly has never issued any statement regarding this entire mess.

When asked to comment, Vincent Perez, Reyes’ press secretary responded with, “I don’t know what this had to do with us.”

When pressed with the fact that the agencies involved were working in his district, Perez responded, “I still don't understand what this has to do with our office.”

However, in a different matter Reyes’ office contacted ICE on June 19, 2008 regarding the kidnapping of a relative in Juarez though ICE had no jurisdiction. As a result, Reyes is now under investigation by the House Ethics Committee as a complaint was filed in July 2008 questioning the improper usage of a U.S. law enforcement agency.

Betting the House

The only way this type of political play could have been pulled off was by Mexico having a chip; keeping in mind they want open borders – amnesty at minimum. They had the political chip, or blackmail, courtesy of the mishandling and cover-up of the House of Death case. But to pull it off, law enforcement starting with the Border Patrol had to be undermined and destroyed from within; the very thing Mexico has always wanted. ICE is corrupt, overwhelmed, and melting anyhow so they would be an ineffective replacement.

The long-standing relationship between Reyes and Aguilar within management at Border Patrol is equally important. Reyes was Chief Patrol Agent of McAllen Sector while Aguilar was a high-ranking subordinate under him.

Given this relationship it would be easy to communicate and restructure the Border Patrol to the agency’s detriment with Reyes shepherding it through Congress without much notice. Many Members of Congress have deferred to Reyes due to his experience as a Border Patrol high-ranking agent.

Given DHS and the Justice Department’s roles in the House of Death case, with the ‘rule of law’ eliminated, and their failure to hold people accountable in this matter, amnesty could be pushed. The American people have been left standing alone against these overwhelming odds.

The Blind Sheikh (Abdel Rahman) was successfully convicted in 1995 for bombing the World Trade Center and is now in prison for life. He had permanent resident status in the United States – though he was on the official US terrorist list – and this was prior to 9-11, so he was tried in U.S. civilian courts as a criminal defendant. His conviction and sentencing is Attorney General Holder’s terror trial standard and he holds it up against the many concerns expressed about KSM+4 being tried in our civilian courts. There have been several other terror trials since 1995 in our criminal courts, but the powerful combination of a World Trade Center attack and convicted Islamist bomber is held up as the best claim that enemy terrorists can be prosecuted in federal court.

Former Attorney General Mukasey does not agree and he was judge for the Blind Sheikh’s trial. Days ago, Mukasey remarked on Holder’s announcement as he addressed attorneys at the Federalist Society’s convention in Washington DC. Among other objections to Holder’s decision, Mukasey worried that battlefield evidence is not collected according to criminal law standards. He also noted that the trial process would have to start anew in compliance with civilian court procedures, causing a “circus of information disclosure.” He posited that constitutional provisions like the right to a speedy trial -- generally a 90-day standard for a defendant to be charged or tried -- may be argued by the defense.

Mukasey pointed to the Moussaoui trial as an example of how terrorists will use the courtroom to grandstand. Even though Moussaoui proclaimed himself guilty, courtroom shenanigans went on for over four years and the jury failed to return a death sentence verdict. Apparently the jury was not convinced that Moussaoui's “silence was directly responsible for the 9-11 attacks.” No wonder, the legal difficulties of proving “silence” and “direct responsibility” and how to demonstrate the negative of not doing something, all conspire to contort the process. Moussaoui left the courtroom trumpeting, “America, you lost.”

Andrew McCarthy, the lead US Attorney in the Blind Sheikh’s trial, also disagrees with Holder. First, McCarthy does not find constitutional, international law, or legal case history basis for vesting unlawful enemy combatants with US Constitutional due process rights. Second, he agrees with Mukasey that the different standards for criminal trials complicate efforts to convict terrorists, while maintaining his great confidence in the Southern District New York prosecutors. Finally, and most terrifying, is that McCarthy knows firsthand how intelligence secrets will be disclosed during trial:

In 1995, just before trying the blind sheik (Omar Abdel Rahman) and eleven others, I duly complied with discovery law by writing a letter to the defense counsel listing 200 names of people who might be alleged as unindicted co-conspirators--i.e., people who were on the government's radar screen but whom there was insufficient evidence to charge. Six years later, my letter turned up as evidence in the trial of those who bombed our embassies in Africa. It seems that, within days of my having sent it, the letter had found its way to Sudan and was in the hands of bin Laden (who was on the list), having been fetched for him by an al-Qaeda operative who had gotten it from one of his associates.

Jihadists delight in gaming our legal system. As McCarthy also records in his riveting account of the two-year trial: Willful Blindness: Memoir of Jihad, the terror plotters planned for getting caught: “Bring my lawyer.’ Never talk to them. Not a word. ‘My lawyer’—that’s it! That’s what’s so beautiful about America.”

Attorney General Holder said in Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings today that he knows we are at war. When,then, will he treat the terrorists like enemies – not common criminals -- in this war?