Breitbart’s Big House

Internet news entrepreneur Andrew Breitbart broke the story of the Obama administration’s planned relocation of the terrorist detainees held in Guantanamo to the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Illinois. This past Friday at Big Government Breitbart posted the draft of the presidential directive to the Attorney General and Secretary of Defense necessary to initiate the related activities. Andrew Malcolm posts the final text of the memo on his Los Angeles Times Top of the Ticket blog here.
An AP story credited Big Government with the scoop. The New York Times got around to the story yesterday after Breitbart forced the administration’s hand and the administration announced its big plans for the big house. The Times made no mention of Breitbart’s role in breaking the story.
The Times does report that loose ends remain in the administration’s plan to bring enemy combatants to Illinois. Administration officials acknowledge that the move would require congressional approval, since Congress now bars Guantánamo detainees from being brought onto American soil unless they face prosecution, and some of the detainees may be indefinitely confined without being tried — even in the Age of Obama. The Times adds that one administration official said that Democrats (who, the Times helpfully adds, control both houses) were planning to lift that restriction if the administration came up with an acceptable plan for closing the military prison at Guantánamo.
In 2010 Breitbart will reportedly extend his “Big” blog brand into new areas. With the planned trial of KSM et al. in federal court in New York and the planned relocation of other terrorist detainees from Guantanamo to Thomson, I perceive another niche Breitbart could fill. How about Big House? Big House would serve to to break news regarding Barack Obama’s exercise of his authority as commander in chief against “militant extremists” and draw attention to related analysis such as Andrew McCarthy’s “An irrational act.”

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses