As reported previously
by the New Yorker, Rahm Emanuel has disagreed with Eric Holder regarding whether 9-11 plotters should be tried in civilian courts or military tribunals.
Today, the New York Times' Jodi Kantor and Charlie Savage
make the same assertion, quoting Rahm Emanuel directly:
Mr. Emanuel, , said his disagreement with Mr. Holder is rooted in different perspectives, not personalities. “You can’t close Guantánamo without Senator Graham, and K.S.M. was a link in that deal,” he said, referring to Mr. Mohammed.
So there you have it: We can't try KSM on civilian court because Lindsey Graham will get mad and not help close Guantanamo, or something to that effect. Compare the paragraph to this one from the New Yorker:
“Rahm felt very, very strongly that it was a mistake to prosecute the 9/11 people in the federal courts, and that it was picking an unnecessary fight with the military-commission people,” the informed source said. “Rahm had a good relationship with Graham, and believed Graham when he said that if you don’t prosecute these people in military commissions I won’t support the closing of Guantánamo. . . . Rahm said, ‘If we don’t have Graham, we can’t close Guantánamo, and it’s on Eric!’ ”
Some Rahm defenders might reply "well, no denial doesn't mean it's true." But this is highly naive. Perhaps high officials wont' bother fact-checking an inaccurate Daily Kos diary written by an anonymous diarist, or one written by me; or a claim made by a small newspaper in say, Idaho. But this is different. We are talking about the New Yorker Magazine, the Washington Post (
saying Axelrod acknowledged the rift) and the New York Times which politicians read every day; and these outlets are quoting Emanuel directly.
In the past, when rumors were spread, they were shot down:
White House Denies Ha'aretz Report on Rahm EmanuelEmanuel denies any plan to leave White House jobRahm Denies Mayoral Run