They are unapologetic about impugning the motives of lawyers representing terror suspects detained at Gitmo for years without any way of adjudicating their guilt or innocence. Here is how Levin describes the situation:
There is nothing unethical about Stimson's comments. In fact, he was serving a public interest by shining a light on those law firms that are representing the enemy.
How does he know that every suspect in Gitmo is, in fact, "the enemy." Scores have been released with no charges; many have been detained far from any battlefield and offered up by bounty hunters; many have been deemed innocent even by the Bush administration; others have been detained on evidence procured solely through torturing one other suspect. Steyn also simply says that allowing terror suspects to become criminal defendants means losing the war. Ok, then give them POW status. But the limbo they are in - neither prisoners of war nor protected by the rule of law - is a mess and a disgrace. It has undermined our case, and thereby the war. Reading Steyn's and Levin's defenses of the indefensible is a good insight into exactly how uninformed and ignorant parts of the degenerate right have become.