The Obama Inc. argument was that this was workplace violence and treating it as an act of terror would undermine Hasan's defense. But now Hasan's defense is that it was terrorism.
That's Nidal Hasan's actual defense strategy. And it makes the Workplace Violence claim put out there by Obama Inc. as credible as the airborne PTSD claims.
Hasan isn't just claiming defense of Islam. He's claiming defense of Islamic leadership, namely Al Qaeda leaders. It's hard to turn that into anything but acting as part of an Islamic terrorist group, formally or informally.
The Army psychiatrist charged in the deadly 2009 Fort Hood shooting says he'll show evidence at his trial that he opened fire because Islamic leadership was in imminent danger.
Maj. Nidal Hasan told the judge Tuesday that he needs a three-month delay to prepare to represent himself at trial. He faces the death penalty or life without parole if convicted of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder.
The judge, Col. Tara Osborn, said she had some questions about Hasan's defense before she would rule on his delay request.
A "defense of others" strategy requires defendants to prove they killed a person or people to protect others from immediate danger. Many of the soldiers killed on the Texas Army post were preparing to deploy.
The families of soldiers murdered and wounded by Hasan have been arguing that they should have been awarded medals. The Obama Inc. argument has been that this was workplace violence and that treating it as an act of terror would undermine Hasan's defense.
But now Hasan's defense is that it was indeed an act of terror. There goes Obama Inc's last excuse.