For all former President Bush’s malapropisms and mangling of the English language — genuine as well as hyper-inflated — the 43rd chief executive never, to the best of our knowledge, sought to play prosecutor, judge and jury in a legal case. The same cannot be said of President Obama, who weighed in Nov. 18 on the proposed civilian trial of Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his four terrorist cronies.

Speaking to television reporters during his excursion to the Far East, President Obama said that Americans who consider the notion of granting KSM all the constitutional protections given to U.S. citizens “offensive” will not feel that way once “he’s convicted and the death penalty applied to him.” Geez, talk about prejudicing the case against this war criminal from the git-go. We can almost hear the bleating of defense attorneys — from U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s old law firm, perhaps? — saying his clients can never hope to get a fair trial in New York City.

And what, too, of empaneling an impartial jury in the Big Apple? This whole idea of opening up the U.S. court system to KSM and his thug buddies suddenly has “mistrial” written all over it.

And yet, in Wednesday’s real power-play exchange — between Mr. Holder and skeptical Republican senators atop Capitol Hill — the attorney general continually maintained it would be easier to gain convictions in this case in a civilian court. He failed to gain many converts among his inquisitors — and understandably so, especially when it’s a known fact that evidentiary standards in military tribunals are not as rigid as in civilian courts.

Simply stated, the government would have an easier time getting evidence admitted as proof in said tribunals. As if that should be a struggle in the first place, as the terrorists have all but admitted their role — via their desire to plead guilty — in the deaths of roughly 3,000 Americans.

So the question on the lips of many Americans is this: Why does the administration wish to needlessly prolong this agony? As stated in this space before, we have an opinion, and it all revolves around politics. For his part, Mr. Holder says the trial should be held in New York City because it would send a strong message about this nation’s legal values.

But even this reason holds little water, given Sen. Charles Grassley’s “understanding” that if KSM somehow gets off on a technicality (always a possibility in an increasingly liberal court system) he will be remanded back to U.S, custody — as an enemy combatant. “And then,” said the Iowa Republican, “you are right back where you started.”

Nothing Mr. Holder said Wednesday — about our legal values or the efficacy of gaining a conviction in civilian court — passes the gut test of the average American, who wants nothing less than to see this matter (and KSM and Co.) put to rest.

You see, this is not about “legal values,” but about simple justice — without the pain and suffering of a ridiculously drawn-out “show” trial.