He's too high profile to 'just disappear.' He would almost certainly face charges.
Still, expect surveillance and general intimidation of defense attorneys and judges on the same scale.[1]
[1] http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/...
I agree "national security" would be invoked to hush it all up but it would certainly add to the body of evidence that the people in charge got to go.
Or heck, name him an "enemy combatant" and just detain him indefinitely in some Polish blacksite. People will forget his name in time.
The Supreme Court has already struck down, on constitutional grounds, application of the UCMJ to military contractors deployed with the military on foreign military missions, under express language in the UCMJ applying it to them (the motivation for the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, which applied US federal civilian criminal law that otherwise applies within the US territorial and special maritime jurisdiction to them.)
So I don't see that argument surviving the inevitable habeas petition.
> Or heck, name him an "enemy combatant" and just detain him indefinitely in some Polish blacksite. People will forget his name in time.
Not in time to mitigate the short term political consequences of being seen disappearing him.
Rotting in solitary while the court case slowly plays out is likely just as good for the supposedly aggrieved as a victory in court with the subsequent incarceration.