Waterboarding Illegal? Mukasey Can't Say

Bush's AG Nominee Losing Support Of Congressional Democrats

(AP)  President Bush's nominee for attorney general told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday that an interrogation technique called waterboarding is repugnant but that he did not know if it is legal.

Michael Mukasey's four-page letter did not satisfy Democrats, many of whom said their vote hinges on whether he's willing to say that the technique, which simulates drowning and is banned by the military, is illegal. Mukasey was widely expected to be confirmed by the full Senate, if by a narrower margin than the White House expected.

Mukasey, a retired federal judge, called the technique "repugnant to me" and pledged to study its legality if confirmed.

"If, after such a review, I determine that any technique is unlawful, I will not hesitate to so advise the president and will rescind or correct any legal opinion of the Department of Justice that supports the use of the technique," he wrote to the committee's 10 Democrats.

Elsewhere in the letter, Mukasey said that he did not know if the technique is still being used by U.S. personnel because he is not yet cleared to receive such classified information. Still, he pledged to stand up to Mr. Bush if necessary and to seek ways to protect the nation from terrorism.

"I would leave office sooner than participate in a violation of law," Mukasey wrote.

Before Mukasey sent his letter, Democrats and a few Republicans had said they were concerned about his refusal to say whether waterboarding is illegal. Some senators also focused on a Mukasey comment that appeared to indicate he believes that the president in some circumstances is not constrained by the law.

"I remain very concerned that Judge Mukasey finds himself unable to state unequivocally that waterboarding is illegal and below the standards and values of the United States," said Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who said Mukasey still owes the panel answers to other questions.

Leahy, who was one of several Democrats who said their votes depend on Mukasey's answer on torture, did not say whether he would support confirmation.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., earlier this week said he would not vote for confirmation if Mukasey did not answer definitively that waterboarding amounts to torture. Durbin, the chairman of the human rights subcommittee, found Mukasey's statement unsatisfactory.

"Judge Mukasey spent four pages responding and still didn't provide an answer," Durbin said in a statement. "Judge Mukasey makes the point that in the law, precision matters. So do honesty and openness. And on those counts, he falls far short."

Not immediately commenting was Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., usually lightning-fast with media comment on virtually any topic. The Senate's Democratic campaign chief suggested Mukasey to the White House as the successor to former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and has said he has concerns about Mukasey's initial answers to the waterboarding question.

Other senators, particularly those Democrats running for president, had made up their minds hours or days before Mukasey issued his statement.

"We cannot send a signal that the next attorney general in any way condones torture or believes that the president is unconstrained by law," said front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.

Her chief rival for the nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., also criticized Mukasey.

"We don't need another attorney general who believes that the president enjoys an unwritten right to secretly ignore any law or abridge our constitutional freedoms simply by invoking national security. And we don't need another attorney general who looks the other way on issues as profound as torture," Obama said.

Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., said he would not vote to confirm Mukasey. "We cannot have a United States attorney general who will equivocate and dissemble on this matter. Too much is at stake," he said.

Another presidential hopeful, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., also has said he would vote against confirmation.

On the Republican side, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said Mukasey's letter left him less concerned about voting for confirmation but wanted to raise a few more issues with Mukasey in private.

"I'm favorably inclined to support him," Graham said in a telephone interview. "I think he did himself a lot of good."

Mukasey's letter was expected to boost support for his confirmation, which in the last week had shifted from nearly unanimous to troubled.

In his four-page letter, Mukasey said he would try to balance constitutionality with "our shared obligation to ensure that our nation has the tools it needs, within the law, to protect the American people." But he declined to take a stand on waterboarding because, he said, the question is hypothetical.

It's not known, Mukasey said, whether waterboarding or any other specific harsh interrogation technique is being used, or in what circumstances.

"Legal opinions should treat real issues," Mukasey wrote.

"I have not been briefed on techniques used in any classified interrogation program conducted by any government agency," he added. "For me, then, there is a real issue as to whether the techniques presented and discussed at the hearing and in your letter are even part of any program of questioning detainees."

Waterboarding cannot be used by the military under the Army field manual and a 2005 law on detainee treatment. But Congress has not passed additional legislation banning certain harsh interrogation techniques in all circumstances, Mukasey noted, and he also placed some onus for the uncertainty on Congress.

Mukasey said that after being briefed on current practices as attorney general, he would evaluate whether they would violate the Constitution or U.S. or international law.

Specifically, he said, he would decide wither a technique is torture based on two factors in the U.S. criminal code: whether it was intended to cause severe physical pain or suffering or prolonged mental harm.

In more than 170 additional pages of questions and answers released late Tuesday, Mukasey said that presidential signing statements should not be used to create "unnecessary" confrontations with Congress. He also pledged not to approve the transfer of any detainee to a country where there is a realistic possibility of torture.

Mukasey supported immunizing telecommunications companies that may have turned over secret information about customers to the government in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The companies involved, he said, "did so at the government's request and in reliance upon the government's representation that their assistance was lawful. Under these circumstances, retroactive immunity in my judgment would appear appropriate."

Some Democrats say they want to know what information was gathered before they immunize anyone from prosecution.

[terrorislam4]

I STAND WITH THE DANES

FASCIST NAZI TERRORISLAM IS
Persona non grata

Exclusive: Salute the Danish Flag! - It%u2019s a Symbol of Western Freedom By Susan MacAllen
In Denmark, once-liberal immigration policies have forced huge governmental change and zero tolerance for Muslim immigrants intent on turning Denmark into an Islamic welfare haven. FSM Contributing Editor Susan MacAllen reveals a shocking reaction there and lessons America must learn.
http://familysecuritymatters.org/homeland.php?id=1172085

[terrorislam4]

Posted by tuckerndfw at 09:24 AM : Nov 01, 2007

rightttttt demonic-rats tell the truth hahaha

"Everybody in politics lies, but they [the Clintons] do it with such ease, it%u2019s troubling,%u201D Geffen said.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003548043
Hillary Clinton''s Former Campaign Finance Director Indicted
http://www.wnbc.com/politics/4063107/detail.html
hillary lies
But a Hillary Tale About Her Childhood
http://hillaryspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MTE3OTBlZWUxMTI0NjVjZDhkNTExYTc3NWJiZTE4ODI=
Hillary''s "Feminist Problem"
The Nation: Feminists Rescind Their Support For Former First Lady
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/15/opinion/main2934136.shtml
Watergate reporter demolishes Hillary%u2019s career story
reveal a number of %u201Cdiscrepancies%u201D in her official story.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1719879.ece

hahahaha people paying to read and listen to an admitted, proven, convicted, impeached, disbarred liar%u2026lol
For Clinton, New Wealth In Speeches
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/22/AR2007022202189.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/21/AR2007022100993_pf.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17263999/

Sales of Bill Clinton book drops
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071016/ap_on_el_pr/bill_clinton_book_1

[terrorislam4]

more terrorislam sponsored genocide

Thinktank accuses Saudi regime over hate literature

The controversial state visit of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, which got under way today with a lavish ceremony, has prompted new criticism over his regime''''s alleged role in distributing hate literature in British mosques.
The Policy Exchange thinktank found extremist literature in a quarter of the 100 mosques and Islamic institutions it visited, including London Central Mosque in Regent''''s Park, which is funded by Saudi Arabia.

Some of the literature advocated violent jihad, murdering gay people and stoning adulterers, its researchers found.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,,2201805,00.html

[terrorislam4]

dont you just hate these stupid silly little fascist nazi terrorislamic muslims pretending to be liberal Americana,,, and begging for the usa to leave iraq,,, lol,,, they must be really getting their arses kicked,,, hahahahahaha,,,

and these fascist nazi terrorislamic muslim collaborators,,,

THEY ARE LOSING

Last letter from doomed Al Qaida chief: "We are so desperate for your help"
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2007/ss_iraq_09_30.asp

Iraq insurgency: People rise against al-Qa''eda
Damien McElroy spent a week in the heart of the insurgency in Anbar province in Iraq. In the second of seven exclusive reports he describes how peace and prosperity have returned to a town formerly riven by sectarian killings.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/08/wanbar308.xml

Al Qaeda Dealt Devastating Blow in Iraq
The U.S. military says it has dealt devastating and potentially irreversible blows to Al Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq, the Washington Post reported Monday.

Al-Qaeda In Iraq Reported Crippled
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/14/AR2007101401245_pf.html

[s1ckd09]

Did you know I have been having this same stupid, irrelevant discussion for over FIVE years?

It began long ago and far away on Yahoo''''s message boards and I could quote UNSCR 1441 verbatim without notes.

Quite frankly, it''''s a stupid discussion and neither your opinion nor mine matter.

I will not alter my opinions about the legality or wisdom of those invasions, nor do I expect you to change yours.

I consider Bush a war criminal, pathological liar and most corrupt president in US history. That opinion will not change regardless what you post.

And, I seriously doubt anyone will ever be prosecuted for the quagmires into which he led us (along with the corrupt Dems who support/ed him).

If you think George Bush is the greatest president since George Washington, it''''s okay with me. Your opinion really is irrelevant to my daily life.

Posted by tuckerndfw at 10:06 PM : Oct 31, 2007

Personally, I like basing my opinions on facts. You apparently, by what you just said, only accept something as fact if it supports your pre-formed opinion. Interesting... dumb, but interesting.

[usaprophet]

Ron Paul represents a different Republican Party from the one that Iraq, deficits and corruption have soured the country on. It''s ironic that other GOP candidates are scared to death of his message, BECAUSE his is more conservative than theirs. Being anti-war IS conservative. Another key difference between his message and the others is that he is a strong defender in The Constitution, which protects our civil liberties. The other Republican cadidates, who are mostly NWO Oligarchs, want to erase your liberties. They''ve tried hard to exlude him from the spotlight, along with the mainstream press. In late June, despite a life of antitax agitation and pious churchgoing, he was excluded from a Republican forum sponsored by Iowa antitax and Christian groups. Ron Paul does not represent your Father''s style of Republicanism. He represents your Founding Father''s style. He stands for a certain idea of the Constitution; the idea that much of the power asserted by modern presidents has been usurped from Congress, and that much of the power asserted by Congress has been usurped from the states. Though Dr. Paul acknowledges flaws in both the Constitution (it included slavery) and the Bill of Rights (it doesn%u2019t go far enough), he still thinks a comprehensive array of positions can be drawn therefrom: against gun control; for the sovereignty of States; and against foreign-policy adventures. His message draws on the noblest traditions of American decency and patriotism.

[usaprophet]

Ron Paul does not support secret offshore prisons like the one in Guantanamo, where our government tortures prisoners, who have no right to redress of grievance, or to writ of habeus corpus. Ron Paul promises he will close these "illegal prisons" down. And he wouldn''t necessarily just release the prisoners either. He said he would just bring them to detainment facilities on U.S. soil where they would be entitled to an attorney, and to their day in Court--American Justice. Significant others agree with Paul. "Essentially, we have shaken the belief that the world had in America''s justice system by keeping a place like Guantanamo open and creating things like a military commission," former U.S. Secretary of State, Colin Powell recently said. "What can I do about it," you ask? Support the 2008 candidacy of Dr. Ron Paul for President. I believe he''s our only hope to restore peace, prosperity and civil liberty in this country. Throw-out the New World Order Fascists and their Socialist comrades in crime. Both groups consider themselves above the Constitution. Vote for a REAL American--Ron Paul. Presidential candidates with the integrity and proven track record of adherance to the Constitution Dr. Paul always demonstates only come around once in a lifetime, if we''re lucky. The cause of freedom is too important to let anything stand in the way of our participation in this 21st Century political revolution. The time for change is now. The time for Ron Paul is now!

[klifton2-2009]

The world is looking and wondering what the US has become since Bush stole the WH right from the hands the gullible. The US is now indulging in legal semantics to decide what is torture and what is not. How about subjecting Bush and his gang, family members included, to the treatments they advocate and let THEM decide whether it is torture or not? US Justice is a laughing stock. The country redefines terms at will to suit their purposes and convenience. When a nation grants immunity to the killing of unarmed citizens, as in Iraq,the nation is progressing towards evil. If US citizens do not repudiate Bush and his gang, it is equivalent to the Germans supporting the Nazis and pretended they did not know of Hitler''s atrocities. Has the US under Bush come to this?

[ajmarine1]

It''s time to go.

Live Long and Prosper!

[ajmarine1]

Upholding the law and supporting George Bush are mutually exclusive.


Posted by tuckerndfw at 10:59 PM : Oct 31, 2007


I have supported Bush, but if he or anyone else in his admin. have done wrong and need to go to jail,.....send them.