Bush Nominee Needs To Be Briefed To Have An Opinion?
The confirmation hearings of Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey took a bizarre turn when President Bush defended Mukasey's refusal to render an opinion because he hasn't been briefed on it. by Walt Thiessen
(libertarian)
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Reuters is reporting today that President Bush is defending his nominee for U.S. Attorney General, Michael Mukasey saying, "He's been asked to give opinions of a program -- or techniques of a program -- on which he has not been briefed," and therefore shouldn't be expected to have an opinion as to whether it constitutes illegal torture.
Apparently, Mukasey doesn't feel as uninformed as Bush thinks he is. He wrote to the Senate Judiciary Committee's 10 Democrats on Tuesday that waterboarding, as they described it to him, is "repugnant to me." It sure sounds to me like Mukasey has an opinion on the subject. So why does Bush think Mukasey doesn't have an opinion?
What Bush is apparently trying to say is that Mukasey hasn't rendered a legal opinion on the subject in the form of a formal paper, and all this is part of a rather bizarre attempt to get Mukasey confirmed. It makes me wonder whether or not Bush believes Mukasey would obstruct Bush's torture plans. Perhaps Bush thinks that once his minions have "briefed" Mukasey on the program, meaning once they've applied pressure to Mukasey to adopt the Bush line on the subject, then Mukasey will toe that line.
Other Republicans and Democrats don't have much trouble taking issue with the interrogation method in question. Democrat Barack Obama says it is ineffective. Sen. John McCain has taken the rather foolish position that it shouldn't be permitted because it doesn't work, after which he also admitted that similar techniques worked on himself when he was a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
Congressman Ron Paul has been against it for years. In 2004, he wrote an article in which he stated:
"It is precisely during times of relative crisis that we should adhere most closely to the Constitution, not abandon it. War does not justify the suspension of torture laws any more than it justifies the suspension of murder laws, the suspension of due process, or the suspension of the Second amendment."
Sen. John Edwards has been highly critical of Mukasey saying:
"[He] twisted the law to justify waterboarding and other interrogation techniques that have long been considered torture. Now the man who is supposed to clean up the Justice Department -- Judge Michael Mukasey -- says he does not know whether waterboarding is torture or not. What more information does he need?"
Meanwhile, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani isn't sure whether it's torture or not:
"It depends on how it’s done," he said, adding that he was unsure whether descriptions of the practice by the "liberal media" were accurate. "It depends on the circumstances. It depends on who does it."
Sen. Hillary Clinton is reportedly in favor of using torture if there's an imminent threat:
"In the event we were ever confronted with having to interrogate a detainee with knowledge of an imminent threat to millions of Americans, then the decision to depart from standard international practices must be made by the President, and the President must be held accountable," she said.
"That very, very narrow exception within very, very limited circumstances is better than blasting a big hole in our entire law," she added.
Clinton hasn't made a clear statement of where she stands on "waterboarding" torture.
So apparently the two leading candidates in the polls, Giuliani and Clinton, would follow Bush's example if elected, but candidates further down in the polls would not (to one degree or another). It makes me wonder if Giuliani and Clinton would similarly claim that Mukasey hasn't been properly briefed if they were currently president. It's enough to make one hope that one of the challengers, particular someone like Ron Paul who is so strong in his defense of the Constitution, will get the chance to lead us away from the use of torture.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 13
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Walt Thiessen only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Walt Thiessen is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Why would you, at this late date, expect Bush to say anything that is sensible or truthful?
It's a moron who supports those who plot, lie, cheat and commit murder abroad, but expect them to remain humane, honorable, and trustworthy at home. Yet, Bush has fooled no one. Americans wanted two things from the Middle East; oil and blood, and Bush is selling them all they can afford to buy of both. It is just so Christian to blame Bush for the greed and apathy of 300 million.
Here's more vulgar, godless apathy: PHILADELPHIA - The bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Pennsylvania has been ordered to cease his duties until a church trial about accusations that he concealed a relative's sexual abuse of a 14-year-old girl in the 1970s, a newspaper reported Thursday.Last year, Bennison apologized to the diocese for "lack of action on my part." He told The Inquirer that he had told the relative "to leave the parish's employ" but did not report the matter to civil or church authorities because the girl's parents had NOT chosen to do so. AP/Yahoo 11/02/07.
