Letters to the Editor
-
Mukasey's Personal Security
The government has spent nearly twice as much providing personal security for the Bush nominee than any other judge in his position. Does that mean he is already part of the shadow government which Cheney runs? One assumes security is merely protection, until of course you want to travel without being noticed.
-
Even we accept it?
I know it's too little and possibly too late...
But I still find any opposition at all heartening. The Congress has failed us and failed us badly-- but I'm glad they're at least putting up some fight. -- Persia
Is that really how you view it? Because I think you might want to rethink that. If they were putting up an actual fight there would be no question about whether this authoritarian judge would have any hope of being confirmed. In fact, is there any logical reason that the Democrats are in a position to have to put up a fight? Aren't the Democrats in control of this situation? Couldn't they have said "don't even bother coming because there isn't a snowballs chance in hell you will be confirmed?"
I think your willingness to see them as "at least putting up some fight" speaks to what Glenn just wrote about. Even we (sane people) have internalized this new "state of the nation." Even we find it normal that the man made it past the first day. Even we find it "normal" that he was nominated in the first place. That is the larger problem, no?
-
Talking point appears to be "waterboarding is illegal in the Military Code"
I've heard and seen the recurring talking point in several newscasts or AP stories that Mukasey has stated that waterboarding is illegal in the Uniform Military Code of Justice and by extension that therefore "the United States does not torture."
If I am not mistaken, the CIA is not covered by the Military Code. Therefore this whole talking point is moot since we're talking about the CIA and what they do in their secret camps.
I think that those of us opposing this nomination should make sure that we push back very clearly on this issue and allow a "bait and switch" here, granting wavering Democratic Senators an escape hatch to just let the nomination pass.
-
Goodness Had Nothing to Do with It
Even given all of those robust, unsentimental clichés-- politics ain't beanbag; making laws is like making sausage, etc., the national political process in Amerika's decaying empire is sordid and appalling indeed.
I haven't tried to search for the story, but I'm sure that before the AG hearings even began, I read that Sens. Schumer and Leahy had made a deal with the WH to scale back Congressional committee investigations into questionable DOJ activities during General Misfeasor Gonzalez's tenure in exchange for an "acceptable" candidate for the replacement AG. Judging from the result, "acceptable" meant "not a well-known flaming wingnut like Robert Bork or Ted Olson".
Sen. Schumer recommended Mukasey and welcomed him to DC. To all but the most naive, stupid, or enthralled observer, the air was redolent with the stink of the usual "fix". It is another in a series of turning points in which neither party really is in the mood for a battle, and the Democrats got to indulge their obsessive/compulsive penchant for keeping their powder dry-- allowing the Republics to prevail by inertia.
And, for the reasons Glenn noted, even this 11th-hour seeming setback is difficult to fathom. It's nice to see some Dems belatedly bridling on "principle". But only partisan Democrats who unconditionally support the party and trust its leadership will take this opposition at face value. Otherwise, it can be explained away as still another turn of the farce, another step in the collusive bipartisan pas-de-deux, in which Dems will get credit from their uncritical base for "hanging tough" before enough of them give Mukasey a green light-- with the inevitable Reluctance and Grave Concerns.
Neither party has a Plan B, unless it's to leave the post filled by the acting AG for the remainder of the Unitard's term. The only thing that would scuttle Mukasey's nomination at this point is a perception that public outrage would be sufficient to actually hurt the Democrats in 2008. To paraphrase Mae West, I'm confident that "principle" has nothing to do with it.
-
Why the apparent change?
When he was nominated you seemed to grudgingly support him:
http://salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/09/16/mukasey/
How do you still feel about "the impressive role he played in presiding over the Jose Padilla case in its earliest stages"? Do you still consider him "very smart and independent, not part of the Bush political circle"? Are you still heartened that he "displayed a willingness to defy the President and reject assertions of lawless and unconstitutional powers, and to refuse to be intimidated by exploitative claims of the Terrorist threat"? I'm glad you're now highlighting the troubling parts of his record. Why the change?
-
Key Phrase
a flamboyant and purely symbolic (though impotent)
The key word here is impotent. I'm getting the feeling that everyone would love to repudiate waterboarding and come out against torture. What they don't want is for anyone to actually face any consequences about things that have already taken place. This is in the same category as the telecom issue. Everyone is free to come down on the right side as long as no one has to go to jail or pay fines for what's already done.
Its been noted several times that Mukasey can't acknowlege that any illegal activity has taken place because as Attorney General, it would be his responibility to prosecute it. This is of courtse true of anyone in that position.
-
Sorry to be a cynic...
... but I can't get over the feeling that this "opposition" is nothing but a dog-and-pony show that is intended to deceive us into thinking the Democrats might be good for something.
I'd love to see the Democrats grow some backbone, but this is hardly a useful situation to do it in. If Mukasey isn't confirmed, Bush can just use a recess appointment to stick us with some dirtbag of his own choice, or do nothing and leave the current interim dirtbag at DOJ's helm. I don't think either is obviously preferable to Mukasey, so I have to assume this "opposition" is just show that will amount to nothing.