This is why I don't like bullshit politics anymore.
What good are stinking fucking elections, anyway?
Why did the American people even bother with DemocraPs?
I don't like the guy because he is one of the 103 9/11 conspirators!
"Michael Mukasey — federal judge in New York; presided over 1993 WTC bombing case; active in 9-11 cases, including Larry Silverstein’s insurance claims; oversaw the detained material witnesses of 9-11, including five dancing Israeli Mossad agents apprehended by FBI; recently appointed by Bush to be the next Attorney General; radical Zionist of Russian Jewish parentage; “dual citizen” of US and Israel"
And he's gonna be the GOOD A.G.?
I want Ashcroft back!
"Mukasey asserts his independence; AG nominee vows to resist political push" by Charlie Savage/Boston Globe October 18, 2007
WASHINGTON - President Bush's nominee to be the next attorney general, Michael Mukasey, said yesterday that he rejects legal theories that presidents have the constitutional power to bypass anti-torture statutes, and vowed to keep the Justice Department free from political influence.
Mukasey's answers drew an enthusiastic response from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which will vote on whether to recommend his confirmation to the full Senate.
Several Democrats on the committee characterized his approach to the job as a major change -- even though several of the nominee's answers signaled he might not completely break from the direction his predecessor established.
[Even though it isn't! This is all FOOLEYS for the Amurkn public!!!!
Like POLITICS is REAL!]
Mukasey said yesterday he believes that Bush's power as commander in chief allows the president, in some circumstances, to monitor phone calls and e-mail on US soil without a warrant.
Mukasey suggested he might stand with the White House on another controversy: Forbid his office from prosecuting administration officials who, at the president's direction, disobey a congressional investigative subpoena.
[Is this when the Dems did the butt-prop?]
Mukasey seemed to mollify Senator Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat who chairs the Judiciary Committee.
[Great! Way to go, tough Pat!!!]
The confirmation hearing of Mukasey, who presided over the trial of defendants in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, continues today.
[Oh, so he was in on the first WTC cover-up, huh?
Great change!]
"Attorney General Pick Treads Careful Line at Hearing" by PHILIP SHENON
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 — President Bush’s nominee for attorney general, Michael B. Mukasey, did not distance himself from the Bush administration’s most controversial antiterrorism policies.
[Ah, but the Dems loved him!
WE GOT CHANGE!]
Mukasey disappointed Democrats by not answering many questions about those polices, senators from both parties suggested at the end of a day of testimony that he was all but certain to be confirmed. The tone of the hearing, which will continue Thursday, was polite and cordial, with Mr. Mukasey answering questions in a calm, even voice and smiling occasionally at a senator’s turn of phrase.
[Suck a little dick, no problem!
Didn't answer questions, but did he get jizz on his chin?]
Mr. Mukasey also pleased the Democrats [He "pleased" them, huh? Ha-ha-ha!] who control the Judiciary Committee by saying that he considered torture of terrorist suspects to be illegal under American and international law and that the president did not have the authority to order it under any circumstances.
Mr. Mukasey: “Torture is unlawful under the laws of this country. It is not what this country is all about. It is not what this country stands for. It’s antithetical to everything this country stands for. Soldiers of this country liberated concentration camps toward the end of World War II and photographed what they saw there as a record of the barbarism we opposed. We didn’t do it that so that we could then duplicate it ourselves.”
[Just where the hell has this guy been? In one of Osama's caves? WTF?
We don't torture, etc, bringing up the holocaust, etc. WTF?
WTF you think we are doing around the world, bozo?]
He criticized a Justice Department legal opinion issued early in the administration, and since rescinded, that allowed harsh interrogation techniques on terrorist suspects:
“It was a mistake. It was unnecessary.”
[But it's still happening.]
Mr. Mukasey distanced himself from the idea that presidential power during wartime makes it unnecessary to consult Congress, a position espoused by Vice President Dick Cheney and David S. Addington, Mr. Cheney’s chief of staff and former legal counsel.
“I think it’s been obvious from events of the last several years that everybody is better off — the president is better off, the Congress is better off, the country is better off — when everybody’s rolling in the same direction,” he said. “When the president acts pursuant to his authority with help from the Congress, with the tools that the Congress provides, then we don’t have to get into butting heads over who can and who can’t.”
["Oh, yeah, go right on through, (zip)" -- Congress to Mukasey]
Mr. Mukasey declined to discuss recent news reports that the Justice Department, after rescinding the original opinion on harsh interrogation techniques, produced two secret legal opinions in 2005 that authorized similar techniques in terrorism cases.
He said he could not comment on the later memorandums because he had not read them.
[??]
When Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, suggested in his questioning that the 2005 opinions might authorize torture, Mr. Mukasey stopped him.
“You characterize it as torture. I do not know of such a policy, and I hope not to find them.”
[And I won't look, promise!]
Nor would he comment in detail on the legality of the program of eavesdropping without warrants that was authorized by Mr. Bush shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks and has been strongly criticized by civil liberties groups and lawmakers from both parties as possibly unconstitutional.
Mr. Mukasey, who knew enough about the program to refer to it as the Terrorist Surveillance Program, the name preferred by the White House:
“I am not familiar with that program.”
[Where the hell have you been, sir? In a bubble?
WTF? And who knows how many other "programs' they got.
Probably rename 'em every time they are caught!]
The program remains highly classified, and Mr. Mukasey suggested that he had not given information since his nomination last month about how the National Security Agency program operates:
“For me to make a categorical statement with regard to that program one way or the other, I think, would be enormously irresponsible."
[And this guy is going to be the top law-enforcement official? Sgt. Shultz?]
Whatever their concern about some of his answers on national security issues, senators from both parties appeared eager to vote to confirm Mr. Mukasey and have him go to work at the Justice Department as quickly as possible.
Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee:
“This nomination can begin the repair process.”
[Mukasey the "healer?" Puke!]
"Warmth for a Nominee Viewed as Unlike His Predecessor" by DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 — If Michael B. Mukasey was bracing for a rough ride at his confirmation hearing for attorney general on Wednesday, Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of Brooklyn, had one word for fellow members of the Judiciary Committee and, more important, for Mr. Mukasey, a Bronx native: Fuhgeddaboutit.
It was clear from Mr. Schumer’s laudatory introduction and a similarly effusive introduction by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, a law school classmate of Mr. Mukasey’s, that the nominee was not going to face hostility. And indeed, the senators kept the questions polite and the banter cordial throughout the day.
[Ah, yes, the Lieberman STAMP-of-APPROVAL, I see!]
But tension did emerge quickly at the hearing — between Mr. Schumer and Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the Judiciary Committee chairman, who finally seemed to lose patience with the odd role that Mr. Schumer has played as Mr. Mukasey’s ambassador across the political aisle.
[Can it be any more obvious that AIPAC runs this government?
I mean, really! The BULLDOG CHUCKIE, huh?]
Although Mr. Schumer is a pit bull of a Democrat and Mr. Mukasey an unwavering conservative, it was Mr. Schumer who put forward Mr. Mukasey as someone that President Bush could nominate without enraging the Democrats, essentially assuring the White House a fairly smooth confirmation process.
[So Muk sucks them, and they do Bush.
Great government, huh?
Hi, monitor. :-(
The introductions set the tone for a generally friendly hearing in which senators repeatedly compared him with the previous attorney general, Alberto R. Gonzales, to their evident relief.
Mr. Schumer’s support for his fellow New Yorker also drew attention to the absence of New York’s other senator, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Mrs. Clinton is not on the Judiciary Committee but it is common for both of a nominee’s home-state senators to give introductions. Her office said she had a scheduling conflict with another hearing.
In this case, though, the nominee happened to be an extremely close friend of another New Yorker, former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who could end up opposing Mrs. Clinton in the presidential election next year. The two men are so close, in fact, that Mr. Leahy felt compelled to ask Mr. Mukasey how he would handle any case involving the election.
[Good Lord! It IS a GLOBALIST CABAL, just like Alex Jones says!!!
WTF has happened to AmeriKa?]
“Can I assume,” Mr. Leahy asked, “it will be safe to say that you will totally recuse yourself from any involvement with Mr. Giuliani or any candidate for president?”
“It’s not only safe to say,” Mr. Mukasey replied. “I’m saying it, too.”
[So the election will be stolen outright -- either a crowning of Queen Hillary, or the descent into total despotism with heir Rudi!]
