"Denounce Waterboarding, Democrats Tell Nominee" by PHILIP SHENON
WASHINGTON, Oct. 26 — The nomination of Michael B. Mukasey as attorney general encountered resistance on Friday, with Democratic senators suggesting for the first time that they might oppose Mr. Mukasey if he did not make clear that he opposed waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques that have been used against terrorism suspects.
The ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, joined in the expressions of concern about Mr. Mukasey. Mr. Specter said in an interview Friday that the nomination could hinge on Mr. Mukasey’s written responses to questions posed to him this week about the Bush administration’s antiterrorism policies, including its use of interrogation techniques like waterboarding, which simulates drowning, and about his larger views on executive power.
At his Senate confirmation hearings last week, Mr. Mukasey, a retired federal judge from New York, declined to say whether waterboarding is a form of torture and is unconstitutional.
"Mukasey, when asked at his confirmation hearing if waterboarding was torture, replied: “I don’t know.”
Are you going to get the AG job, Muk?
Gee, I DON'T KNOW!
In waterboarding, interrogators pour water onto cloth or cellophane that has been placed over the face of a suspect, creating the sensation of drowning.
Yeah, yeah, you got the job, you got the job, glug-glug!!!
Many Democratic lawmakers say privately that he is still likely to be confirmed, given the need for leadership in the Justice Department after months of turmoil. Apart from Mr. Specter, no Republicans on the Judiciary Committee have raised public doubts about the nomination.
Yeah, to hell with the laws and the Constitution!
To hell with it if he supports torture and the unitary dictator.
We need someone, ANYONE, over at Justice!
Isn't the job being filled in the interim by a well-respected career employee, Clement?
Not BUSH'S GUY, huh? That's what the rush is?
But Mr. Mukasey’s sometimes awkward responses at his confirmation hearings to a series of questions about his views on the administration’s antiterrorism policies and its expansive views of its wartime powers under the Constitution prompted the first significant expressions of concern about the nomination from some lawmakers.
Mr. Specter, in a telephone interview Friday:
“A number of issues need clarification. I’m troubled by the depth of his assertion of executive powers.”
Mr. Specter said he was worried specifically about whether Mr. Mukasey would advise President Bush to disregard acts of Congress.
He ALREADY DOES, fool!
Mr. Specter, in reference to the eavesdropping legislation:
“I don’t know that I would confirm a guy who is going to say that he’d advise the president that he has the constitutional authority to ignore a deal he has made with Congress on a specific provision [of a law]."
Ignore a DEAL? That's what the laws are?
DEALS between the ruling elite shitstinkers?
May God help this nation!
Mr. Bush complained Friday that Democratic leaders in Congress were acting too slowly on Mr. Mukasey’s nomination, as well as on several pieces of legislation.
FUCK HIM and his WHINING!!!!!
He noted that the Senate had failed to approve the nomination “even as members complain about the lack of leadership at the Department of Justice.”
They'll get to bending over for your ass-fuck, Georgie, just cool your jets and be patient!
In a letter to Mr. Mukasey that was also made public on Friday by the Judiciary Committee, Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan, posed a series of questions about specific interrogation techniques that have been used by the United States against terrorism suspects and whether Mr. Mukasey found them inhumane.
Mr. Levin asked:
“Would you consider it inhumane to intentionally expose a detainee to cold or intentionally immerse a detainee in water until such time as a detainee begins shivering?”
“Would you consider it inhumane to threaten to transfer a detainee to a third country with the knowledge that the detainee is reasonably likely to fear that country would subject him to torture or death?"
"Would you consider it inhumane to force a detainee to remove his clothes or remain naked other than for security or medical reasons?”
Answer for yourselves, readers.
Is it torture, or no?
If not, you wouldn't mind taking a vacation at Gitmo or a secret site, would you?
Too bad Levin is an unabashed war-funder!!!!
(Update: Mukasey Sure to be Confirmed)
Saturday, October 27, 2007 Attorney general will block AIPAC probe
Published October 27, 2007
MUKASEY
Attorney general will block probe
Two of the most vociferous opponents of the now ex-attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, were the two Jewish senators, Arlen Specter and Charles Schumer.
Gonzales broke no rules [?], he simply had to go. Why?
In January 2006, Lawrence Franklin pleaded guilty to espionage related charges of passing classified documents to Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, officers of the powerful Jewish American-Israel Public Affairs Committee. The materials concerned U.S. policy towards Iraq, Iran and the war on terrorism.
According to the indictment, these individuals "did unlawfully, knowingly and willfully conspire" in criminal activity against the United States.
The investigation has expanded to ex-Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Under Secretary Douglas Feith and now appears to be moving to the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, via Michael Ledeen, William Luti and David Wurmser.
Also being investigated is the Washington based think tank American Enterprise Institute, home to the promulgators of the Iraq war.
The Gonzales replacement, Michael Mukasey, another pro-Israeli Zionist, is now needed to suppress the investigations of AIPAC and members of the Bush administration, and to drop the charges against the spies for Israel, Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman.
Alberto Gonzales was moving forward on the prosecutions ... he had to go!
