Skip to main content

View Diary: Schumer Op-Ed:  A Pitiful Defense For His Mukasey Vote (228 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  We need to deride these turncoats (7+ / 0-)

    who twist themselves into such contortions to justify the unjustifiable.  

    They have earned out scorn and we need to broadcast it far and wide.  At no point should we let them be comfortable with the choices they are making.

    They truly are corrupt.  I now know and understand the meaning of the word.

    It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change. Charles Darwin

    by pioneer111 on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 06:19:42 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Seems to me that Schumer, and other Dem's, (0+ / 0-)

      are stuck between a rock and a hard place.  If they don't approve Mukasey, Bush has threatened (and there's no reason not to believe him) that he will make an AG recess appointment, who would serve out the remainder of Bush's term.  Both Schumer and Feinstein have said they believe the president's recess appointment would be "even worse."

      Also seems to me that if the Senate wants to make waterboarding unequivocally illegal, all they have to do is pass a law saying so.  Doing so would call the hand of Bush, who would have to veto the law (and defend his veto to the public) if he wanted the procedure to continue being used.  If his veto were overridden, Mukasey could then be turned loose to file criminal charges on the president, the veep, and those in the defense department who continue to use the practice.  If his veto were sustained, it would make a nice campaign ad against Repub's.

      Of course this would do nothing to stop extraordinary renditions - sending prisoners to third countries who can then administer whatever torture they please.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 06:33:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Senate needs to stay in session (9+ / 0-)

        to prevent recess appointments.  They can do 'pro forma' sessions with a handful of senators who live nearby (except if some Republican wants to stop that and force a real recess they may be able to do it by calling for a quorum or something -- who knows Senate rules?).

        There are already laws against torture in general that should apply to waterboarding.  Mukasey has made clear he won't enforce them.  If Congress passed a new law specific to waterboarding, Bush might just sign it but attach a signing statement saying he won't follow or enforce it if he needs to do that 'to protect the nation'.  Mukasey has already indicated he'd go along with Bush ingoring laws if the President 'needs to, to protect national security'.

        We're all pretty crazy some way or other; some of us just hide it better. "Normal" is just a setting on the dryer.

        by david78209 on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 06:44:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Your sayin' Dem's appoint him and WE win?!?! (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ER Doc, Randall Sherman, costello7

        What kind of fucked up, TORTURED logic is that?!?!

        Approving him is tantamount to saying we approve of torture, a unitary executive, the whole kit and caboodle.

        We need to oppose him. Period.

        When war is considered to be more noble than peace - we have lost everything.

        by feloneouscat on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 06:48:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  No law is neccessary (8+ / 0-)

        Waterboarding has always been torture.  We've prosecuted people for waterboarding--both within this country and in war scenarios.  Passing such a law does two things, IMO.

        ONE)  By its very nature, grants retroactive immunity.  Since the Constitution (yeah, I know, "quaint") prohibits making actions retroactively illegal, it could only serve to say "from this day forward..."  Bush gets a pass and he happily signs the bill.  "Clearly Congress believed waterboarding was, previously, legal or they would not have seen a need to pass this law making it illegal."

        TWO)  It opens up all kinds of other techniques, now considered to be torture, to being used under the theory that "no law currently exists banning the practice."  There is a legal maxim that basically states "to include one thing is to exclude all others."  IOW, to state that waterboarding is illegal is to state that all other techniques are not illegal.  Again, W signs the Bill happily.

        Well, BULL SHIT!  Waterboarding has always been torture.  Torture has always been illegal in this country.  George Bush is a war criminal and all the Dems who sign on to an AG who will not state, without equivacation, that waterboarding is torture, are complicit in Chimp's crimes.

        I don't care if W "recess appoints" Charles Manson, the Dems should not willingly abandon their oath and endorse torture.  A vote for Mukasey is a vote for torture.  Period.  Better to have a torture AG without the approval of Congressional Dems than with.

      •  Even worse? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        catfood
        Maybe, but vulnerable as a recess appointment.

        You know the first thing we'll hear if Congress criticizes any of Mukasey's actions: "You approved him." Just like with criticism of Petraeus and the surge.

        The chances of the Senate getting a law passed declaring waterboarding illegal are minimal. The Republicans would filibuster claiming it's unnecessary and prevents the President from defending us. And we don't torture anyway.

        And turn Mukasey loose? He's in the president's pocket. He's not going to file criminal charges on his boss. Bush would never have nominated him if he wasn't sure of that. "Needs investigation" "National security" "Executive privilege" He wouldn't even agree that Congress could make laws restricting executive authority.

      •  Waterboarding (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        feloneouscat, Fallon

        is already illegal under United States law:

        In 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor

        Passing another law might make for a good show, but with Mukasey in the Justice Department, who's going to enforce it?

        -5.12, -5.23

        We are men of action; lies do not become us.

        by ER Doc on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 07:17:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Not a rock and a hard place. (0+ / 0-)
        1. Don't approve Mukasey. Do not make the Democrats part of the Torture gang.
        1. Waterboarding is ALREADY illegal because it is torture. You don't have to be effin' briefed on it. Sticking needles in them, pulling out fingernails, etc. ALL do not have to be individually made illegal - they ARE illegal.

        I'm not sure what the point of your post was...

        When war is considered to be more noble than peace - we have lost everything.

        by feloneouscat on Tue Nov 06, 2007 at 08:55:20 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site