Something has been bothering me about the torture memo disclosures. Sure, it bothers me that Jay Bybee hasn't yet fled the country or resigned in shame. And it bothers me that John Yoo and Alberto Gonzales are still free men, at least for some definition of the word "free" that doesn't involve international travel.
But what about the guy we got to replace Gonzo? What about Michael Mukasey?
Some of you might remember that there was a bit of a shift between day 1 and day 2 of Mukasey's confirmation hearings, way back in October of 2007. Our own Kagro X pointed out here (and probably somewhere on dkos as well) that as of October 19th, Mukasey had clearly been co-opted by someone who knew what the score was inside the CIA. The about-face in his testimony suggested that someone had called him the night of the 18th and ... encouraged him ... to rethink several of his positions.
I wondered then who talked to Mukasey, and what that person could have said that changed his mind.
I wonder if he would tell us now (maybe if someone asks nicely).
But to stick to my headline: while I was digging through posts from the end of October 2007, I ran across this one from Talking Points Memo on October 29, wherein then-senator Barack Obama provided the following statement explaining why he would not vote to confirm Mukasey as AG: [emphasis mine]
"We urgently need an Attorney General who will check the vast and unconstrained executive powers that have been accumulated under the Bush-Cheney Administration. Judge Mukasey has failed to send a clear signal that he understands the legal and moral issues that are at stake for our country, and so I cannot support him.
"No nominee for Attorney General should need a second chance to oppose torture and the unnecessary violation of civil liberties. It's time to stop the political parsing and to close the legal loopholes. Waterboarding is torture, and so are other 'enhanced interrogation techniques' like 'head-slapping' and 'extreme temperatures.' It's time to reclaim our values and reaffirm our Constitution."
Well, Mr. President, I'd say that statement makes it pretty clear that even then you knew what the stakes were. Waterboarding is torture, and torture is a war crime. The United States is required to investigate and prosecute any incidents of suspected torture. Mukasey knew that requirement, and by October 19th 2007, he must have known that an investigation would reveal that at least some Americans were guilty. His cowardice and his craven ambition prevented him from enforcing the law, and thereby made him complicit in the crime.
If there is going to be even one prosecution, why not start with the man who could have blown this wide open in the fall of 2007 and chose instead to cover it up in order to further his own career? Your own words reveal your understanding of the issue. Now that you are in a position to correct the situation, what are you going to do about it?