Bush fabricates on Mukasey at the Heritage Foundation.

I just finished watching Bush speak at the Heritage Foundation regarding the confirmation hearings of Michael Mukasey for Attorney General and on the War on Terror.  He says that Mukasey's confirmation is being unfairly held up by the Senate and that a vote is needed now.  With all due respect Mr. President, you are, once again, you are playing fast and loose with the facts and have no idea what you're talking about.  Details below.

President Bush began his discussion of the Mukasey hearings by pointing out that he has "endured" six hours of questioning and answered 200 spoken questions and over 500 written questions.  Michael Mukasey is being confirmed for the top law enforcement position in the country.  I spent more time answering questions and preparing to get my license to practice law in Pennsylvania.  With all due respect, we have not even scratched the surface of what should be done to ensure that we have the right person for the job.

Specifically, Bush was upset about the questioning regarding waterboarding.  He had three specific items that upset him about this and I will cover them in turn.  

1.  Michael Mukasey doesn't know if waterboarding is used, so he can't comment and that it is unfair to question him about a classified program.

2.  Mukasey doesn't want his comments to be used to undermine interrogators in the field.

3.  Bush doesn't want terrorists to know what techniques may or may not be used.

Regarding item 1, the Senate didn't ask about a classified program.  Senators asked Michael Mukasey about the technique called waterboarding and whether it was torture or not.  This process is not classified.  In fact, it is so well-known that it has an entry on Wikipedia.  Michael Mukasey does not need to comment on a classified program to comment on waterboarding and it's time he answered the question.

Item 2 also has its fallacies.  As Mukasey is not presently the attorney general, his comments cannot undermine anyone.  Even if he does become the attorney general, his comments are moot.  If waterboarding is torture, then interrogators are not permitted to use the technique.  If it is not torture in Mukasey's mind, then it cannot undermine the interrogators, but only support them.  As such, this concern cannot and must not prevent Mukasey from answering the questions.

As for item 3, given the track record of the Justice Department on arresting and convicting terrorists (only four people have been convicted of plotting attacks in the United States), the terrorists aren't going to be impacted by this anyway.  Regardless, as Bush has said, the policy of the United States is that we don't torture.  Provided Bush is being truthful with the American people (which is highly unlikely, but we should assume that Mukasey and Bush trust each other), if waterboarding is torture, then the terrorists already know we don't use it.  If it isn't torture, then nothing Mukasey can say will prevent the United States from using it.

As you can see, none of the reasons given by President Bush is a valid reason for avoiding the question.  Mukasey can and must answer the question of whether or not waterboarding is torture.  And if he refuses to fire up the computer and check out Wikipedia before giving his answer, then he is unfit for this office and the Senate must reject him.