Why I Will Vote "No" on Mukasey

The attorney general of the United States must be a defender of our constitutional rights. Because President Bush thinks he can do whatever he wants to do in the name of fighting terrorism, we need an attorney general who can explain to the president what the Constitution of this country is all about. We need an attorney general who does not believe the president has unlimited power. We need an attorney general who will tell President Bush that he is not above the law. We need an attorney general who clearly understands the separation of powers inherent in our Constitution. Regretfully, I have concluded that Michael B Mukasey would not be that kind of attorney general. That is why I will be voting against his nomination.

Let me be clear. Of course the United States government must do everything that it can to protect the American people from the dangerous threat of terrorism, but we can do that in ways that are effective and consistent with the Constitution and the civil liberties it guarantees. The Bush administration and the lawyers who have enabled it for the past seven years cannot be bothered with such technical legal niceties as the Bill of Rights. This administration thinks it can eavesdrop on telephone conversations without warrants, suspend due process for people classified as enemy combatants and thumb its nose when Congress exercises its oversight responsibility. That is why I called on Alberto Gonzales to resign. I had hoped that the confirmation process for a new attorney general would give the president and the Senate an important opportunity to refocus on the core American principles embedded in our Constitution.

Unfortunately, Judge Mukasey doesn't get it. At his two-day confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he suggested that eavesdropping without warrants and using "enhanced" interrogation techniques for terrorism suspects might be constitutional, even if they exceeded what the law technically allowed. He said Congress might not have the power to stop the president from conducting some surveillance without warrants. He even, incredibly, claimed to be unfamiliar with the technique known as waterboarding.

Waterboarding is a "very exquisite torture," according to no less of an authority than Senator John McCain of Arizona, a former prisoner of war. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, provided Murkasey a graphic description of the practice. He told the nominee that it ''is the practice of putting somebody in a reclining position, strapping them down, putting cloth over their faces and pouring water over the cloth to simulate the feeling of drowning." Still, Mukasey refused to say it was tantamount to torture or to venture an opinion on whether it is constitutional. Torquemada's ghost might be smiling somewhere. I am not.

Without diminishing that issue, Mukasey's lawyerly obfuscation on the point is not the biggest or even the most basic problem I have with his nomination. There is an even more important reason why he should not become the next attorney general.

Mukasey should not be confirmed because he could not muster a simple, straightforward answer at his confirmation hearing when he was asked the simple, straightforward question: Is the president of the United States required to obey federal statutes? "That would have to depend," he weaseled, "on whether what goes outside the statute nonetheless lies within the authority of the president to defend the country."

As it happens, the Supreme Court, one of those pesky other branches of government, reaffirmed just last year that the president must comply with a valid federal statute. In a case involving military commissions, the majority even took note of the fact at the time that the Justice Department "does not argue otherwise." Mukasey evidently would argue otherwise. "If Judge Mukasey cannot say plainly that the president must obey a valid statute, he ought not to be the nation's next attorney general," wrote Jed Rubenfeld, a professor of constitutional law at Yale Law School who appeared before Judge Mukasey as a prosecutor. He's got that right.

It has become an American aphorism that ours is a government of laws, not men. We need an attorney general who understands that, so he can explain it to a president who does not.

Comments

[godlessclif]

Bernie Sanders is just like Senator Jefferson Smith, only Smith is fiction and Bernie is real.

[HalR]

Thanks, Sen.Sander­s for a well written article. It appears we need more Senators with your logic,understanding of the Constitution,desire to do what is right instead of what is political partisan. No one is above the law.

[mamacat]

That's great Senator Sanders. Do you think the Senate will turn him down?

[peacehappens]

"We need an attorney general who will tell President Bush that he is not above the law. We need an attorney general who clearly understands the separation of powers inherent in our Constituti­on."

We need a Speaker of the House that will do the same things but we don't have one do we?

Pelosi will tell Democrats, "Voting against Mukasey is OFF THE TABLE" because her intention is to protect Bush/Cheney at all costs and to ensure their continued success in trashing our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

[Not Blind]

Bravo to Sen. Sanders, Chris Dodd, Ron Paul and others who still believe the Constitution is the Law of this land, not just a "damned piece of paper," as Bush refers to it.
Our founding fathers created this nation as a free republic and democracy, based upon principles, not technicalities. The principles of freedom guarantee citizens legal and civil rights and freedoms. They (our founders) also knew that a system of checks and balances, and a split government: administrative, legislative and judiciary would maintain stability, order and preserve the republic.
Instead, via signing statements, blatant disregard of the Constitution, defiance of international law, contempt of Congress, and appointments to the judiciary and head of the so-called Justice Dept. of party loyalists, political allies and corporate or individual donors/friends who only wish to serve the President, NOT the Constitution they swore and took and oath to defend and protect, the public or this nation, we've become a despotic tyrannical, dictatorial society much akin to the one of Saddam Hussein. Today, even free speech is suppressed. Those who voice objection or criticism, and even dare to question are betrayed, subjected to character assassination or castigated wontonly. The press and media have succumbed to the pressure by offering its "news" (more blogging and PR for the failed administration's policies), than reporting facts, finding evidence, or conducting serious professional investigation as part of their credentials as "journalis­ts."
Was this "Press Conference" a joke? Of course! Did some gullible fools buy it? Certainly! Will FEMA live up to it's promise and the purpose for which it was intended? NOPE!

[spicegal]

So long as Mukasey refuses to denounce torture in all its forms, he has NO BUSINESS being confirmed as AG. I expect the Dems to vote no on confirmation unless he truly comes clean. It is time for the Dems to draw a line in the sand for once and stick to it. Come on guys, find your spines. In fact, who do I need to contact about this????

[Libsrule]

That's great Senator, but what about your fellow senators? Just because you vote against this Bushlicker will they?

One gets the impression that, as usual, the democrats will make noise about him not being appropriate, and not good for America, but because they are more afraid of Rush, Hannity and the rest of the talking heads over at the Fox Noise Whorehouse, than they are of the voters who put them in power, he will probably get the nod and things will continue as before.

So more importantly why do they keep doing this.

[rabun666]

This country is so pathetic now that nominees for appointments will not commit to following the Constitutional laws that they swear to uphold and then they still get appointed BY THE DEMOCRATS. tHE DEMOCRATS MUST BE BOYCOTTED IN TERMS OF MONEY AND VOTES.

[texanna]

Your comments are spot on, Sir. It would be really nice if your colleagues in the Senate and on the Senate Judiciary Committee had the same knowledge of our Constitution. I say, reject this guy and tell Shrub that you all will be happy to consider a serious candidate for the office -- you know, somebody who actually believes in the separation of powers idea and that other crazy shit those silly framers dreamed up! All Mukasey did in the hearings was find another way to say to the Neocons that he's on board with the Unitary Executive idea they've foisted on the rest of us. Also, anybody who doesn't know about waterboarding at this point clearly isn't up to performing the tasks of a high-level government post as this topic has been widely discussed and described in print, on TV and radio for at least the last year!

[Misanthrope2]

If Bernie Sanders is for it, I am too. If Bernie Sanders is against it, I am too.

Thanks, Bernie.

[JustJoeKing]

Thank you, sir.

[eplatypusunum]

Senator,

Well said. Thank you.

Now, any ideas on how we can get MORE Independents in Congress? It seems almost impossible in any state except yours, Maine and occasionally here in partially nutty Minnesota (Gov. 'Bullethead' Ventura, who wasn't entirely inept).

Seriously. I think we're doomed if we don't get a few more Independents in both houses. Republican party is diabolical (Lincoln weeps) and the Democratic party is ineffectual. No balance...

Thanks again,
epu

[lisakaz]

Thank you, Senator! I hope more of your colleagues join you. It is HIGH TIME THE CONSTITUTION MATTERS AGAIN.

[frost]

.

much as i would hope that all democrats would block the installment of a more competent torturer than Gonzalez was..

i have been steeped in the fire of repeated cowardice by democratic politician­s.. clearly democrats will continue down the road of failing America by allowing yet one more disgrace by the Bush administration to occur..
.

[Ravenlea]

Thank you for this. Now, how about voting to impeach Bush and Cheney?