Libertarian Leanings

...needs to find courage?

As the nomination of Judge Michael B. Mukasey for U.S. Attorney General goes to the full senate for confirmation, the Detroit Free Press argues that Judge Mukasey needs to find courage. 

It really shouldn't be tough for Michael Mukasey to admit that waterboarding is torture. When you pressure someone to cooperate with an interrogation by tying them to a board with their head lower than their feet, covering their face with a cloth and then pouring enough water into the cloth to make them think they're drowning, what else would you call it?

Oddly enough, while complaining of Mukasey's "caginess" editorial writers at the Detroit Free Press make no mention of the possible need for congressional courage.

What does the law say about waterboarding? As McCarthy points out, Congress had the opportunity in the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 and again in the Military Commissions Act of 2006 to specifically forbid the practice but chose not to do so. McCarthy writes: “It is ironic . . . that the same elected officials now demanding a definitive answer from Judge Mukasey have failed to give us one themselves.

If it were a Republican controlled congress, The Detroit Free Press would probably have complained that they were the ones in need of courage.

Schumer says OK on Mukasey

The oily Chuck Schumer said he will vote for the confirmation of Michael B. Mukasey.

Mr. Schumer's announcement followed a private meeting today with Judge Mukasey to discuss waterboarding.

"I deeply oppose it," Mr. Schumer said of waterboarding. "Unfortunately, this nominee, indeed any proposed by President Bush, will not agree with this. I am, however, confident that this nominee would enforce a law that bans waterboarding."

Mr. Schumer, who was Judge Mukasey's chief Democratic sponsor, said the retired judge told him that if Congress passes a law banning waterboarding "the president would have absolutely no legal authority to ignore such a law." Mr. Schumer said Judge Mukasey said he would enforce any congressional ban the controversial interrogation method.

Safe all around.  Schumer can rest assured that Judge Mukasey will not fail to enforce any ban congress chooses to pass on waterboarding.  At the same time Judge Mukasey can be absolutely certain there will be no such ban to enforce.  Twice congress has been given the opportunity to pass such a ban, and twice congress decided against.  Apparently waterboarding is OK with them, while interestingly enough, it's not OK for it to be OK with anybody else, even when it's really not OK with anybody else.  It all makes perfect sense when you think about it.

The real target

With all of the Democratic Presidential candidates now opposing the nomination of Judge Michael B. Mukasey for U.S. Attorney General, and Judiciary Committee Democrats apparently planning to block his nomination from reaching the Senate floor, the Wall Street Journal editorial board has concluded that the real target is antiterror interrogation.

If Democrats want to strip the CIA of this tool, then they ought to legislate it openly, not make law under the table through the confirmation process. Congress has twice had the chance to ban or criminalize waterboarding, but it declined to do so in both the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 and the Military Commissions Act of 2006. And not for lack of trying: In debating the Military Commissions Act, Ted Kennedy offered a detailed amendment that specifically prohibited waterboarding, as well as other coercive interrogation methods; it lost on the Senate floor, 46-53.

Sorry, boys.  The real target has always been George W. Bush.  The issue could be anything.  It really doesn't matter.  Whatever it is, the only important thing is to oppose George W. Bush on it.

Update:  Andy McCarthy points out that Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Chuck Schumer have all embraced the concept of coercive interrogation at one time or another. He askes, "What am I missing here?" buttressing my point. It's all about opposing George Bush — nothing else.

Michael B. Mukasey

The nomination of Michael B. Mukasey has hit a predictable but ludicrous snag -- posturing Democrats.

Mukasey's (and the White House's) problems began during his Oct. 18 Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing to replace Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General. At the hearing veteran Illinois Senator Dick Durbin asked Mukasey a deceptively simple question: is waterboarding torture? 

There's a problem with the Illinois Democrat's deceptively simple question.  He and his colleagues had ample opportunity to answer it once and for all legislatively. 

The irony here is that Congress has twice had the chance to ban waterboarding, or simulated drowning, but has twice declined to do so. In both the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 and the Military Commissions Act of 2006, Congress only barred "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment. While some Members have said they believe waterboarding is banned by that language, when given the chance to say so specifically in a statute and be accountable for it, they refused.

Business as usual.

Continuing leftward drift at the Gray Lady

According to Andrew C. McCarthy, the New York Times coverage of Judge Michael B. Mukasey, President Bush's nominee to replace outgoing Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, has been dreadful -- but predictable.

The Times, however, can’t keep it to the opinion pages. Day after day, news coverage in a once-great newspaper devolves into Left-wing polemic, to the point where there is no longer a qualitative difference between the Times and The Nation. Save one: The Nation, self-described “flagship of the left,” has no pretensions about being anything other than the Nation; the Times still pretends to be the Newspaper of Record — and continues to be treated that way by the “mainstream” press (which itself still pretends to be mainstream).

The problem, of course, is that we are supposed to get an accurate account of what the record is before we start a partisan brawl about what it means. That’s not possible with the Times anymore. Monday’s hatchet job on Michael B. Mukasey, the former federal judge tapped by President Bush to be the nation’s next attorney general, is proof positive.