Schumer, Feinstein back Mukasey

Of course! Was there really ever any question? It's the Jewish thing to do...

by Andrew Zajac - Nov 2, 207

Looks like Michael Mukasey will be the next Attorney General after all, many Democrats' misgivings about his unwillingness to declare waterboarding illegal notwithstanding.

A pair of key Senate Democrats, Diane Feinstein, of California, and Charles Schumer, of New York, announced this afternoon that they'll vote for Mukasey, giving him the votes he needs to win approval of the Judiciary Committee.

This can be looked at as a call made on the merits, but politically, the nods from Schumer and Feinstein also can be interpreted as meaning that Democrats still haven't figured out how to address issues like torture without appearing to be soft on national security.

The approval of key Democrats came a day after President Bush compared Democratic leaders stalling aspects of his security agenda, including the Mukasey confirmation, to appeasers who enabled Lenin and Hitler.

Reading between the many lines of his statement, one can sense Schumer's discomfiture.

The media-savvy senior senator from New York typically issues frequent, but very brief, sound bite-like statements on the issues of the day.

In this case, he's broken an uncharacteristically long silence with what for him is a torrent of prose:

SCHUMER STATEMENT SUPPORTING JUDGE MUKASEY TO BE NEXT U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL

I will support Judge Michael Mukasey for Attorney General.

I have spent the last nine months doing everything I can to get new leadership at the Department of Justice and I believe the job will not be finished until we get a strong and independent Attorney General. I believe Judge Mukasey is that type of person. Should we reject him, it is almost certain that an acting, caretaker Attorney General will take office without the advice and consent of the Senate. Inevitably, that would enable those in this administration, who do not believe in the rule of law, and have done things that caused even former Attorney General Ashcroft to threaten resignation, to have the complete upper hand.

Only a strong and independent Attorney General can return the Justice Department to what it once was, and should always be. Under this administration, that nominee will certainly never share our views on issues like torture and wiretapping. The best we can hope for is someone who is independent, has integrity, will put rule of law first and, above all, will clean the stench of politicization out of the Justice Department. I believe Judge Mukasey will be that type of Attorney General.

This is an extremely difficult decision. When an administration, so political, so out of touch with the realities of governing and so contemptuous of the rule of law is in charge, we are never left with an ideal choice. Judge Mukasey is not my ideal choice. However, Judge Mukasey, whose integrity and independence is respected even by those who oppose him, is far better than anyone could expect from this administration. He is recommended by and reminds me of Jim Comey, another Bush nominee who—while he didn’t agree with us on the issues—showed the kind of independence and integrity this department needs.

I would also like to say something about torture, particularly waterboarding. I deeply oppose it. I supported Senator Kennedy’s amendment in 2006 and am a co-sponsor of his bill in this congress. 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 as I hope it will.

This afternoon, I met with Judge Michael Mukasey one more time. I requested the meeting to address, in person, some of my concerns. The Judge made clear to me that, were Congress to pass a law banning certain interrogation techniques, we would clearly be acting within our constitutional authority. And he flatly told me that the President would have absolutely no legal authority to ignore such a law, not even under some theory of inherent authority under Article II of the Constitution. He also pledged to enforce such a law and repeated his willingness to leave office rather than participate in a violation of law.

Judge Mukasey is a lawyer’s lawyer. He will not leap to quick judgments. When we want him to do so, such as on torture, we will be disappointed. But when he resists those in the administration who want quick and facile answers, so they can get their way, so they can roll over civil liberties and blot out separation of powers, it is they who will be disappointed.

I realize that, should he become Attorney General, Judge Mukasey and I will disagree on many issues. I have told him that I will battle just as fiercely against him as I did against previous Attorney Generals when we disagree.

These are troubling times at the Justice Department. We cannot afford or allow the department to languish and limp along for the next 14 months. I deeply esteem those who believe the issue of torture is so paramount that Judge Mukasey’s views on it should be the sole determinant of our vote. But I must respectfully disagree. The Justice Department is a shambles: politicized and demoralized. The belief and hope that Justice Mukasey, with his experience, independence and integrity, can restore the department motivates my vote.