Justice Dept. clears Yoo, Bybee

Justice's original report on John Yoo and Jay Bybee's support for torture has been "softened," says Newsweek. Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey sent the original report back for ... further work.

But, the Obama DOJ isn't distancing itself from the softening of the findings. (Not that that surprises me.)

Latino voters ground zero in GOP ‘vote fraud’ political battle?

Racially as well as politically driven?
The Wall Street Journal noted 10 days ago that New Mexico was the focal point on the FBI’s battle against vote fraud, registration fraud, etc.

Why New Mexico? Well, if the FBI/Department of Justice investigation is being politicized, a number of reasons.

The obvious is that it’s a tightly fought swing state.

The less-immediate one is that it’s got the nation’s largest Hispanic population, by percentage.

There’s your key. Illegal immigration is a GOP base red meat issue. It’s been in the news a lot the last six months, from the failure of the Senate to pass an immigration bill on.

So, going after alleged Hispanic vote fraud in New Mexico would be a base-pleaser.

Play it out
Then, the effort could easily spill over into new southwestern swing state Nevada, and Colorado — two other states with high Hispanic populations.

If Obama and his campaign can connect the dots, and are politically astute …

They’ll up the ante on Mukasey, and accuse him of conducting not just a politically biased but a racially biased, investigation. And, then, cut a couple of Spanish-language commercials.

Mukasey officially demands telecom immunity — but not all is over

The too-late-to-shut-the-barn-door bit of silver lining is that he acknowledged the existence of TSP. That said, Judge Walker could do one of two things that would crap a turd in the Mukasey-Bush-Cheney-Addington punchbowl.

That would be to either:
• Pull the judicial equivalent of jury nullification and tell Mukasey where to get off;
• Issue a stay of Mukasey’s request, based on the EFF suit against the government itself rather than the telecoms, filed for exactly this reason.

Walker has no legal reason to resort to option 1. But, he has plenty of legal logic to choose option 2.

(Oh, and thanks once again for an AG like this, Chuck Schumer; with Democrats like you, who needs to vote Republican?)

Maybe a judge will hold Mukasey in contempt — for real

Judge Thomas Hogan told the Department of Justice to make Gitmo trials job No. 1:

“The time has come to move these forward. Set aside every other case that’s pending in the division and address this case first.”

Snark aside, Hogan even offered to help DOJ find countries of repatriation or expatriation for Guantanamo detainees.

Of course, there’s this little issue of the government not wanting to pay the detainees’ public defenders.

“Now the government is stonewalling again by not allowing Americans’ private dollars to be paid to American lawyers to defend civil liberties,” ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said.

What if Hogan threatens to rule that detainees have no possibility of receiving a speedy trial, under the Sixth Amendment, if the Bush Administration keeps this up?

WHAT KIND of contempt will Rove get from Conyers?

Let’s face it. Karl Rove is NOT going to show up at the House Judiciary Committee’s July 10 hearing on the possible political motivations of the trial of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman.

Let Conyers subpoena away, like he did with Harriet Miers and John Bolton in the U.S. Attorney firings. Attorney General Mike Mukasey refused to enforce the contempt citations, so the House filed a legal motion.

But, in that case, the court could simply tell Conyers that he hasn’t exhausted all his possibilities yet, namely that of inherent contempt.

The flip side to that, though, is that inherent contempt only applies to the Congress sitting at the time. So, Conyers et al would have to compel testimony from Miers and Bolton (or Rove) with the clock ticking toward the clichéd Labor Day start of the campaign season.

And, even with inherent contempt, what if they still refuse to testify? Is Passive Pelosi™ going to swear out the Capitol police to go to their houses with warrants?

Feinstein hoist by own petard

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Betty Crocker), who along with Chuck Schumer was key in getting Mike Mukasey approved as Attorney General, is now hoist by her own petard as Mukasey refuses to give her a straight answer as to whether or not John Yoo’s 2001 memo claiming the Fourth Amendment had “no application to domestic military operations.”

Here’s the exchange:

“I’m just asking you, ‘Is this memo in force that the Fourth Amendment does not apply?’”

“The principle that the Fourth Amendment does not apply in wartime is not in force,” Mukasey replied.

“That’s not the principle I asked you about,” Feinstein countered. The memo referred to domestic military operations, she said.

“There are no domestic military operations being carried out today,” Mukasey replied.

“I’m asking you a question. That's not the answer.” …

Finally, Mukasey responded, “The Fourth Amendment applies across the board whether we’re in wartime or peacetime. It applies across the board.”

But, Mukasey then said he didn’t think the Yoo memo had focused on the Fourth Amendment.

I’ve said before, Dianne Feinstein’s political stances would be wonderful if she were a Democratic senator from, say, Oklahoma or Alabama. They would be solid if she were a Democratic senator from Ohio or Missouri.

But, she’s a waste, in essence, as a Democratic senator from California.

BushCo hates bloggers in the name of national security

The Bush Administration strenuously opposes Sen. Arlen Specter’s media shield law. Why?

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the bill would erect roadblocks to gathering information “from anyone who can claim to be a journalist, including bloggers.”

The legislation gives an overly broad definition of journalists that “can include those linked to terrorists and criminals,” wrote Attorney General Michael Mukasey and National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the nation would be more vulnerable to “adversaries’ counterintelligence efforts to recruit” those shielded by the bill.

Bullshit, bullshit, and bullshit.

We know the real reason they’re saying this is the same reason Mukasey took top blog Talking Points Memo off the AG’s daily e-mail news summary mailing.

They hate bloggers.

Why?

TPM got former AG Alberto Gonzales canned over partisan firings of district attorneys.

Bloggers got House Democrats to stiffen up and pass a FISA bill without telco immunity.

Bloggers took Bush, Uncle Fester Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld et al to task on Iraq long before the mainstream media had a clue.

George W. Bush, for the remaining nine and a half months of his term (not starring Mickey Rourke as Bush) wants to spy on bloggers.

It’s that simple.

FISA renewal REALLY not urgent but bait-and-switch is

So, after BushCo’s attempted bitchslap of Congress did nothing on telecom immunity in FISA renewal, all of a sudden, Attorney General Mukasey is open to compromise.

“If somebody has some brilliantly creative compromise, I'm happy to hear that.”

This is a bait-and-switch Trojan horse, of course, because Mukasey then defines “brilliantly creative compromise” in BushCo terms, saying the just-passed House bill doesn’t count.

Obviously, this is a pre-Senate invasion softening-up bombardment. Look for a beached, dying, harpooned Jay Rockefeller to wash ashore shortly after Easter.

Reporters and media protection latest BushCo ‘security threat’

I guess a media shield law will give al Qaida “aid, hope and comfort,” or some other stupidity.

First, we have the Subtler, Suaver Alberto Gonzales™, Attorney General Mike Mukasey, claiming a shield law now wending its way through the Senate, defines a journalist too broadly.

Of course, this is the same AG Mukasey who cut blog/online news source Talking Points Memo off the list of daily e-mail media recipients from the Department of Justice.

And, doorknob bless Patrick Fitzgerald for prosecuting Scooter Libby, but he’s just wrong in claiming a shield law isn’t needed.

Dismissing notions that media subpoenas would dampen investigative reporting, Fitzgerald said, “Journalists have been saying the sky is falling since 1972 ... and that suddenly the stories will dry up. But I'm not seeing big blank spaces on the front page.”

Uh, Pat, the worry isn’t what has happened since 1972, but what has happened since 2001. Get a clue. Or else admit that you’re spinning a line here.

Was Spitzer set up?

Per an earlier blog post I had about quick-draw Mukasey, prominent New York City attorney Horton wonders if the whole thing wasn’t a set-up.

Horton notes that the Public Integrity Section of the U.S. Department of Justice has shown huge political bias in the Bush Administration, as well as the fact that the Mann Act is a bogus legal relic.

It is an eyebrow-raiser, at the least, given that Attorney General Mike Mukasey has shown himself to be little more than suaver, more subtle Alberto Gonzales.

Quick-draw Mukasey

So, the Eliot Spitzer investigation needed a personal okey-dokey from Attorney General Mike Mukasey?

Because the focus was a high-ranking government official, prosecutors were required to seek the approval of the United States attorney general to proceed. Once they secured that permission, the investigation moved forward.

But, Big Mike doesn’t have the time, or energy, or moral certititude, to investigate waterboarding? Or actually enforce a contempt of Congress citation?

Too bad George Tenet or Peter Goss didn’t hire call girls. Or Harriett Miers hire a gigolo, although the mere image of that might want to make me throw up in my mouth.
Qu

Arbour, unlike Mukasey, knows torture when she hears about it

And, she says, something can be done

U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour has no problem calling waterboarding torture. Once again, our moral standing in the world falls like a dropped soufflé.

Arbour made her comment in response to a question about whether U.S. officials could be tried for the use of waterboarding that referred to CIA director Michael Hayden telling Congress on Tuesday his agency had used waterboarding on three detainees captured after the September 11 attacks.

Violators of the U.N. Convention against Torture should be prosecuted under the principle of “universal jurisdiction” which allows countries to try accused war criminals from other nations, Arbour said.

“There are several precedents worldwide of states exercising their universal jurisdiction ... to enforce the torture convention and we can only hope that we will see more and more of these avenues of redress,” Arbour said.

Are there specific precedents for this? Hell, yes:

Arbour referred to an arrest warrant issued in 1998 by a Spanish judge for former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, who died in 2006, on charges of torture, murder and kidnapping in the years that followed his 1973 coup.

Latin American dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s were known to use waterboarding on political prisoners.

I’d pay damn good money to see an international judge issue arrest warrants for John Yoo, David Addington, Richard B. “Dick” Cheney and George W. Bush.

Acquiescent Dem gift Mike Mukasey keeps on his illegality giving

Once again, for your non-law-abiding pleasure, it’s called Attorney General Mike Mukasey, the “Alberto Gonzales with brains” that Democrats signed off on as attorney general. First, there’s the more minor issue of him stiffing Talking Points Memo; next, there’s the much more serious matter of his flat refusal to enforce Congressional contempt citations. Florida Congressman Robert Wexler elicits this blanket refusal

WEXLER: Should Congress pass a contempt citation, will you enforce it?

MUKASEY: A contempt citation of...

WEXLER: With respect to the subpoenas, with respect to Mr. Bolten?

MUKASEY: If you're talking about a contempt citation based on Mr. Bolten's failure to appear...

WEXLER: Yes.

MUKASEY: ... in response to a direction by the president that he not appear, the answer is no. Because he can't violate that request.

True, only six Democrats actually voted for Mukasey, but that was enough. However, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid could have held up the nomination had he so chosen, or one of the 40 opposed Democrats, or more, could have filibustered.

Or, if one of the Senate Democratic presidential candidate had actually shown up that day, they could have blocked cloture instead of an actual filibuster.

Sure, some Democrats might argue that Bush would have just let somebody worse be acting AG. Counterargument: Aside from the likes of David Addington or John Yoo, could you actually have somebody worse?

The dirty half-dozen Democrats, to remind you are, Charles Schumer (D-Hedge Funds), Diane Feinstein (D-Betty Crocker), Evan Bayh (D-Blandness), Tom Carper (D-Banking), Mary Landrieu (D-Southern Belle With Vapors), and Ben Nelson (D-Too Background To Get A Snarky Title).

Beyond that, the man and his son were both campaign advisors to Rudy Giuliani, Mr. Terrorism Nutbar, for doorknob’s sake. How could you NOT expect something like this?

Reason No. 973a to be leery of Democrats — more on Mukasey

As a follow-up to a recent post of mine noting Attorney General Mike Mukasey’s stance on waterboarding sounds like Newt Gingrich, the real issue behind this is we have an Attorney General with the ethics of Alberto Gonzales but more administrative skill in stonewalling, lying and denying:

The problem is that Mukasey is only willing to make and defend his decisions without explaining them. Still, he is very convincing in asserting that even though his decision is secret and its rationale is secret, and all future applications are secret, he is nevertheless confident that it’s the right decision.

True, some Democrats from the Senate Judiciary Committee are right now showing themselves to be less worthy of being called leery.

But, this is like shutting the barn door on a 2,000-beast concentrated animal feedlot operation after they’ve all crapped in the lagoon.

What, Newt Gingrich is now AG?

Reason No. 973 to be leery of Democrats, especially in Congress

Mike Mukasey, the Attorney General nominee the Senate, including Democrats, so willingly signed off on, now says the question about whether waterboarding is torture or not can only be determined through a cost-benefit analysis.

BushCo’s latest dodge on the CIA waterboarding tapes trail

The administration told Judge Henry H. Kennedy it didn’t have to turn over info about the tapes because the Justice Department was investigating the matter itself.. You know the rest of the drill.

AG Mike Mukasey does a pro forma investigation. (He’s already told the Senate Intelligence Committee to buzz off.) Says he finds nothing.

Case closed.

Charles Schumer, official dickhead on Mukasey

)Seconded by Harry Reid, though.)

First, Frank Rich rips him a new one, then the NYT editorial board piles on.

First, the editorial, which begins by taking a shot at Harry Reid, without naming him:

Democrats offer excuses for their sorry record, starting with their razor-thin majority. But it is often said that any vote in the Senate requires more than 60 votes — enough to overcome a filibuster. So why did Mr. Mukasey get by with only 53 votes? Given the success the Republicans have had in blocking action when the Democrats cannot muster 60 votes, the main culprit appears to be the Democratic leadership, which seems uninterested in or incapable of standing up to Mr. Bush.

Then, it focuses on Schumer:

The claim that Mr. Mukasey will depoliticize the Justice Department loses its allure when you consider that he would not commit himself to enforcing Congressional subpoenas in the United States attorneys scandal.

Then, it finishes by shooting at all the Democrats on this one:

All of this leaves us wondering whether Mr. Schumer and other Democratic leaders were more focused on the 2008 elections than on doing their constitutional duty. Certainly, being made to look weak on terrorism might make it harder for them to expand their majority.

And, here’s a thought from Rich:

What makes the Democrats’ Mukasey cave-in so depressing is that it shows how far even exemplary sticklers for the law like Senators Feinstein and Schumer have lowered democracy’s bar. When they argued that Mr. Mukasey should be confirmed because he’s not as horrifying as Mr. Gonzales or as the acting attorney general who might get the job otherwise, they sounded whipped. After all these years of Bush-Cheney torture, they’ll say things they know are false just to move on.

Don’t worry, though: Schumer is out saving hedge funds from additional taxation as we speak.

Mukasey vote swapped for DoD pork

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid swapped Mike Mukasey’s nomination for the Defense Department appropriations bill, which doesn’t include Iraq and Afghanistan costs.

This was a routine appropriations bill. So what, so what the fuck, if GOP Senators were using procedural tactics to delay it? Reid could have played that same game with some bill some Republicans lusted after.

Instead, Mukasey was swapped out for military pork. No other way to put it.

The DoD regular appropriations bill is about 50 percent pork as it is. Probably would have done the country a damn bit of good, Mukasey aside, for it to sit a while.

And, Dodd got stiffed out of the chance to filibuster, and deliberately, I believe.

I hereby nominate Harry Reid for the “Get Some Conejos” prize of the week.

Five chickenshits on Mukasey?

The four Democratic senatorial presidential candidates — Clinton, Obama, Biden and Dodd — all say they opposed Michael Mukasey’s nomination as attorney general. Yet, none of them could actually be present in the Senate to officially vote no?

That’s pretty much ditto for McCain on the Republican side, who weaseled out of having to vote either for or against Mukasey despite saying he believes waterboarding is torture.