|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Senate confirms Mukasey as attorney general
By Patrick Martin
10 November 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Former federal judge Michael Mukasey was formally sworn in
as the US attorney general Friday, less than a day after the Senate
confirmed his nomination by a 53-40 vote.
The confirmation vote marked the completion of the Senate Democrats
capitulation to the Bush administrations torture policy,
as well as its assertion of virtually unlimited executive power
in any area of policy related to national security.
Six Democrats and independent Democrat Joseph Lieberman
of Connecticut joined with all 46 Republicans in voting to approve
the nomination of Mukasey. These six included Charles Schumer
of New York and Dianne Feinstein of California, the two Democrats
on the Senate Judiciary Committee who played the critical role
in salvaging the nomination after Mukasey provoked an uproar by
declining to characterize waterboarding as torture.
Schumer and Feinsten provided the margin of approval on the
Judiciary Committee, which ratified the nomination by an 11-8
vote and sent it to the floor of the Senate earlier in the week.
The other four Democrats for Mukasey were Evan Bayh of Indiana,
frequently mentioned as a potential vice-presidential candidate
in 2008, as well as Thomas Carper of Delaware, Ben Nelson of Nebraska
and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana.
Even more important than the six Democrats (plus Lieberman)
whose votes put Mukasey over the top, were the overwhelming majority
of Senate Democrats who voted no, but refused to conduct a filibuster
to stop the confirmation vote from taking place at all.
A total of 39 Democrats and independent Bernard Sanders of
Vermont, who caucuses with the Democrats, voted against Mukasey.
The four Senate Democrats who are running for president, Hillary
Clinton, Barack Obama, Joseph Biden and Christopher Dodd, skipped
the vote but had already announced their opposition.
This means that there were many more than the 40 votes required
to sustain a filibuster if the Senate Democratic leadership had
decided to prevent a vote. While in the minority, before 2006,
Senate Democrats mustered 40 votes on a number of occasions to
block particularly odious Bush nominees to the federal judiciary.
The four-hour debate Thursday was typical of the conduct of
the Democrats since they took control of Congress as a result
of the 2006 congressional elections. There was much breast-beating
about how bad Bush was, how terrible his policies were, and how
much the Democrats were offended. But not offended enough, apparently,
to actually conduct themselves as an opposition, and block the
nomination.
Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee,
denounced Mukaseys claim that he could not declare waterboarding
to be torture because he had not been given access to classified
information on the exact techniques employed by CIA interrogators,
even though waterboarding has been prohibited under both US law
and the Military Code of Justice.
This is like saying when somebody murders somebody with
a baseball bat and you say, We had a law against murder
but we never mentioned baseball bats, Leahy said.
Murder is murder. Torture is torture.
Yes, and cowardice is cowardice, prostration is prostration.
Equally fierce rhetoric came from Senator Edward Kennedy, perhaps
the Senates dean of high-minded outrage, who declared, We
cannot afford to take the judgment of an attorney general who
either does not know torture when he sees it or is willing to
look the other way.
Kennedy and the rest of the Senate Democrats, however, were
willing to look the other way rather than resort to
a filibuster, just as they have been willing to look the
other way rather than block any further funding for the
war in Iraq.
It is hard to decide which was more revolting, the impotence
of the Democrats who cast their votes against Mukasey, or the
hypocrisy of those who argued in his favor, despite admitting
that he had clearly signaled that the Bush administration would
continue its torture policy.
Feinstein of California declared, This is the only chance
we have to approve a replacement for disgraced former attorney
general Alberto Gonzales, who resigned in September. She cited
Bushs threat to name an acting attorney general to run the
Justice Department on an interim basis for the final 14 months
of his administrationas though such an arrangement would
be any more damaging to democratic and civil rights, and constitutional
norms, than the rubber-stamping of Mukasey.
Schumer of New York, who actually suggested Mukasey to the
White House as a replacement for Gonzales, was unrepentant in
his Senate speech. No one questions that Judge Mukasey would
do much to turn around the Justice Department and much to remove
the stench of politics from this vital institution, he said.
It was Schumer who played a major role in the campaign against
Gonzales that led ultimately to his ouster. He consistently sought
to focus, not on the most blatantly antidemocratic aspects of
Gonzaless tenure, such as the approval of illegal wiretapping,
spying and interrogation techniques, but on those actions in which
Gonzales sought to favor Republican electoral prospects at the
expense of Democrats. These included the now-notorious firing
of US attorneys who prosecuted political corruption cases against
Republican officeholders or who declined to bring politically
motivated cases against Democrats.
Schumers reference to removing the stench of politics
from this vital institution expresses his belief that under
Mukasey the FBI and other repressive agencies will go back to
their regular tasks of terrorizing immigrants, minorities and
political opponents of the crimes of American imperialism, without
being sidetracked into ventures that disrupt the bipartisan unity
of the two big business parties.
He also cited the fact that some 12 of the 15 top-level Justice
Department positions are currently vacant or occupied by officials
serving on an acting basis, without receiving Senate confirmation.
Once Mukasey takes charge, he said, there would be a steady flow
of nominees to fill the vacancies, and the Senate would be well
positioned to influence Justice Department policy as it acts on
those nominations.
In other words, Schumerand the other Senate Democratslook
forward to a much greater degree of collaboration between Congress
and one of the major repressive arms of the federal government.
See Also:
Bipartisan support for authoritarian
measures
Democratic senator defends vote for Bushs attorney general
nominee
[7 November 2007]
Democrats cave in on torture: Key senators
back attorney general nominee
[3 November 2007]
US attorney general nominee refuses to
condemn torture techniques
[1 November 2007]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |