Election Central | Talking Points Memo | Reid To Vote Against Mukasey: Says He Was "Profoundly Disturbed" By Waterboarding Evasions

Reid To Vote Against Mukasey: Says He Was "Profoundly Disturbed" By Waterboarding Evasions

By Greg Sargent - November 6, 2007, 2:37PM

In a statement sent our way moments ago, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid just came out and opposed Mukasey's confirmation as AG. Key quote:

“I was profoundly disturbed by statements Judge Michael Mukasey made during his confirmation hearings concerning executive power, and about the legality of the use of waterboarding as an interrogation technique. As a result, I cannot in good conscience vote to approve his nomination to be Attorney General of the United States."

Reid's opposition, of course, won't stop Mukasey's confirmation. Reid had earlier refused to declare his opposition to Mukasey, claiming that he didn't want to get out front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which voted today to send the confirmation to a full Senate vote. Reid is holding a presser as we speak.

Meanwhile, Reid will have another chance ahead to prove his opposition to waterboarding. Congress is considering a bill that would explicitly ban this and other extreme interrogation techniques, and Reid can ensure that this bill comes to the floor for a vote.

More details on that here. Reid's full statement after the jump.

“I was profoundly disturbed by statements Judge Michael Mukasey made during his confirmation hearings concerning executive power, and about the legality of the use of waterboarding as an interrogation technique. As a result, I cannot in good conscience vote to approve his nomination to be Attorney General of the United States.
“I do not believe this is a difficult or complex legal question; waterboarding is illegal under current law. After World War II, the U.S. prosecuted and convicted Japanese soldiers for engaging in this practice. Senators McCain, Graham and Warner – who have served as leaders in the U.S. Senate on this issue, recently issued a detailed legal analysis unambiguously concluding that waterboarding ‘represents a clear violation of U.S. law,’ that Congress has repeatedly outlawed.

Further, former and sitting Judge Advocates Generals agree that waterboarding is illegal. On Friday, in a letter to the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, several prominent former Judge Advocate Generals declared unequivocally: ‘Waterboarding is inhumane, it is torture, and it is illegal… Waterboarding detainees amounts to illegal torture in all circumstances’ (emphasis theirs).

“I respect Judge Mukasey and believe he is an intelligent, capable man. If he is confirmed, I believe he will take steps to depoliticize the Department of Justice and to help restore the integrity and credibility that was so lacking under his predecessor, Attorney General Gonzales. However, given our recent history, it is of crucial importance that our next Attorney General be able to stand up to the President and for the rule of law. Because I am not confident that Judge Mukasey will, I will oppose his nomination.”

Comments (17)

Geek, Esq. wrote on November 6, 2007 2:44 PM:

Oh, bite me Harry. Don't twist arms behind the scenes to prevent a filibuster and then isse dramatic statements about why he's not acceptable.

Profoundly distrubed my @ss.

Anonymous wrote on November 6, 2007 2:48 PM:

So in other words, Reid opposes Mukasey, but he's just not willing to lift a finger to, you know, actually oppose him.

Greg wrote on November 6, 2007 2:53 PM:

question now, all, is does he bring this bill outlawing waterboarding to a vote. anyone offering odds?

P J Evans wrote on November 6, 2007 2:59 PM:

So is Harry actually going to *do* anything to stop the confirmation, or is he going to fuss out loud and let it go through anyway?

(That's a rhetorical question, since he's made it clear he'll do whatever Bush and Cheney want. They've shown him his dossier with all his secrets.)

Eric wrote on November 6, 2007 3:08 PM:

This is a mug's game. They can't get this law passed, especially not past a veto. When it fails, the Rethugs will declare that waterboarding has obviously been legal, otherwise why would you need a law to make it illegal? This will absolve all of the evil bastards who have authorized torture to date. One again, spineless Dems are outplayed.

clbrune wrote on November 6, 2007 3:27 PM:

Does it matter whether congress passes a law banning waterboarding when Attorney General Mukasey will tell the President that he doesn't need to obey the law?

Sure, pass all the laws you want.

biggerbox wrote on November 6, 2007 4:06 PM:

A brilliant idea!

How about they ALSO work on a law that specifically bans shooting an unarmed and bound prisoner through the back of the skull? You know, in case the White House suddenly decides that the definition of 'murder' is vague and the issue of what is and isn't brutal killing becomes 'complicated', and people haven't been 'read into the program'? And then we can have a law specifically banning tossing people out of helicopters? Oops, better include fixed-wind aircraft, too. We wouldn't want any loopholes. Let's be clear.

What a crock. Waterboarding is already illegal. The problem isn't with the law, it's with the men in charge of enforcing it.

Steaming Pile wrote on November 6, 2007 4:28 PM:

Seeing is believing. Anything less is just bullshit. As they say in Missouri, you gotta SHOW ME.

Rob77979 wrote on November 6, 2007 4:58 PM:

This guy is a joke. He panders, lies and cheat, and now he's talking about his conscience? Harry, you should be in Hollywood because you can impersonate almost anybody just to be in the news. "Profoundly disturb," how dramatic can this guy get?

Mary wrote on November 6, 2007 6:55 PM:

Let's see.

Reid, Biden, Clinton, Obama and Dodd are all "no-s" on Mukasey, but 2 out of 10 Dems on the Judiciary Committee voted for him.

So either

a) none of them have minimal competence at leading even the Democratic party on a major moral and legal issue, much less leading the country, or

b) Dems who do lead the party have already cut deals, probably for pork, to let Mukasey in and now all that's left is to choreograph the kabuki to give the Presidential candidates and majority leader a fig leaf.

barkleyg wrote on November 6, 2007 7:48 PM:

O.K. Is this vote going to need a 60 vote cloture vote to allow a REAL vote? If what is good for the goose is good for the gander, then the Democrats have one last chance to show some guts, and for most of them some Balls, and finally say that" Hell no, we don't support torture or an AG that doesn't know what torture is."
Besides LIEberman, Schumer, and my pathetic Senator Feinstein, hopefully we won't have anymore STUPID Dems( I expect this of Repugs) who don't understand that waterboarding IS TORTURE, and not a CIA swim class!

ringring wrote on November 6, 2007 10:52 PM:

Mark wrote on November 7, 2007 12:06 AM:

Awesome, Harry. Now if you could just figure out what the word "leadership" means.

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are possibly the two most feckless human beings currently wasting space on Planet Earth.

Mark wrote on November 7, 2007 12:10 AM:

http://ringring.50webs.com/

Please ban this filthy whore scumbag and his filthy whore scumbag domain until the end of time.

ringring wrote on November 7, 2007 10:17 AM:

order ultram online wrote on November 19, 2007 6:34 AM:

order ultram online [url=http://drugstore.forumup.us#575245902]order ultram online[/url] http://drugstore.forumup.us 1164936490

hand job porn sex woman wrote on November 21, 2007 4:17 AM:

free teen sex video clip [url=http://having.igek.info/sm.html#562462936]free teen sex video clip[/url] http://having.igek.info/sm.html 526416700

Name:
Email Address:
URL:
	Remember personal info?
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

Reid To Vote Against Mukasey: Says He Was "Profoundly Disturbed" By Waterboarding Evasions

Comments (17)

Post a comment

All Times ET

Tomorrow - Thursday, October 2, 2008