Richardson Blasts Hillary, Obama, Dodd And Biden On Mukasey Vote
Bill Richardson's campaign has put out a press release condemning the Senate for confirming Michael Mukasey — and condemning four of his opponents for missing the vote.
"The Senate could have rejected this nomination with a filibuster," Richardson says in the release. By showing up and speaking out, Senators Biden, Clinton, Dodd, and Obama might well have stopped his confirmation. Instead, they chose to sit on the sidelines and watch history pass them by."
The full statement is available after the jump.
Richardson: "We witnessed a devastating failure of leadership"Says failure of Senators to vote is a failure to lead; reiterates that torture is unacceptable in any form, promises to prosecute anyone responsible for its use as President
SANTA FE, NM — New Mexico Governor and Democratic Presidential candidate Bill Richardson today issued the following statement in condemnation of the Senate's confirmation of Michael Mukasey as Attorney General of the United States:
"It is shocking that four U.S. Senators running for the Democratic Presidential nomination failed to show up and vote against Judge Mukasey or speak against him during the debate to persuade their fellow Senators that torture is a no-compromise issue.
"Judge Mukasey disqualified himself by refusing to acknowledge what the world has known for centuries: that waterboarding is torture and torture of any kind violates U.S. and international law. Alarmingly, Judge Mukasey already has shown a startling willingness to allow politics to influence his opinion regarding one of the most basic American principles -- human rights.
"The Attorney General is responsible for steadfastly defending the Constitution and implementing the laws of the land, without exception or equivocation. What should have been an easy question to answer-- waterboarding is torture, and torture is illegal-- was not easy for Judge Mukasey, who chose instead to dodge. His actions speak volumes. His answer was unacceptable, and he is unacceptable as the Attorney General of the United States. The Senate could have rejected this nomination with a filibuster. By showing up and speaking out, Senators Biden, Clinton, Dodd, and Obama might well have stopped his confirmation. Instead, they chose to sit on the sidelines and watch history pass them by.
"Last night, we witnessed a devastating failure of leadership in the fight to take back America, enforce the Constitution, and restore the principles on which this nation was founded.
"This is not what our country needs in its next President.
"Let me be clear: As President, I will ensure that any form of torture, including waterboarding, will never be used. Furthermore, I will direct the Department of Justice to vigorously investigate and prosecute any individual responsible for the use of torture. No one is above the law. No one."
Comments (30)
phil james wrote on November 9, 2007 1:36 PM:Richardson may be a bit flaky in other areas but on this one he is right dead ON!
Jake D wrote on November 9, 2007 1:37 PM:Hasn't Edwards blasted Hillary and Obama too?
gqmartinez wrote on November 9, 2007 1:41 PM:I like Richardson, I really do. He's #2 on my list. But the result of the vote was already known ahead of time and it was pretty clear he would be confirmed.
phil james wrote on November 9, 2007 1:42 PM:The four Senators must have known they were going to get this kind of heat. There had to have been some kind of backroom deal cut by Harry with the White House. Of course, so far the deals Harry has brought back from the WH, and Leahy's deals, and others have been all torn wet paper bag and no groceries.
phil james wrote on November 9, 2007 1:43 PM:he would not have been confirmed if there was a filibuster...simple as that.
Susan in Iowa wrote on November 9, 2007 1:43 PM:Just because there were enough no votes to support a filibuster does not mean that the "no's" would have supported one. This is just Richardson playing the gotcha card. Three Repubs (including McCain) skipped the vote, too. If it was going to be close, my guess is that all the candidates would have been there.
The place to stop Mukasey was in committee, where Biden voted no. Schumer and Feinstein are the two reasons Mukasey is now the AG.
tony wrote on November 9, 2007 1:44 PM:The blames for this belongs to Harry Reid. This vote was supposed to be postponed UNTIL NEXT WEEK!! He called it on short notice when he knew the candidates were going to be away, being well aware that Dodds and the other would filibuster. Remember, he also called the Kyl-Lieberman vote on short notice (30 minutes!) while Obama was out campaigning after telling him it would be delayed.
Blame Reid's parlimentary shenanigans. Sure, the candidates could have gotten back logistics were perfect and the private jet was fueled up and ready to roll but that's probably asking too much.
The Democratic leadership folded and they're the one to blame. The candidates jsut got caught with their pants down.
Anonymous wrote on November 9, 2007 1:52 PM:This is a bogus charge and Richardson knows it. If he wants to rail against anyone, I'm sure he can look up Senator Reid's number.
he would not have been confirmed if there was a filibuster...simple as that.
And just for the record, Dems could have filibustered him last night. Mukasey was confirmed with 53 votes--not enough to defeat a cloture vote.
Just to add my two cents - but to offer support that is clusterf**k is all Reid's fault. I'm not an apologist for the sitting senator candidates, but Richardson's charge is wrong.
I agree with Tony, who speculates that this about Dodd's filibuster which the other candidates supported.
Gateley wrote on November 9, 2007 1:57 PM:There is a REASON none of them were there. Biden and Dodd (and I'm assuming Clinton) WERE planning to be present for the vote.
The vote was scheduled for next week. Then Harry Reid re-scheduled it for yesterday. THEN, even in the course of my watching the proceedings, it was tentatively scheduled for midnight, but actually took place around 10:15 or so.
By the time they were notified, it was physically IMPOSSIBLE to return to Washington to participate. They literally did not have enough time.
Harry Reid is the guilty one in this instance - not the candidates. They had arranged their schedules in good faith to ensure their return for the vote, and Reid pulled the rug out from under them.
Look behind the headlines before jumping to judgment. Richardson should heed that, too.
Paulie wrote on November 9, 2007 1:58 PM:More shameful "leadership" from our elected officials. Absolutely disgraceful.
"Ah, it's only a vote for the new AG and he says he doesn't like waterboarding. What's that? He doesn't know if it's illegal? Not to worry, he seems like a nice enough fella."
If ANY senator had an ounce of self-respect they should resign but alas, self-respect and principles left D.C. a LONG time ago.
Dustin Ingalls wrote on November 9, 2007 2:00 PM:Who's tending to New Mexico while Richardson's on the campaign trail? His failure to govern is a failure to lead.
phil james wrote on November 9, 2007 2:01 PM:So you're saying Reid basically told Dodd to go pound his filibuster?
ProDem wrote on November 9, 2007 2:05 PM:Please...Richardson is basically a pandering asshole!! How does anyone take this jerk seriously??
Tom Betz wrote on November 9, 2007 2:06 PM:@gqmartinez: In fact, the outcome was not known in advance, but rather was minpulated by Reid's sudden scheduling of the vote. Bernie Sanders made that very clear today when pressed about why he didn't stand up and filibuster Mukasey. He very nearly apologized for screwing up, saying that he didn't have a good vote count because the vote was called so suddenly, and if he had it to do over, he'd object to the unanimous consent motion for an upperdown vote, forcing a cloture vote. That would have given Senate Democrats running for president time to get back from Iowa and help stop Mukasey.
Harry Reid played Mukasey opponents for fools, and the Democratic Senators running for President are going to pay a price for their failure to show up as a result of Reid's double-dealing.
Let's hope that Reid pays a price and loses his leadership position. He's much more suited to a BOHICA position.
Then why aren't Dodd and the other candidates screaming that Reid screwed them?
Jake D wrote on November 9, 2007 2:15 PM:cb and/or Gateley:
Did you happen to see the Obama thread where a campaign spokesperson stated LAST NIGHT they knew about the vote but decided not to cancel campaign events?
Susan in Iowa:
Are you disputing the possibility that "By showing up and speaking out, Senators Biden, Clinton, Dodd, and Obama might well have stopped his confirmation"? Instead, they chose to sit on the sidelines and watch history pass them by.
Richard L. Adlof wrote on November 9, 2007 2:15 PM:And colonpowpow suggested that I was not so nice when I made this point earlier . . .
brendancalling wrote on November 9, 2007 2:19 PM:re: Harry Reid as the source.
You are all, IMO, accurate.
Here is the email i sent Josh today after repeated unsuccessful calls to reid's office:
"I called Senator Reid's office to inquire into "just what went down yesterday, what the deal was that Reid held out for, how it was exactly that the presidential candidates didn't get back or weren't given enough time to get back for the vote."
Guess what? They refused to talk to me. First they asked fore my zip code and told me that if I lived in Nevada I'd get a letter. Then they told me that even if I was from nevada, no one would speak to me: legislative aides don't speak with constituents. As we ALL know, when a politician's office promises to send you a letter, they're talking about a form letter, which half the time won't even address the constituents' concerns.
In reid's case, that's a load of malarkey: i have spoken to legislative aides in the past at his office. Something went down here, and they're not prepared to admit what it was.
I also think there is some bad blood between Reid and Dodd: I'm not sure what it is, but Reid has screwed Dodd a couple of times. there was the Civil Rights Cold Case bill that Dodd was pushing, but which Reid allowed Coburn to kill with a hold. Then there's the wiretapping
hold, which Reid says he'll disregard. And now this dead of night Mukasey vote:
I spoke to Dodd' campaign, and they said he didn't show because he couldn't schedule a flight back from Iowa. That indicates that perhaps there was little to no warning.
I don't trust Harry Reid. I think there's something going on with him
that's not kosher."
This was clearly deliberate from Harry Reid, and it's part of a disturbing pattern of enabling the worst excesses of this Administration. Frankly, i am beginning to believe that Reid is a Bush Dog. Harry Reid should be removed from leadership before he can do any more damage.
Seth H. wrote on November 9, 2007 2:25 PM:So we've established it was Reid's fault. That's pretty clear, I think. What really gets me about Richardson's response is, well, if every senator in the presidential race (including McCain, mind) wasn't there, why the hell does he think he would've been there? A lot easier to criticize from the outside. The same goes for Edwards on this one. If you're not in the senate, you can't be held at fault for not being there. I wonder how many of his gubernatorial duties Richardson is neglecting while on the campaign trail... We don't know because it's not as tangible. Running for president is an overtime job and we haven't yet figured out how to place ourselves in two places at once.
NCSteve wrote on November 9, 2007 2:36 PM:At least Hillary (and Dodd and Biden, of course) now know what it feels like to be on the receiving end of a "missed an important vote" cheap shot caused by Harry Reid unexpectedly scheduling the vote on short notice.
One wonders whether Hillary's people will have the gall to use same cheap shot against Obama on Kyl-Lieberman after this.
Oh, what am I thinking? Of course they will.
colonpowwow wrote on November 9, 2007 2:39 PM:Yeah, filibuster Mukasey. Let's say it would have worked and he would have been rejected (it wouldn't, but let's say it did).
Bush replaces the repugnant Mukasey, who the Democrats had suggested as someone they could support as a nominee, with the absolutely excrable Ted Olson or the like.
Then while the Democrats continued to tie this up, I can think of about 10 good ways that the Republicans could blast the pants (and skirts) off of the obstructionist, polarizing, dangerous to our security in time of war Senators, two of whom are frontrunners for the party nomination.
Yeah, a real winning issue here. The fight was last week. Shumer and Feinstein capitulated. Game over.
Move along.
Richardson can't only not speak very well, he can't (won't) count either.
Alex, Kansas City, MO wrote on November 9, 2007 2:47 PM:What an opportunist Richardson is. Must have learned that working for Kissinger.
phil james wrote on November 9, 2007 3:19 PM:"I wonder how many of his gubernatorial duties Richardson is neglecting while on the campaign trail"
You're right of course. How could we be so stupid as to not equate sanctioning torture as the basis of our system of National government with addressing the latest redistricting proposal in New Mexico? And I also love the pure logic of those who say this was expedient because we would have gotten a worse AG than Mukasey in the end. Couldn't agree more. Who are we to demand that our representatives hold appointees to a high and principled standard based on our Constitution and the rule of law? That's for school kids. You know. The kids who are going to inherit this whole disastrous mess after we have done our expedient best to just get by without actually having to take a real stand on anything.
Tired and Cranky wrote on November 9, 2007 3:23 PM:I am so f_cking tired of these pathetic non-human loser "frontrunners". WTF, Hillary, Obama, etc.? Why is it so hard to push aside the reptilian parsimony and put yourself in the shoes of someone being waterboarded? It doesn't take much imagination or empathy (commodities incompatible with being a "modern" president) to see how feeling like you're OMG DROWNING would suck and qualify as "inhumane and cruel" treatment. The so-called democratic front-runners who didn't vote should be asked to experience waterboarding first-hand since it clearly isn't important enough to vote against some amoral prick who thinks it's analagous to puppy breath and warm chicken soup - call it anything but torture. What, no takers? Hillary? Barry? Bueller? Anyone? Oh, incidentally, didn't we try Pol Pot on war crimes charges for this exact for of "tough love"?
Go Bill. I'd love to see you win but it ain't in the cards, because you have to be morally bankrupt, batshit crazy and pwned by America Inc.™. Sad that the only candidates making any sense are the so-called fringe crackpots. Which is why we deserve whatever We The Somnabulant Sheeple get, since we're too busy looking at Paris' jailhouse tits or Hillary's cleavage to notice that we're being herded into boxcars, metaphorically speaking. Maybe we'll enjoy our involuntary vacation holiday at Disney's Guantanamoland Spa and Rehabilitation Theme Park where we can learn to repeat the following mantra until we really believe it, a la Winston:
Everything is fine.
Stop asking scary questions.
They know what's good for me.
OK, rant over.
I believe that Reid had made it impossible to filibuster due to the type of vote scheduled. Whatever deal he may have brokered and with whom, that's his problem.
No. This is not Richardson playing gotcha. He's right. All 4 of our vaunted Democratic Senators "said" they "opposed" the Mukasey nomination, but when it came down to a vote, they took the cowards way out and didn't. Their presidential political calculations were more important than actually showing up and voting.
When it came to the real deal, they folded.
Cowards. Craven political cowards.
Richardson is looking better and better.
Am I in Bizarro-World or something.
ALL OF THE CANDIDATES WENT ON RECORD HOW THEY WOULD VOTE ON THIS and they all opposed Mukasey (and by extension, waterboarding).
AFTER they had all gone on the record on how they would vote, Shumer and Feinstein caved and said they would vote the nomination out of committee. When their votes were added to the Republicans, and with a few other Democrats and Traitor Joe voting to confirm, there weren't enough votes to stop the nomination either by a filibuster or otherwise.
What's the issue here? All the Dem candidates opposed Mukasey because he was soft on torture. We then lost on the vote. We lost because too many Dems voted to confirm Mukasey. And I guess we also lost Ted Olson or whoever Bush would have submitted next.
We also lost out on these same Dem candidates would be getting hammered for being obstructionists subjecting us to terrorism in a time of war by leaving us without an AG while they played politics. Get over it. Take your good losses with your bad losses.
JDS wrote on November 9, 2007 4:33 PM:They missed the vote because the new Attorney General will have little to no consequence on any policies within the last year of the Bush administration.
Dr WU-the last of the big time thinkers wrote on November 9, 2007 5:59 PM:Right on, Richardson but the Dems coulda been contenders, they coulda filibustered the nomination but they, instead, went quietly into the night..
How do I hate those damn Dems? Let me list the ways…
No spines,chickenshit, backbone of a chocolate eclair, wimps,Republican enablers, wine-drinking, hedge-funded surrender rabbits, toads.
Wise up TPM'ers. The real Attorney General is Cheney's chief of staff, Addington.
The actual AG is a coat holder
If the dems had any brains they would have filibustered Mukasey since it was never the question, as Schumer indicated, that a more horrible AG would get the position.
A more horrible AG already has the position
