Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Mukasey Rejects Call for CIA Tape Details

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:13 PM
Original message
Mukasey Rejects Call for CIA Tape Details
Edited on Fri Dec-14-07 02:20 PM by IDemo
Source: Washington Post

Friday, December 14, 2007; 2:27 PM

Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey today sharply rebuffed congressional demands for details about the Justice Department's inquiry into the destruction of CIA interrogation tapes, saying that providing such information would make it appear that the department was "subject to political influence."

In letters to the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee and others, Mukasey also reiterated his opposition to appointing a special prosecutor to the tapes investigation, saying he was "aware of no facts at present" that would require such a step.

"At my confirmation hearing, I testified that I would act independently, resist political pressure and ensure that politics plays no role in cases brought by the Department of Justice," Mukasey wrote. "Consistent with that testimony, the facts will be followed wherever they lead in this inquiry, and the relevant law applied."

One letter was sent to Sens. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Similar correspondence was sent to Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and to House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) and other House Democrats.

edit -- to correct content

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
no_hypocrisy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. Way to smoke, Chuck!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spotbird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Chuck is no different than Lieberman,
he is just better at hiding it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xipe Totec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. Where there's smoke, there's a pair of pants ablaze
Amazing that Mukasey didn't burst into flames in mid sentence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LakeSamish706 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. And I will believe this when I see it... Independent my ass! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rox63 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. * would never nominate someone who was truly independent n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peregrine Took Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. Thanks, Chuckie. You've given us a real charmer. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. Chuck and DiFi, proud of yourselves now? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. Mukasey should have said
"subject to the people's oversight".

At least then, it would have been precisely accurate in plain speak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jonnyra Donating Member (205 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
7. The sooner we stop
thinking the democrats are working for we the people the sooner we the people can get on about the business of taking matters into our own hands and demanding an end to the fascist takeover of our nation and the trashing of our constitution. Until that happens the crimes will continue and the nation will soon lie in ruin. That is if it isnt too late.

Clearly the democrats are part of the problem not the solution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKthatsIT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #7
21. TAXATION without REPRESENTATION
Is it time to pull the plug, folks?

Just let me know when you understand...this is OUR only means of impressing them all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
8. Is it that "providing the information" or "the information"....
Would make the DOJ look like a political tool? HUGE distinction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
10. Isn't Chuck and Diane's "we need new leadership" choice just swell? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
11. Thanks for nothing Harry and Chuck!
You stupid spineless corrupt idiots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tbyg52 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. Don't forget Dianne. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
13. "make it APPEAR that the department was "subject to political influence."??
Sweet Jesus
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Yesiree!
Sure would hate anybody to get that idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sam Ervin jret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 05:03 PM
Response to Original message
14. what ever happened to doing something so as to stop any "appearance of wrong doing"
Remember when just the appearance of a conflict was enough to disqualify you for something? When the appearance of wrongdoing was enough to ask for a "look see"? Now? The brother of the watchdog is working on the board of the company he's charged with guarding. The whole thing is a sham and this Attn. Gen. is just the whip cream on the top of the sham banana split of an administration we are suffering through.

it's enough to make us all lactose intolerant, and sick to our stomach
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 05:31 PM
Response to Original message
15. Thanks, Chuck and Diane, for giving us yet another Bushista.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
16. Well, thats that. Mukasey said there is nothing there to warrant
any sort of Congressional investigation of special prosecutor. Move along folks. This is just another Bush administration crime cover up.

We are no better off with Mukasey than we were with Gonzo. This is very discouraging.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
18. MUKASEY, Torture, and a Special Prosecutor. A Conflict of Interest Conundrum.
Some are asking, "What did Bush know and when did he know it?"
Some are asking, "What did Pelosi know and when did she know it?"

I'm asking, "What did Mukasey know and when did he know it?"

Mukasey may have refused to answer the water torture question during his confirmation hearings because HIS OWN judgment was on the line.

Did Mukasey knowing use illegally obtained evidence in the Padilla ruling?
Had Mukasey already made the determination that water torture was just fine in his court?

Here is why this question arises. MrJJ's comment on TPM words this well:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004888.php

.... Mukasey may have a conflict of interest problem already, and may have to call upon a Special Prosecutor.

Jose Padillas lawyers argued before the Florida Federal Court that Abu Zubaydah was tortured into saying Padilla was an al Qaeda associate. The DOJ dismissed Padillas allegations as meritless, asserting Padillas legal team could not prove that Abu Zubaydah had been tortured. Well, its clear now that they certainly COULD have, if the tapes of the interrogations of Abu Zubaydah had been made available!

Now here is where Mukaseys role comes into question. U.S. District Judge Mukasey, now attorney general, was the one who signed the warrant used by the FBI to arrest Padilla in May 2002. Court records show the warrant relied in part on information obtained from Abu Zubaydahs interrogation. .....

The Attorney General can only issue a warrant based upon legally obtained evidence, and confessions under torture are certainly not legally obtained. So either Mukasey was misrepresented the evidence, and would be liable to be potentially a party in those who were presented with perjured evidence; or he knew that torture was used in obtaining the confession and ignored it.

In either case he is unsuitable to run an investigation, as it will, inevitably, involved himself. Thus a Special Prosecutor is necessary.

I'm also asking, "Are we back where we started, with an Attorney General who is guilty of politization of justice?"

I'm also asking, "Did George W. "Waterboard" Bush foist a co-conspirator on the U. S. Senate and the American People?"

This seems to be where inquiries will now, of necessity, need to focus first!
Deja Vu. We are back where we started all over again.

First, we need a Special Prosecutor to investigate the Junta's new Attorney General!

FROM: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
20. Can you believe these IDIOTS got rid of gonzo only to give us this friggin' guy mukasey????
What a damn disgrace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 17th 2014, 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC