And there we have it: Michael Mukasey was recommended to the full Senate this morning by the Judiciary Committee, on an 11 to 8 vote, with Senators Schumer and Feinstein (as expected) tipping the scales in the AG-to-be’s favor.
MSNBC does an excellent job recapping and expanding on the basics, here and here, including the widely held assumption that the full Senate will follow the Committee’s lead and Mr. Mukasey will become this nation’s next Attorney General.
Like Shaun Mullen and many others, I was not supportive of Mukasey’s nomination after he hedged on waterboarding. Later, Holly’s post, on Schumer’s and Feinstein’s rationale for supporting Mukasey, forced me to re-think two key questions.
(1) Which is more important: the prospective AG’s unwavering clarity on this single-but-important issue, or gaining the benefit of what many believe will be his (otherwise) exceedingly competent and generally apolitical leadership at the helm of the DOJ?
(2) Is it all together Mukasey’s responsibility to clarify the waterboarding debate, or does Congress share some of that responsibility via new legislation, mandating (unequivocally, once-and-for-all) that this appalling practice is indeed torture and will not be allowed at the hands of any U.S. agency or person?
The conclusion I reached is perhaps best articulated by regular TMV commenter Domajot, who attached these thoughts to Holly’s aforementioned post re: Schumer’s and Feinstein’s decision …
[Their] reasoning is sound, but it’s a sad day for the US nevertheless.
It’s a sad day when the nation’s AG-to be can’t say what he thinks about waterboarding.
It’s a sad day when our heroes are people who had to settle for a questionable choice instead of a good choice.
I accept, but I do not celebtate.
Photo Credit: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters