Friday, October 19, 2007
Mukasey shows his true colors
And they are remarkably identical to those of Our Dear Embattled Leader.
And good old Tony Farto gets it wrong, as usual.
Mukasey aroused Democrats' concerns by testifying that there may be occasions when the president's powers as commander in chief could trump a federal law requiring that a special court approve intelligence-related wiretaps. That answer jibes with one of the legal rationales used by the Bush administration in defense of its controversial Terrorist Surveillance Program, under which the National Security Agency eavesdropped on calls between persons in the United States and those overseas without first securing a court warrant.And I say, give him a taste of the bucket and let him make up his mind.
Mukasey also repeatedly demurred when asked whether an interrogation technique that involves simulated drowning, known as waterboarding, constitutes torture and is therefore illegal. "I don't know what's involved in the technique," Mukasey said. "If waterboarding is torture, torture is not constitutional."
And good old Tony Farto gets it wrong, as usual.
White House spokesman Tony Fratto defended Mukasey, saying he "is not in a position to discuss interrogation techniques, which are necessarily classified," because he was not briefed on such programs.See, nobody asked about interrogation techniques, they wanted to know if "strapping the prisoner to a hard surface, covering his face or mouth with a cloth, and pouring water over his face to create the sensation of drowning" is torture. Normal people think it is but not your average Bushovik. Bushoviks think it is a wonderful interrogation technique because every time they use it, they get the answers they want to hear.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
Post a Comment