Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Attorney General Nominee Mukasey Compares U.S. Torture to Nazi Tactics [VIDEO]

Posted by Steve Benen at 12:24 PM on October 17, 2007.


Weren't Republicans apoplectic when Sen. Dick Durbin said something similar two years ago?
Mukasey Attorney General Hearings

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Video in your
mailbox!

 

This post, written by Steve Benen, originally appeared on The Carpetbagger Report

Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey's confirmation hearings got underway this morning, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) explored Mukasey's position on administration torture policies. His response was surprising.

Not only did Michael Mukasey repudiate the so-called 2002 "torture memo" signed by Office of Legal Counsel chief Jay Bybee -- which appears to have survived in spirit, if not in letter -- but he compared U.S. torture to the Holocaust.

Most significantly, Mukasey said that he is unaware of any inherent commander-in-chief authority to override legal restrictions on torture -- a huge repudiation of Dick Cheney, David Addington and John Yoo's perspective on broad constitutional powers possessed by the president in wartime -- or to immunize practitioners of torture from prosecution. That answer is sure to create anxiety inside the CIA, where many interrogators fear that they will be brought up on charges for carrying out interrogation methods earlier approved by the administration.

The Bybee memo is "worse than a sin, it's a mistake," Mukasey said. He referenced the photographs taken by U.S. troops who liberated the Nazi concentration camps in 1945 to document the "barbarism" the U.S. opposed. "They didn't do that so that we could then duplicate it ourselves." Beyond legal restrictions barring torture clearly, torture is "antithetical to everything this country stands for."

Greg Sargent had the same reaction I did -- weren't Republicans apoplectic when Sen. Dick Durbin said something similar two years ago?

Specifically, Durbin, on the Senate floor, said, "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

The reaction was overwhelming. One suspects the ensuing firestorm to Mukasey's remarks will be a little less intense (which is to say, non-existent).

Indeed, this is going back a couple of years, so it's probably worth taking a moment to consider just how far the right pushed this.

In June 2005, shortly after Durbin's remarks, Karl Rove delivered a speech to the New York Conservative Party in which he said Durbin's historical comparison was literally dangerous to the safety of Americans.

"Let me just put this in fairly simple terms: Al Jazeera now broadcasts the words of Senator Durbin to the Mideast, certainly putting our troops in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals."

It was, even by Rove standards, breathtaking demagoguery. On the one hand, he said Durbin was encouraging terrorists. On the other, Rove said liberals in general, and Durbin in specific, intend to undermine the safety of U.S. troops.

In other words, according to the president's top political aide, Durbin's comparison was proof that liberals are literally treasonous. (The White House later said Rove was just "telling it like it is when it comes to the different approaches for winning the war on terrorism.")

Durbin, shortly thereafter, made a tearful apology, but from time to time, you'll still see conservatives reference his historical analogy ("The Senate Majority Leader says the war is 'lost'; the Senate Minority Leader compares Americans to Nazis....")

And yet, he we are, and the president's nominee for Attorney General is making the same analogy. No one gasped, or expressed outrage, or demanded an apology. Mukasey's comparison made sense, just as Durbin's did.

It's a reminder that the right, for all of its many faults, can manufacture an outrage out of nothing, and then pretend it never happened. It's almost impressive, in an offensive kind of way.

Digg!

Tagged as: rove, torture, conservatives, bush administration, leahy, attorney general, durbin, mukasey

Steve Benen is a freelance writer/researcher and creator of The Carpetbagger Report. In addition, he is the lead editor of Salon.com's Blog Report, and has been a contributor to Talking Points Memo, Washington Monthly, Crooks & Liars, The American Prospect, and the Guardian.


Juan Cole on Iranian Protests and the Reform Movement's Future
Cole and HuffPo's Nico Pitney discuss how the Obama administration must engage the Iranian regime.
Post by ZP Heller. July 9, 2009.
David Letterman: Top Ten Messages On Sarah Palin's Answering Machine
The Letterman / Palin saga continues.
Post by Mark Ristaino. July 9, 2009.
Xinjiang Riots Explode in China
Ethnic protests rocked China's western Xinjiang province, killing at least 140 and injuring more than 800.
Post by Mark Ristaino. July 9, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Mukasey...
Posted by: bobtr900 on Oct 17, 2007 1:05 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...says one thing but exactly what will he do once in office. Is he another Republican neocon or is he for real.
Are "we the people" being duped once again and how are they going to do it using Mukasey. Is he going to be used to lend legitimacy to the Bushie Rethugs as Colin Powell was used and at the same time aided them.

Hitle and the Nazis still reign supreme in the Bushie Rethug gov't. Will Mukasey spell their downfall, is any Republican that honorable. I haven't seen or heard of any honorable Rethugs beginning with Reagan, Pope John Paul II and Jerry Falwell.

I may be a Catholic but I abhor what Catholicism did during WWII and the Holocaust and I equally abhor what Catholicism is doing now and has been doing it installed that smooth tongued devil of the evil empire, Ronald Reagan.

The Vatican teamed up with Hitler(a Catholic, born and raised) and the free world brought Hitles downfall. Can qwe hope for the same thing as Catholicism and the Republican Party attack and are trying their best to bring down America.

It is clear to me that as goes the Republican Party so to will go their religious enablers, the Catholic Church and the evangelical fundamentalists.

Has Catholicism spelled out it's own downfall. I am in complete support of the downfall of all fundie.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Durbin redux
Posted by: mcginn on Oct 18, 2007 6:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Mukasey's comparison made sense, just as Durbin's did."

Then why did Sen. Durbin back down? I lost all respect for him when he did that.

As Glenn Greenwald aptly noted
right-wingers routinely refer to liberals as "nazis" and nobody raises a fuss.

Durbin was in a perfect position to stand up for the tit-for-tat principle, in addition to being right on the actual issue. Instead, he cowered under pressure from the right wing scream machine. For shame.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Durbin redux Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: Durbin redux Posted by: mountainmama
Durbin cried!
Posted by: scott balogh on Oct 18, 2007 6:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The dressing down Dick Durbin took from the senate caused him to cry while issuing his apology. Right there on c-span

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't get hopes up, "Torture" is today's Sacrificial Lamb
Posted by: channing on Oct 18, 2007 9:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mukasey is Sacrificing NeoCon Torture to an Angry populace to keep the focus off the bigger crimes of 911 and the GWOT, Iraq and missing DOD Trillions.

If you haven't noticed, the shear volume of High-Crimes is a Tactic that allows Distraction to conquer the airwaves and keep Establishment Sentries in the public eye fiddling FOREVER with less than central issues at the root of this Bad Tree. "Torture" is real bad, but is it as bad as blowing up a couple thousand people in Manhattan? Or Killing a Million Iraqi's? Rigging Elections? Disappearing Trillions of dollars through a Rogue DOD/Secret Service Black-Hole?

Mukasey has been intimately involved in almost all US "Terrorism" cases... you know, all those successful witch-hunts that made us all safer, though it cost us Habeas, Rendition, and a complete break-down of Oversight and Right to Privacy... or Whistle-Blow. Further, he's a Legal Consultant in the Ghouliani campaign, the guy who has Everything to Lose by Failing to keep his NY False-Flag Nightmare out of the Main Stream Awareness.

Any Sacrificial-Lambs are better than None when it comes to the Criminality in Power today, but I'm too busy Wolf-Hunting to get the slightest consolation from it!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A rethug is a rethug is a rethug is a rethug. They all come from the village of the damned!
Posted by: johngary66 on Oct 18, 2007 10:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't trust them, ever!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Torture
Posted by: Urgelt on Oct 22, 2007 5:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps Mukasey means what he says. I hope so.

But it bothers me that he is the choice of a man well-known for weasle-wording definitions when it comes to torture. That's his policy. Bush insists no torture has been conducted, ever, period. He arrives at this sentiment by redefining torture in a nefarious and disingenuous way - it's not torture unless organs are damaged or death is produced.

In other words, lying bothers Bush not at all.

Mukasey is Bush's choice for Attorney General. I can hope Mukasey's ethics are on a higher plane, but I'm not holding my breath. It's hard to imagine Bush backing down on anything, nor demanding anything but lock-step loyalty from his appointees.

The worst part is, with all the stonewalling going on at Justice and elsewhere in the Administration, only a small fragment of what they've been doing to prisoners has emerged into the public eye. I can't imagine Bush appointing anyone that won't support his need to conceal his crimes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]