Comments on: Former judge Michael Mukasey top AG pick.

By: Mikey

Mikey — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:43:35 +0000

I suppose his first order of business is to fire all the U.S. Attorneys who do not support Rudy Guiliani. Another rigged election awaits us.

By: Pointus

Pointus — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 03:49:07 +0000

I agree with the above comment urging the Senate to hold off on any confirmations until the DOJ & the white house comply with their subpoenas. Period.

By: Lou Ventino

Lou Ventino — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:22:49 +0000

We all must stick together to be sure that our top priorities, Gay Marriage and Transgender rights, are accepted by all people. We must teach only true progressive values and ideas to our children and schools. We must fight for free healthcare and free college for everyone. Our boarders must be open so that anyone who wants to come here can do so freely. We must eliminate all nuclear weapons and power plants. Our elected (selected) government officials should be held accountable in an international court of law. If this judge stands for all of these Democratic values, then vote him in!

By: cliff

cliff — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 18:51:09 +0000

yea right .. he thinks what?
MICHAEL B. MUKASEY
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110010505
-=snip=-

“Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, is said to have told his American captors that he wanted a lawyer and would see them in court. If the Supreme Court rules–in a case it has agreed to hear relating to Guantanamo detainees–that foreigners in U.S. custody enjoy the protection of our Constitution regardless of the place or circumstances of their apprehension, this bold joke could become a reality.”

-=snip=-

“one unintended outcome of a Supreme Court ruling exercising jurisdiction over Guantanamo detainees may be that, in the future, capture of terrorism suspects will be forgone in favor of killing them. Or they may be put in the custody of other countries like Egypt or Pakistan that are famously not squeamish in their approach to interrogation”

-=snip=-

By: the Sweet Saviour on a Stick

the Sweet Saviour on a Stick — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:42:28 +0000

Wow…someone bush picked for the job of AG who thinks that people accused by the “we know where the WMD are” crowd actually have rights.
Shocking..

By: JEP

JEP — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 14:06:17 +0000

HE SHOULD HAVE ADVISED RUDY NOT TO RUN!

if he was really a patriot…

By: Jake D.

Jake D. — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 13:10:20 +0000

Robert Waldmann:

Do you think Benedict Arnold was an enemy combatant?

By: Fan_of_Man

Fan_of_Man — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 12:54:28 +0000

HE SHOULD HAVE ADVISED RUDY TO QUIT GOING DRAG!

By: JosephW

JosephW — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 07:30:27 +0000

I’m also not too worried about those “conservatives” who are planning on fighting the guy. The self-righteous Catholic dude who brought up the Chinese asylum seeker might want to consider how ready the American Catholic Church (that is, the US members of the Roman Catholic Church) is to support POLITICAL asylum cases based on a country’s abortion policy. (He might want to note how dangerous that precedent would be for GAYS AND LESBIANS using “political asylum” as a reason for coming to this country. The Catholic Church opposes homosexuality with the same fervor as it does abortion; I don’t think the man is going to be happy when thousands of gays and lesbians from Africa and the Middle East start fleeing to US Embassies demanding political asylum. Notably, the Church’s policies on both are based on “moral” reasons. But I digress…….)
What DOES concern me is the man’s status as an adviser to the Giuliani campaign. Even if he merely receives the nomination, his first obligation should be to resign his advisory position, no matter how benign it may be. If he is nominated and approved, he really would have no choice, whereas if he fails to be approved, he can always return to the campaign.

By: JosephW

JosephW — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 07:18:07 +0000

Paul, it may be hard for you to understand, but no one is “start[ing] in on the next guy”. (Actually, there is NO “next guy” yet; Mukasey is, at this moment, the “front runner”for nomination.) What we ARE doing is checking the man’s record BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE. The Republicons under the Shrub Administration have done very little to produce a moderate nominee, instead preferring to nominate other conservative-to-far-right neocons at first, knowing that those nominations would find limited support among enough of the MODERATE wings of both parties and would either withdraw or be withdrawn from the process, with the Shrubbies putting their REAL selection (who would take on the appearance of being a moderate UNTIL their confirmation) before the Senate. The Senate would then be more likely to confirm the “alternate”.
As for your absurd question, the answer is rather simple. We want the OPPOSITE of what the Shrubbies are DOING. They want torture; they want the ability to declare American citizens as “enemy combatants” on a whim; they want to prosecute a person in absolute secrecy; they want the unlimited ability to eavesdrop on private conversations WITHOUT CAUSE. Now, I don’t know about you, but I think being OPPOSED to those is MORE THAN ENOUGH. I could phrase all those positions in a “I’m for” mode (as in “I’m for the abolition of torture; I’m for the right of American citizens to not be declared an enemy combatant without just reason; etc”), but a rational person would be able to figure that out. (Granted, *SOME* conservatives–especially of the trollish variety–don’t seem to be very rational in most instances so they would need to have things spelled out for them.)

By: paul

paul — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 04:58:49 +0000

Complain every day about alberto gonzales until he resigns. then start in on the next guy. Is that the progressive idea of progress. (just a reminder, the democratically controlled congress has lower approval ratings than the president)

We get the idea of all the things you oppose, what are you for?

By: DutchHenry

DutchHenry — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 03:26:01 +0000

Some kind of Ag did idiot will be.Padilla can be locked up forever just as long as you let him see his attorneys ? This joker does not derseve to be Ag.

By: redstateblueheart

redstateblueheart — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 02:14:09 +0000

According to earlier reports, he was on Schumer’s list of acceptable nominees for the Supreme Court……

By: Ya Know

Ya Know — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 01:03:02 +0000

The guy, Mukasey, seems to have done nothing different than what was done under AGAG.

This is just republican blame game tactics if they try to use this abortion that was done by CHINA and during AGAGs service.

By: Ya Know

Ya Know — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 01:00:41 +0000

I see, the forced abortion of a chinese woman by the chinese government. He ruled in favor of the immigration board.

But Gonzales was the AG in April of 2007.

What am I missing here?

NITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 05-4140
XIAN CHUN DONG,
Petitioner
v.
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
Respondent
Petition for Review of an Order of the
United States Department of Justice
Board of Immigration Appeals
(BIA No. A96 435 183)
Immigration Judge: Honorable Walter A. Durling
Argued January 19, 2007

By: the fly-man

the fly-man — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 00:33:46 +0000

Why not a FISA judge?

By: Mugsy

Mugsy — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 23:39:26 +0000

This guy must have an extensive voting record. Start digging! :)

I’m not sure what to make of this yet. So middle-of-the-road he won’t be a strong voice/advocate of any legal position.

Now is not the time for a “play it safe”, “don’t make waves” AG.

By: Wayne A. Schneider

Wayne A. Schneider — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 23:23:52 +0000

Based on just the info we have here, I hope that somebody on the Judiciary Committee will have the sense to say, “No, thanks, I’m putting an indefinite hold on this guy.” It is quite clear where he would come down on the very things about which we have problems with this administration. And it’s obvious why they selected him and the message they are sending. “We will do things our way, and you insist that a judge must approve it, then we will pick the judges that do the approving.”

By: Wayne A. Schneider

Wayne A. Schneider — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 23:17:08 +0000

Comment by SKdeA â€” September 15, 2007 @ 5:53 pm

Hi, SKdeA. We’ve been looking for you to invite you to come visit us after you’ve looked through TP.

By: billjpa

billjpa — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 22:56:56 +0000

stop with the updates! Just put together a listing of his positions! Then, after the doj turns over the reqiested papers asked for by the seante, start the hearings.