Posted by Jed Lewison on Thu Jan 31, 2008 at 2:05 AM Pacific

Mukasey on Bush: "I don’t know whether he acted in violation of statutes."

Sen. Arlen Specter and AG Michael Mukasey discuss whether Bush violated FISA (from yesterday's Judiciary Committee):

SPECTER: [President Bush] acted in violation of statutes, didn’t he?

MUKASEY: I don’t know whether he acted in violation of statutes.

::

What is there to say about this?

Maybe it's progress -- we've gone from an AG who couldn't remember anything to one who doesn't seem to think it's important to figure out whether or not his boss has broken the law.

I know it's unlikely that Bush or Cheney will get impeached, but isn't letting them walk a moral failure?

Aren't we telling the next generation of Americans that the law has no meaning?

::

Full transcript (h/t Think Progress):

SPECTER: Is there a legitimate argument that the President has Article II powers to undertake such conduct?

MUKASEY: There are a number of concepts in your question, including whether he has authority to undertake torture. Torture as you know is now unlawful under American law. I can’t contemplate any situation where this president would assert Article II authority to do something that the law forbids.

SPECTER: Well, he did just that in violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He did just that in disregarding the express mandate of the National Security Act to notify the intelligence committees, didn’t he?

MUKASEY:I think we are now in a situation where [that issue] had been brought within statutes, and that’s the procedure going forward.

SPECTER: That’s not the point. The point is that he acted in violation of statutes, didn’t he?

MUKASEY: I don’t know whether he acted in violation of statutes.

SPECTER: Well, didn’t he act in violation of FISA? Expressly mandates you have to go to a court to get an order for wiretapping. There’s really no dispute about that, is there?

MUKASEY: It required an order with regard to wire communications, when that was a surrogate for foreign communications — for domestic communications. When foreign communications became something that traveled by wire.

SPECTER: I’m not talking about foreign communications. I’m talking about wiretapping U.S. citizens in the United States. Terrorist Surveillance Program undertook to do that. Well, not getting very far there, let me move on to…

Mukasey on Bush: "I don’t know whether he acted in violation of statutes."

Sen. Arlen Specter and AG Michael Mukasey discuss whether Bush violated FISA (from yesterday's Judiciary Committee):

SPECTER: [President Bush] acted in violation of statutes, didn’t he?

MUKASEY: I don’t know whether he acted in violation of statutes.

::

What is there to say about this?

Maybe it's progress -- we've gone from an AG who couldn't remember anything to one who doesn't seem to think it's important to figure out whether or not his boss has broken the law.

I know it's unlikely that Bush or Cheney will get impeached, but isn't letting them walk a moral failure?

Aren't we telling the next generation of Americans that the law has no meaning?

::

Full transcript (h/t Think Progress):

SPECTER: Is there a legitimate argument that the President has Article II powers to undertake such conduct?

MUKASEY: There are a number of concepts in your question, including whether he has authority to undertake torture. Torture as you know is now unlawful under American law. I can’t contemplate any situation where this president would assert Article II authority to do something that the law forbids.

SPECTER: Well, he did just that in violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He did just that in disregarding the express mandate of the National Security Act to notify the intelligence committees, didn’t he?

MUKASEY:I think we are now in a situation where [that issue] had been brought within statutes, and that’s the procedure going forward.

SPECTER: That’s not the point. The point is that he acted in violation of statutes, didn’t he?

MUKASEY: I don’t know whether he acted in violation of statutes.

SPECTER: Well, didn’t he act in violation of FISA? Expressly mandates you have to go to a court to get an order for wiretapping. There’s really no dispute about that, is there?

MUKASEY: It required an order with regard to wire communications, when that was a surrogate for foreign communications — for domestic communications. When foreign communications became something that traveled by wire.

SPECTER: I’m not talking about foreign communications. I’m talking about wiretapping U.S. citizens in the United States. Terrorist Surveillance Program undertook to do that. Well, not getting very far there, let me move on to…

The Jed Report Home Page

© Jed Lewison