« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Mukasey Aligns with Goldsmith on Executive Power
That sound you hear from the Hart Senate Office Building is David Addington's head exploding.
Michael Mukasey, responding to questioning from Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), endorsed the memoir -- and, implicitly, the legal perspective and bureaucratic predicament -- of Jack Goldsmith, the former Office of Legal Counsel chief, who fought Addington and Alberto Gonzales on interrogations, detentions and surveillance policy. "I thought it was superb. I couldn't put it down. In a way, I was sorry when it was finished," Mukasey said.
Among the largest legal disagreements between Goldsmith and Addington centered around presidential authority. Addington argued that power is a zero-sum game, where congressional power necessarily encroaches on executive authority; Goldsmith found it an enhancement, generating consensus for presidential decisions. Mukasey placed himself squarely in Goldsmith's camp. "I would certainly suggest going to Congress whenever we can. It always strengthens the hand of the president," Mukasey said. "Unilateralism, across the board, is a bad idea."
Comments (7)
Cinderella Ferret wrote on October 17, 2007 3:50 PM:Tell me if I am wrong, but doesn't Mukasey being in the Anti-Addington camp mean he still supports the notion that Congress vis-a-vis FISA, cannot restrict the President's power to eavesdrop; even on America soil, as it relates to foreign intelligence gathering? Still a VERY expansive view in my book.
Lets see how much support the unitary executive gets from Republicans on January 20, 2009 when a Democrat takes the White House.
JimBob wrote on October 17, 2007 4:00 PM:Can't help wondering if, now that the Bush administration's day in the sun is pretty much history (and ugly history at that), the Republican party is setting up to reverse itself on presidential authority just as it's time to turn the Oval Office over to a Democrat.
Jeff wrote on October 17, 2007 4:02 PM:Mukasey's comments this morning on the Torture Memo, such as the claim that its arguments were completely unnecessary (to justify the specific policies and practices under consideration), sounded like they came straight out of Goldsmith's book - which is indeed extremely compelling reading.
Ugh wrote on October 17, 2007 4:07 PM:I would love to think that this mattered at all, but most likely Addington et. al. will just cut Mukasey out of the loop and do what they want.
Stan wrote on October 17, 2007 4:33 PM:Good point, Ugh. They did it to Ashcroft when he wouldn't reauthorize the wiretapping program. And they did it to State/Justice when they formulated the whole 'illegal enemy combatants' theory. And when OLC Goldsmith protested the torture tactics, they replaced him with someone else.
Anonymous wrote on October 17, 2007 4:50 PM:Remember Robert Gates? Remember him? I don't. It seems like the White House made him "disappear". This may happen with this guy.
Enoch Root wrote on October 17, 2007 11:03 PM:Did Gonzales lie about the same thing? I can't recall; there have been so many lies lately, it's hard to keep them straight.