In the fall of 2007, the American Freedom Campaign urged Senators to oppose the nomination of Michael Mukasey to serve as Attorney General based on his apparent willingness to ignore the rule of law in favor of the “war on terror.”  We said specifically that he had “demonstrated that he will place the whims and desires of the executive branch above both domestic and international law.”

     On December 3, Mukasey demonstrated in the clearest manner yet that our fears were entirely justified.  At a time when an attorney general concerned about the rule of law should be appointing an independent prosecutor to determine whether any laws were broken during the development and implementation of the administration’s counterterrorism policies, Mukasey has unilaterally dismissed the notion that anyone should be prosecuted based on the fact that “the lawyers who authorized the surveillance and interrogation programs had done so in the belief that they were following the law.”

     First of all, one’s belief that an action is lawful is not the standard for determining whether carrying out that action is in fact legal.  More importantly, there is strong evidence, based on the description of internal administration legal memos – some of which remain classified to this day – that lawyers in the administration used highly questionable reasoning to avoid adhering to existing laws.  In other words, they knew they were sanctioning conduct that would be considered illegal under any rational reading of the law.

     Sadly, Mukasey has used his position not to enforce and uphold the laws of the United States, but to enable the administration to skirt them.

     You can’t say we didn’t warn you…