Reply #23: MUKASEY, Torture, and a Special Prosecutor. A Conflict of Interest Conundrum.

[L. Coyote]

Some are asking, "What did Bush know and when did he know it?"
Some are asking, "What did Pelosi know and when did she know it?"

I'm asking, "What did Mukasey know and when did he know it?"

Mukasey may have refused to answer the water torture question during his confirmation hearings because HIS OWN judgment was on the line.

Did Mukasey knowing use illegally obtained evidence in the Padilla ruling?
Had Mukasey already made the determination that water torture was just fine in his court?

Here is why this question arises. MrJJ's comment on TPM words this well:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004888.php

.... Mukasey may have a conflict of interest problem already, and may have to call upon a Special Prosecutor.

Jose Padilla’s lawyers argued before the Florida Federal Court that Abu Zubaydah was tortured into saying Padilla was an al Qaeda associate. The DOJ dismissed Padilla’s allegations as “meritless,” asserting Padilla’s legal team could not prove that Abu Zubaydah had been tortured. Well, it’s clear now that they certainly COULD have, if the tapes of the interrogations of Abu Zubaydah had been made available!

Now here is where Mukasey’s role comes into question. U.S. District Judge Mukasey, now attorney general, was the one who signed the warrant used by the FBI to arrest Padilla in May 2002. Court records show the warrant relied in part on information obtained from Abu Zubaydah’s interrogation. .....

The Attorney General can only issue a warrant based upon legally obtained evidence, and confessions under torture are certainly not “legally obtained”. So either Mukasey was misrepresented the evidence, and would be liable to be potentially a party in those who were presented with “perjured evidence”; or he knew that torture was used in obtaining the confession and ignored it.

In either case he is unsuitable to run an investigation, as it will, inevitably, involved himself. Thus a Special Prosecutor is necessary.

I'm also asking, "Are we back where we started, with an Attorney General who is guilty of politization of justice?"

I'm also asking, "Did George W. "Waterboard" Bush foist a co-conspirator on the U. S. Senate and the American People?"

This seems to be where inquiries will now, of necessity, need to focus first!
Deja Vu. We are back where we started all over again.

First, we need a Special Prosecutor to investigate the Junta's new Attorney General!

FROM: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3101979