Senate judiciary committee will decide Mukasey's fate

[babylonsister]

(Unless something else happens:yoiks:)

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004625.php

Senate Panel Vote Key to Mukasey Nomination
By Paul Kiel - November 1, 2007, 5:04PM

So the committed "no" votes on Michael Mukasey are up to a whopping nine. The total is likely to climb still higher, but as David pointed out yesterday, the real battle will take place in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

There, the Democrats outnumber the Republicans 10-9. And four Dems have already said they'll vote no. Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has yet to say whether he's made the full journey from "I like him" to "concerned" to "no." Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who championed Mukasey, is dodging the cameras. The rest haven't said. And though ranking member Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) has expressed doubts about Mukasey, it's hard to imagine him actually voting no.

So what would happen if the no votes won? Well, nothing is simple in the Senate. But by far the most likely scenario is that Mukasey's nomination would in fact die there. However, there are some maneuvers whereby Mukasey could still make it on to the Senate floor with the majority of senators on the panel opposing him.

A spokeswoman for Sen. Leahy, however, said that he expects a straightforward vote: “While there are other vote options which other senators can motion for in the committee, Sen. Leahy expects a yes-no vote in the committee on Tuesday.”

The other vote options include a vote of "no recommendation" or "negative recommendation." If such votes passed, Mukasey could still go through to the full Senate without the panel's recommendation or with a negative one.

And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has the power to make a motion to discharge the committee of further responsibility for the nomination. If that motion passed in the full Senate, then Mukasey's vote would move out of the committee for a vote on the floor. But the Politico reports that Reid has ruled that option out.

So again, Mukasey's fate will most likely be determined by a straightforward vote in the judiciary Committee.

[tekisui]

1. A vote for Mukasey is a vote for Torture.

I don't see how any Democrat can support Mukasey at this point.

They should ask him if he thinks sodomy, rape, limb breaking and murder would be considered torture, since waterboarding is such a "grey area".

[OffWithTheirHeads]

2. Fuck that! They should just waterboard his ass, then ask him

If he thinks it's torture.

[crickets]

3. There have been so many "stick a fork in it" moments

over the past few years, but this really is it. I don't understand why anyone in the Senate is still talking about this, much less waffling on it. Vote against the ass who can't admit that waterboarding is torture and move on. It's a no-brainer. Litigation? Well, duh. The fact that we're even having to discuss this for days on end is unbelievable.

Oh wait, I forgot. This is status quo. Never mind. :eyes:

[Solly Mack]

4. Talk about the cowards way out ...

"The other vote options include a vote of "no recommendation" or "negative recommendation." If such votes passed, Mukasey could still go through to the full Senate without the panel's recommendation or with a negative one."

[Didereaux]

5. Leahy will vote yes!

Oh, he will give his usual 10 minutes of hot air warnings and such, but Leahy is, and always has been subservient to Arlen Specter. At this critical tie, it is beyond unfortunate that the Demcratic Party has so many Leahys, Reids and Pelosis' as members and especially that they have seniority. It was preventable, but Democrats when they were on the mat, turned away and did not think of the future. A trait that keeps the independents numbers about equal to those of the Democratic Party and the Repbuglican Party.

Good luck to America!