Today the New York Times reports on the continuing failure of the Michael Mukasey as Attorney General experiment. The short version is that Mukasey has not performed as promised...by a long shot. Back in November we at the Courage Campaign didn't much like the notion of an Attorney General Mukasey, but Senator Dianne Feinstein strongly disagreed. She got a lot of pushback and defended her case in an LA Times OpEd that she might want back at this point given the way reality has actually played out. Let's play point/counterpoint between Feinstein's argument in November and the New York Times today:

Feinstein:

During a long career in public service and private practice, Michael B. Mukasey has forged an independent path as a lawyer and federal judge.

Sen. Arlen Specter:

"I don't want to use the word 'disappointed,' but he hasn't provided the balance that I had hoped for"

Feinstein:

Judge Mukasey is not Alberto R. Gonzales. In our confirmation hearings (and subsequently, in writing), Judge Mukasey's answers to hundreds of questions were crisp and to the point, and reflected an independent mind.
...
The Justice Department is in desperate need of effective leadership. It is leaderless, and 10 of its top positions are vacant. Morale among U.S. attorneys needs to be restored, priorities reassessed and a new dynamic of independence from the White House established.

Sen. Patrick Leahy:

But Mr. Mukasey is "letting the worst excesses of the Gonzales era stand," he continued, "and that disappoints me. It's like saying, 'I'm going to be a place holder,' and this is a man who certainly has the ability to be something more than a place holder. He doesn't want to rock the boat."

Feinstein:

In the hearing, Judge Mukasey clearly expressed his personal repugnance regarding torture. And in a letter dated Oct. 30, he reiterated his personal views and described in detail the analysis he would undertake if confirmed.

NY Times (emphasis mine):

From fending off calls to investigate accusations of torture to resisting a nationwide strategy against mortgage fraud, Mr. Mukasey has taken a go-slow approach that has surprised even some admirers, who see him as unwilling to break from past policies and leave his own imprint in the closing months of the Bush administration.

Feinstein:

I do not believe a president can be above the law, and neither does Judge Mukasey. In addition, Judge Mukasey explained that his view on executive power is based on an analysis of the Supreme Court's 1952 decision in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. vs. Sawyer. Justice Robert Jackson wrote in that decision that the president's power is greatest when he is backed by statutory authority from Congress, and at its lowest ebb when his actions are in conflict with a statute.

NY Times (emphasis mine):

But perhaps his biggest accomplishment has been the expansion of the government's wiretapping powers under a bill signed into law by President Bush this month. Mr. Mukasey had little active role in the day-to-day negotiations with Congress, Congressional officials said. But he and Mike McConnell, director of national intelligence, sent a series of sharply worded letters to lawmakers, keeping the pressure on them to update the surveillance law and provide legal immunity to the phone companies that took part in the eavesdropping program approved by Mr. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

After a months-long impasse over the surveillance measure, administration officials hailed its passage. But critics saw it as a continuation of the status quo under Mr. Mukasey. "I think he was determined to sustain the administration's position," Mr. Specter said, rather than work to scale back the White House's claims to executive power after the controversy caused by the domestic wiretapping program.

Essentially, Senator Feinstein's entire argument has been refuted by Mukasey's actual performance on the job. While she wasn't the only one involved, her proactive work to confirm Mukasey has done a major disservice to the rule of law and health of the Constitution in this country. But if we needed any further evidence that Mukasey is actually nefarious as opposed to lazy or incompetent, look no further than the week he's delivering to us right now. Mukasey has embarked upon a campaign to compel Congress to pass a law altering the Constitutional right of habeas corpus, overruling the courts and the intentions of the founding fathers while also conveniently covering up the abuses delivered by the Bush Administration at Guantanamo Bay. He isn't just failing to fix the problem, he's now neck deep in trying to cover it up. The Attorney General is the lawyer for the government, but the law itself is supposed to still come first. Mukasey is actively seeking to subvert the rule of law, and we have, in part, Senator Feinstein to thank.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but this is exactly what we've been talking about all along here at Courage. A fundamental breakdown of leadership. At the very least, she could admit it and try to push back. But instead, we get her rolling over on FISA, just like the anti-Constitution Mukasey told her to. This is not what California elected her to do.