Mukasey understands the enemy threat

Daniel Henninger:

...

At this moment in the history of the country's needs, what it needs, perhaps even more than Hillary Clinton's Plan B for health care, is a blueprint to protect itself from the uncounted Islamic terrorists who think God wants them to blow up Americans. Killing Americans was explicitly the goal of the terrorists arrested Sept. 5 in Germany, where they had targeted the U.S. air base at Ramstein, Frankfurt's airport and hotels.

The plan proposed by the Bush administration to meet this threat includes the Patriot Act, the National Security Agency's Terrorist Surveillance Program (the warrantless wiretap/FISA controversy), and the military commission trials for Guantanamo prisoners. Each of these elements bogged down in sniper wars between Congress's Democrats and the Bush administration, culminating in time on the rack for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales (the U.S. attorney firings was merely the parliamentary arrest warrant).

In 1995--before the Patriot Act--Judge Mukasey sat for nine months on the bench of a courtroom in Manhattan while the U.S. tried Omar Abdel Rahman, the "blind sheikh," and 11 other men for a conspiracy to blow up the Holland and Lincoln tunnels, the New York building housing the FBI and other landmarks. At sentencing, Judge Mukasey explained Sheikh Rahman's guilt:

You were convicted of directing others to perform acts which, if they had been accomplished, would have resulted in the murder of hundreds if not thousands of people, and brought about devastation on a scale that beggars the imagination, certainly on a scale unknown in this country since the Civil War, if not ever, and would have made the [1993] World Trade Center outrage seem almost insignificant by comparison.

Judge Mukasey's statement reflects an understanding of what some of us argue is this threat's unique nature. Omar Abdel Rahman and other Islamic terrorists do not represent a threat like Ted Bundy, the serial killer in the 1970s who murdered at least 30 women; instead this threat more resembles, as Judge Mukasey also said that day, "militant fascism that failed and militant communism that failed."

Appeals court Judge Richard Posner has written in The Wall Street Journal that "five years after the 9/11 attacks, the institutional structure of U.S. counterterrorism is in disarray." His own ideas often overlap with recommendations Judge Mukasey also has made on this page, such as disabusing ourselves of the notion that the U.S. criminal justice is a first, second or even third responder.

My point is not that Judge Mukasey's view on these matters should simply prevail, though that's fine by me. It is that his knowledge and stature offer an opportunity to raise national security from the muck and trash talk of "experienced" Washington. Most of the time, who cares? But right now isn't most of the time.

...

In Washington he will face the deeply unserious Pat Leahy. Leahy sees the confirmation process as an opportunity to seize documents he is not entitled to and that are irrelvant the Mukasey's nomination. Mario Diaz points out:

...

But being a solid candidate has never deterred liberal senators from politicizing the process. Once again, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) is showing his true colors by implying that the nominee will move along only if he, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, gets something in return. In a statement on the Senate floor yesterday Leahy said “I have been in discussions with White House officials about some of the Committee’s outstanding requests and let them know that cooperation from the White House will be essential in determining that schedule.” Of course, Sen. Leahy is referring to internal White House memos and other confidential documents relating to Alberto Gonzales to which he is not entitled. He has also said, “Our focus now will be on securing the relevant information we need so we can proceed to schedule fair and thorough hearings.”

...

How sad that people voting for Democrats have put this small minded man in charge of anything, and particularly the committee that must approve this important nomination. His bad faith political agenda against the former attorney general will drag on. It is important to remember that his white whale approach to Alberto Gonzales and the firing of the US Attorneys was part of a Democrat attempt to prevent prosecution of Democrats for voter fraud in recent elections. Fairness has never been on Leahy's agenda when considering Bush nominees.