Waterboarding

A very elegant point at Obsidian WIngs:

There is an easy way for Mukasey to get around the fact that he has not been briefed on what the CIA did: just define waterboarding, say whether waterboarding so defined is torture, and add that not having been briefed on what the CIA did, he doesn't know whether or not what they did meets his definition. That Mukasey has not taken this obvious route suggests that he is not motivated by his own uncertainty, but by the desire to keep people he believes have engaged in torture from being punished for their crimes.

But it's not only that, right? It's also that Mukasey knows that, as Attorney General, he'll have to sign off on at least one interrogation technique--call it waterboarding--that he can't describe, for the record, under oath, as torture. It would constitute an ex ante admission of his own guilt. At this point, being an Attorney General in the Bush administration requires breaking the law, and Mukasey, simply by appearing before the Senate, is saying he's OK with that.

Via.