WASHINGTON — The confirmation hearing of Atty. Gen.-designate Michael B. Mukasey turned contentious Thursday as Senate Democrats accused the nominee of dodging questions about a controversial interrogation technique and backtracking on statements he made about the obligations of the president to follow the law.
In a testy final day of questioning before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mukasey drew the wrath of some Democrats on the panel when he refused to say whether he believed that so-called waterboarding -- a technique that simulates drowning -- constitutes torture that is prohibited by the Constitution.
Waterboarding has become a flash point in the debate over the limits of U.S. interrogation policy since the start of the Iraq war. And it was targeted by Congress in 2005 legislation outlawing "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of prisoners.
"I don't know what's involved in the technique," Mukasey said in an exchange with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). "If waterboarding is torture, torture is not constitutional."
"That's a massive hedge. I mean, it either is or it isn't," Whitehouse responded. He gave a brief description of the practice, but Mukasey still declined to offer an opinion on its lawfulness.
"I'm very disappointed in that answer," Whitehouse said. "I think it is purely semantic."
The exchange marked some of the first serious criticism of the nominee, and contrasted sharply with the first day of hearings Wednesday, in which Mukasey was widely praised for being willing to take on the job of restoring the beleaguered agency.
His answers Thursday unnerved Democrats who viewed former Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales as lacking candor and who are hoping for a fresh start under Mukasey, a retired federal judge.
Confirmation of Mukasey, 66, remains on track, but Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) indicated that a Senate vote could be delayed while the panel further explores his views.
"I am concerned that on a number of your answers yesterday, there was a very bright line on questions of torture and the ability of an executive, or inability of an executive, to ignore the law. That just seems nowhere near as bright a line today," Leahy said Thursday. He wondered aloud whether Mukasey had received criticism from White House officials overnight after a hearing Wednesday that encouraged members of both parties.
Mukasey said he had received no such criticism.
