More confirmation questions

Another NYT, another hypothetical question list for confirmation hearings. Today's was for Holder, the AG nominee. The esteemed JEFFREY ROSEN, a law professor at George Washington University and the legal affairs editor of The New Republic had this to ask:


1. What will you do when liberals, over Mr. Obama’s objections, encourage Congress, the courts and the Justice Department to pursue investigations and prosecutions concerning the Bush administration’s surveillance and interrogation policies?

Because as everybody knows, only liberals think Bush's surveillance and interrogation policies should be investigated. It is also assured that Obama will object to it since he's no crazy librul. Tell me how you will pacify them please without actually conducting real investigations. Next, former OLC'er JACK L. GOLDSMITH, a Harvard law professor, the author of “The Terror Presidency,” and an assistant attorney general from 2003 to 2004 had this to ask:

3. Attorney General Michael Mukasey has suggested that the threat of criminal investigations is impairing the ability of the intelligence community to make good-faith decisions about how best to protect the country. How much does this worry you and what, if anything, will you do about it?

Our intelligence community needs to know that there will never be investigations for anything, or else they will be wary of breaking laws. It must be hard to protect the country if you think someone is looking over your shoulder to make sure you don't do illegal things. We simply can't expect our dedicated protectors to be worried about silly things like that, if they let their guard down for a second the terrorist just might escape.

Another one from JEFFREY ROSEN, a law professor at George Washington University and the legal affairs editor of The New Republic cut to the core of Supreme Court nominee dilemmas:

4. Do you agree with Mr. Obama’s implication that the Supreme Court needs someone who will side with the powerless rather than the powerful? What if the best nominee happens to be a white male?


Yes that's a tough one...If the best nominee is a white male, well since we know white males are genetically incapable of siding with the powerless then if you stay true to your implication you will have to choose someone who is not the best nominee. Oh what a pickle! Have fun scratching your head over that one and no, don't bother answering since I designed it to so that it is impossible to form a logical thought in response. But remember I'm watching you.