Mukasey Mum on Torture Techniques

Attorney General-designate Michael Mukasey testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2007, before the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on his nomination. (AP Photos/Susan Walsh) (Susan Walsh - AP)

WASHINGTON -- Attorney General-nominee Michael Mukasey refused to say Thursday whether he considers waterboarding a form of torture, frustrating Democrats and potentially slowing his confirmation to head the Justice Department.

In an increasingly testy second day of hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mukasey also said he is reluctant to support legislation protecting reporters from being forced by courts to reveal their sources. The Democratic-led panel has approved those protections, which President Bush has threatened to veto.

Mukasey, a retired federal judge who has ruled in some of the nation's highest-profile terror trials, repeatedly avoided discussing the legality of specific interrogation techniques _ including forced nudity, mock executions and simulated drowning known as waterboarding.

To comment would be irresponsible "when there are people who are using coercive techniques and who are being authorized to use coercive techniques," Mukasey said.

"And for me to say something that is going to put their careers or freedom at risk simply because I want to be congenial _ I don't think it would be responsible of me to do that," Mukasey said.

Instead, Mukasey stuck to his earlier definition of torture as illegal and unconstitutional _ irritating Democrats who demanded a clearer answer.

"I'm hoping that you can at least look at this one technique and say that clearly constitutes torture, it should not be the policy of the United States to engage in waterboarding," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

"It is not constitutional for the United States to engage in torture in any form, be it waterboarding or anything else," Mukasey answered.

During terse questioning by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., Mukasey said he did not know if waterboarding is torture because he is not familiar with how it is done.

"If it's torture?" Whitehouse responded incredulously. "That's a massive hedge. I mean, it either is or it isn't."

"If it amounts to torture, it is not constitutional," Mukasey answered.

"I'm very disappointed in that answer," Whitehouse said. "I think it is purely semantic."