They should have Lehrer question nominees for positions in the administration before they take office. Lehrer gave Mukasey a thorough going over, in what was a refreshing return to form for the news program, from the recent campaign grind. 
Of course, such interesting and important news comes at a cost, the cost of America's innocence and naiveté regarding our judicial system. 
Mukasey was explicit and deliberate in his answers, the most interesting of which elucidated the legality of waterboarding. According to Mukasey, right now, waterboarding is neither legal nor illegal, because it's use  has not been requested by intelligence gatherers. According to Mukasey, he and his subordinates will decide whether or not waterboarding is illegal, when they are asked permission to use it. 
The debate on all this is heating up because 6 gitmo detainees, including Kalid Sheik Muhammed, are being brought to trial. Kalid was waterboarded, and the evidence gathered from that torture might be admissible in court. If the presiding judge, Susan Crawford, thinks it's torture, it won't be admissible. If she doesn't think waterboarding is torture, the evidence will be admissible. In general, the standards for evidence are much lower than in civilian trials, based essentially on a test of "reliability" issued by the tribunal of judges.  
Mukasey looked and sounded like he was operating independently from the White House, but I don't take much comfort in that. If Mukasey is independently coming to these conclusions I worry they will only be that much more difficult to unravel under a new administration. 
Did anyone else see the interview? I'd love to know what the lawyer readers thought.