I believe we have got to get it straight. And I believe these people will be better tried in a military commission for a lot of reasons, one of which is the gaining of intelligence.

It is not just the ability to prosecute this individual, but whether if he were properly interrogated over a period of time we may find out that there are other cells, other plans, other Abdulmutallabs out there boarding planes that are…

I don't think--I just would say I do not think we need to have proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a person is a terrorist before they go on the list.

I think the Bureau of Justice Statistics is a very important office and I think it is very important that it preserve its, I think, pretty solid reputation as being independent and objective in its work.

It is clear that 8 years after September 11, 2001, there are still holes in our counterterrorism system.

One of the things you will be required to do as a Federal judge is to impose sentences.

We are not putting them in jail. We are just simply confronting them before they get on an airplane.

I suggest, if you lack experience in sentencing, you scrupulously follow the guidelines, because they were established through a lot of hard work.

We need to figure out how to do this correctly.

Based on your experience--and you have been at this for a number of years--do you think that the 20 States who now currently, I understand, test on arrest, that that is good public policy?

What are we waiting for? How can we get more progress established here?

I think it could be put in and might not cost quite as much as if you were having to obtain the sample from the rape victim.

I am firmly of the view that we are not as a Nation investing enough money into the kind of forensic evidence-gathering capabilities that can help us reach the best way to fight crime.

I have supported and will continue to support additional Federal resources to accelerate and improve our State and local forensics capability.

I do not think that this Federal Government should be bearing the responsibility of paying for every rape kit in America.

I absolutely believe it's a critical part of our future for clean energy in the world.

That would be a policy error, would it not?

Let me just say fundamentally what I think we have a problem with.

I really and truly believe that we have an opportunity to continue to make progress in immigration far greater than a lot of people have thought, and at this time of surging unemployment, I think it is important that we do so.

The primary mission of the Department is to lead a unified national effort to secure America to deter terrorist attacks.

Will the numbers be up or down a year from now at the border?

I do not believe there is anything wrong with a Federal agent or State police officer criticizing a prosecutor.

To send a message that you can come, we have large numbers of people that come every year, but you must do so lawfully, that is a message we need to send and it is important.

I think that is correct, and to suggest that once you have gotten into the country illegally that you are now free to work and stay in the country indefinitely is not the message we need to send.

shouldn't they at least be required to have some sort of conviction of a misdemeanor of some kind before they are sent back?