Welcome to the Monarchy...

In his senate conformation hearing, Michael B. Mukasey, was asked if the President is required to follow federal statutes (or, in common terms the LAW)
His answer?

"That would have to depend on whether what goes outside the statute nonetheless lies within the authority of the president to defend the country." -source

WHAT?!? The man who wants to be the Highest lawyer in the county thinks the president doesn't have to follow the law if he believes he's defending the country?!? Who determines if his actions are in our defense? The President does, obviously, he's the decider. Would it make the country safer to detain all people who might commit a crime? Maybe it would....but according to Mukasey, the President can take whatever action he feels would protect the country.
Oh, and by the way, the Constitution is a series of federal statutes. So, if we extend the argument of the soon-to-be fucking Attorney General, the constitution does not apply to the president if he's acting in a way he feels defends the country.

This is a violation of the President's oath to defend the constitution. I'm struggling to see it any other way. Can any of you help?