Carrying Water for Schumer and Leahy
The New York Times reports on President Bush's selection of a nominee to replace Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. It turns out, though, that there isn't any real news to report. The Times says that Bush is "closing in on a nominee," but several possibilities are still under consideration, and the Times' account contains little or nothing that is new.
The point of the Times story seems to be to discourage the administration from nominating Ted Olson, whom the paper describes as a "staunch partisan." The Times rehashes controversies from the 1990s in which Olson was marginally involved, and goes to Senators Schumer and Leahy for comment.
Schumer says that Ted Olson wouldn't be on "a list of consensus nominees." No kidding! In today's Washington atmosphere, it is hard to imagine what a list of "consensus nominees" might consist of, but we can be sure that no one with any credentials as a Republican would be on it.
Leahy says that Bush should nominate someone "independent" who "will act as an independent check on this administration’s expansive claims of virtually unlimited executive power.” But the job of a Cabinet officer is to implement the President's policies, not to "check" them.
Notwithstanding tut-tutting from the Times and other liberal organs, President Bush will no doubt nominate an Attorney General who broadly shares his views and will try to carry out the administration's policies. The Democrats' problem is that they don't like those policies; but if they seriously think that the President can be intimidated into, in effect, turning management of the Justice Department over to them, I'm pretty sure they're mistaken.
PAUL adds: Elliot Richardson has passed away, but I think Lawrence Walsh may still be around. Perhaps Schumer, Leahy, and The NYT would view him as a suitable "consensus nominee." I imagine Warren Rudman and Arlen Specter would also make their short list.
To comment on this post, go here.
