Would Should Schumer Do?

Chuck Schumer has egg on his face thanks to the Mukasey debacle. He recruited this guy, offered him as a decent conservative, and then discovered during committee hearings that the guy is pro-torture.* (Wise lawyers always say don't ask a witness a question unless you know the answer you're going to get; the political analogue: don't nominate a guy for AG unless you know he's anti-torture.) Now he's getting roasted for voting for Mukasey, both for being himself pro-torture and for being a toady and sell-out to the White House. The first charge is baseless, but the second has merit.

Schumer's not condoning torture. He arranged for Mukasey to become AG because he feared a worse nominee, who wouldn't have gotten Senate approval and whom Bush would install as a recess appointment. According to Schumer's logic, Bush's choice would arguably be worse than the Yoo-aided Gonzales regime. On all of this, I believe he's right. (Though it doesn't excuse his embarrassing orchestration of events.)

But on the second issue, I think the critics are right. While it's important not to go nuclear against the GOP (some adults have to step forward and govern), there are lines over which no Dem should ever step. Authorizing war with a non-threatening Iraq was one example, and Mukasey is another. In both cases, Dems become complicit in immoral and illegal acts. We are still in Iraq, and Bush is still in the White House, because the compromised Dems have not been able to find a unified position in the aftermath of their votes for the war. If Mukasey becomes AG, which is now almost a sure bet, the Democratic party, with majority in the Senate, will own whatever acts he authorizes. In two years time, the party will be saddled with the shame and responsibility of having signed off on this guy.

Yes, it would be catastrophic if Bush put in an AG on recess who conspired with the White House to commit further illegal acts and consolidate further power in the executive branch. But it would be Bush's crimes, and they would be correctable. Instead, this will usher in another chapter of presidential misdeeds for which there will be no accountability.

________________
*Yesterday on BlueOregon, Reed Poly Sci prof Paul Gronke disputed this characterization. I don't see how it's inaccurate or unfair, however. Bush nominated a guy who will--quite reasonably--not prosecute him for war crimes for, among other things, committing torture. Waterboarding's status isn't unclear: it's torture according to the Geneva conventions. And something more: we're not sure Bush's "coercive interrogations" were limited to waterboarding. So yeah, if you're the AG and you refuse to prevent the President from torturing people, spade a spade, you're pro torture.

Gonzo Bids Adieu

A satisfying way to begin the day: Alberto Gonzales' resignation. Yet I remain ambivilent; as when Ari Fleischer stepped down, the Dems lose an unpopular figure to kick around. Since this is analysis-proof (what're you gonna say?), here's a smattering of the reax from around the right-o-sphere, where unintentional irony and delusion are the order of the day:

Hindrocket/Powerline
"Gonzales's only real offense seems to have been mediocrity. But mediocrity in an Attorney General is nothing new (think Janet Reno), and any blame for this occurrence properly attaches to the White House."

Robert Bork
The price to America of driving Alberto Gonzales from office, if such a scenario unfolds, will be heightened polarization and peril.

Kathryn Jean Lopez, NRO
Gonzales is now available for a SCOTUS nomination.

[An unintentionally funny righty makes an intentional (and funny) joke.]

President Bush
"Al Gonzales is a man of integrity, decency and principle. ...After months of unfair treatment that has created a harmful distraction at the Justice Department, Judge Gonzales decided to resign his position and I accept his decision. It's sad that ... his good name was dragged through the mud for political reasons."

[Words fail.]

Protein Wisdom
"In other words, after having smeared a man into ruin, I knew the left would turn around and immediately affect a conciliatory tone, and press the President to join them in their sudden need to raise the level of discourse."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell
"I thank Alberto Gonzales for his public service and wish him well in his future endeavors. It is my hope that whomever President Bush selects as the next attorney general, he or she is not subjected to the same poisonous partisanship that we've sadly grown accustomed to over the past eight months."

[Almost cosmically ironic.]

Captain's Quarters
A lot of politicians have accused Gonzales of crimes without providing any evidence, and in the end, they couldn't find any even with unfettered room to conduct investigations for half a year. The Democrats have wound up empty on both investigations and legislation, and now they have little to show for the first half of this session.

[Not true. The Times actually ran a piece yesterday documenting the number of laws passed in this session--it far outweighs the previous, GOP-led Congress. But I digress.]

Orrin Hatch
"I hope that history will remember Attorney General Gonzales for his honorable service to his country, rather than for the absurd political theater to which some critics have subjected him."

[Yes, that's exactly what they're remember him for.]

Brit Hume
“He was a man almost without fans in Washington…he was, simply, a crony.”