Redstate

What about Ex-Dep. AG Larry Thompson. Has inside experience, doesn't seem to have a partisan background. I guess wooing him from a big VP job at Pepsi Co. might be hard, but he would seem to be the least controversial figure that wouldn't get hammered in confirmation hearings.

______________________________________
Bobby Jindal Saves Louisiana

I'm not going to suggest names of possible attorneys general, but I do hope that the president will get this out of the way quickly and with as little fuss as possible.

Chertoff would be a horrible choice, for a couple of reasons. The first, pointed out by Pejman, is that his nomination would create two sets of hearings, something that would needlessly complicate the process. I certainly don't want to spend any time listening to anyone question Chertoff about his performance during Katrina.

The other reason I think he would be a bad choice is that it seems crazy to pull someone out of Homeland Security where the pool of qualified personnel is probably much smaller than that for attorney general. If the president thinks Chertoff is doing a good job at HSA, then moving him would be irresponsible. (And if he's not doing a good job, we certainly don't need him at Justice.) Why create any of the confusion or inefficiencies that might arise from installing a new HSA head?

As for a new attorney general, there are many people who could win Senate approval without a huge fight. The question is does the president want to govern or have a fight?

I have a feeling that the best nominees aren't on anyone's list of obvious candidates. Gerald Ford's nomination of Edward Levi should be considered as a model. Supreme Court Justice Scalia said about Levi:

"...there couldn’t have been a tougher job in Washington where the whole executive branch was in disarray after Watergate.... He [Levi] brought two qualities to the job, a rare intellectuality and a level of integrity such as there could never be any doubt about his honesty, forthrightness or truthfulness."

If the president follows that model, he will perform a great service for his administration, the Justice Department, and, most important of all, for the country.

I'd prefer that Bush either toss someone in there now while Congress is on recess so we can avoid the hearing all together or agree with Pejman's assessment that we move slow and leave Clement there for now.

Also agree that Chertoff makes no sense.

Olsen and Thompson are both part of the Rudy Judge panel. So I wonder if it would help or hurt Rudy if one of those guys got the AG job under Bush.

Oz

www.first-cut-politics.blospot.com

I appreciate your concern for Paul Clements, but his chances to become a SCOTUS justice probably depends on a Republican appointment. I don't see that happening for the rest of the Bush term. Any appointment will depend on the election of a Republican president.

If there is no AG for the rest of the Bush term, the Republic is not in danger. Clements can continue to lead as interim for the rest of the term. It should enhance his standing and avoid any damage to his future.

I vote for someone like Olson, or someone even more likely to be rejected by the Democrats. Let the fight be as public as possible. I would prefer a confrontation with the Senate Democrats that is at least as bruising as the Iraqi war funding fight. I believe the Democrats would eventually fold, and Bush would get the appointment.

In the process, every Republican presidential candidate would be able to campaign against an out-of-control Congress, and a do-nothing Democratic Senate who puts politics above all else.