An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Larry Sabato on Michael Mukasey
“This is a smart decision by President Bush, and it avoids yet another vicious partisan battle with the Congress,†said University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato.
“Granted, Mukasey is a conservative — a Republican president is not going to appoint a liberal as attorney general — but Mukasey is in the Edward Levi model from the Ford administration. He’s got a good chance to restore confidence in the Justice Department, not to mention morale inside Justice.â€
2 Responses to “Larry Sabato on Michael Mukasey”
Puhleeze… Bush has fought tooth and nail to keep certain papers and records away from Congress. What about the 5 million e-mails that the White House conveniently lost (and then some were found, but not turned over to Congress)? Bush has no intention of letting Mukasey assert the necessary authorty the AG has over the most controversial issues that we would all like to hear about. If Bush were willing to come clean, then he’s certainly had many chances. Bush sees the AG position as a politcal position (and I’m sure Mukasay feels the same way- he does, after all, support the expanded powers of the Executive Branch).
The only reason Congress finds Mukasey as creditable is because Mukasey stood up to Bush at one point (but supported the White House on other issues).
Bush had Mukasey interview with a whole slew of conservatives who (for the most part) liked him. The Dems were not given the same exposure.
You can bet that Mukasey will turn into another John Roberts- (in that he’ll say what he needs to say to be confirmed) but Mukasey will prove to be a disappointment to those seeking to learn the truth about this White House. There may be some small tidbits thrown out… Bush has set the rules and Mukasey has agreed to play by them.
Remember Bush views everything (including war) as a game for him to win, regardless of who loses what (and in the case of Bush’s war game, thousands of Americans have lost their lives).
If I’m wrong about Mukasey, fine. But for too many years I’ve been hopeful about Bush’s promises and people’s feelings that Bush has changed. I’ve given Bush the benefit of a doubt many times in the past but each time his words were not worth the paper they were printed on. Bush doesn’t get the benefit of a doubt from me on this one. It is playing out like so many other hopeful nominations in the past- the nominee turns out to be a bush partisan.
Mukasey must have really want to put “Former Attorney General” on his CV in order to take this job. His has little time and few tools to make anything happen. He will be there about 15 months and will miss both budget cycles. The new fiscal year is beginning and thus has no chance to affect anything this year. Speaker Pelosi will definitely no pass a budget next year until January 2009. Ms. Mukasy can do little with personnel given his short tenure. The civil servants know they can wait him out.
Since he will probably be living at a hotel or corporate apartment, he will probably not be working Fridays since he will be returing home to New York.
What can he possibly do working four days a week for 15 months with no ability to change personnel, affect his budget, reorganize, or start any new programs. In addition, the current U.S. Attorneys and their assistants will probably start resigning in mass numbers since they will all be fired in January 2009.