ConfirmThem

I think Cox is as conservative as Ted Olson and Laurence Silberman but a lot younger. The other two already have stellar resumes. The AG slot would mean a lot more to Cox's resume at this point in his career.

Although a "young Turk" like Clement, Cruz or Estrada might make more political sense in the long run in terms of building future SCOTUS nominees for years to come, Cox might have a better chance at an actual confirmation without a Senate battle. Clement could be dissected for his support of Bush policies as Solicitor General, and Cruz and Estrada might meet roadblocks with Leahy, Kennedy, Biden, Feingold and Durbin.

I would not be interested in either Hatch or Larry Thompson.

I agree wholeheartedly, Quin. He's always been one of my favorites. I don't know why I forgot to mention him in the previous thread - got my head up my rear....

is that he apparently was squirrelly about the so-called Fairness Doctrine.

He'd be a very fine AG. And, if the Dems block him, he'd be a good one to recess appoint, since the next pres. (whomever he or [horrors] she might be) will appoint his/her own person anyway.

...tho I too really like Cox. Just keep PClem as interim, and make the deputy SG interim SG. Just read where it's perfectly legal. No hearings to drag on & get in the way of judges' confirmations, and serve to give the Dems free airtime to campaign for '08.

And speaking of airtime, I wanna see Bojangles Craig's resignation speech by noon MST Wednesday, then never hear from him again.

Chris Cox. Brilliant. Conservative. Confirmable. Competent.
Discuss.

These five adjectives are the very reasons why Bush will never nominate Cox for the job of Attorney General. He's too qualified and Bush will look for some family crony/insider. Maybe Karen Hughes is available.

Cox is so conservative that he'd make an easy Dem target to attack. I'm sure he could defend himself well, but he's a *gasp* conservative Republican.

Oz

www.first-cut-politics.blospot.com

I think he'd be a great possible AG in the next Republican administration.

Nominate an older guy or gal with nothing to lose, because whether a Republican or Democrat succeeds Pres. Bush, they will need to show they are making a break from the current administration.

Chertoff might fit the bill--not b/c he's old, but because he is already very associated with the current administration.

"People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors." -Edmund Burke

He'd agree to a special prosecutor in a second.

We need someone who will defend the executive branch. Silberman is more along the lines of what we need. or Terlwiger (sp?).

And if the Senate won't confirm, let them explain why they're playing games while Paul Clement runs the show.

"What most people really object to when they object to a free market is that it is so hard for them to shape it to their own will. At the bottom of many criticisms of the market economy is really lack of belief in freedom itself."

-- Milton Friedman

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/27/AR200708...

The WaPo has an interesting profile on Paul Clement. It sounds like everyone loves him EXCEPT Nan Aron:

"Because of his experience in government and corporate law, Clement is often compared to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. -- favorably by conservatives such as Starr, and unfavorably by liberals such as Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for Justice.

"He's courtly. He's polite. He is a good listener," Aron said. "In part, because the attitude of so many in this administration has been indifferent, if not hostile, . . . when you have a John Roberts, a Paul Clement, who is at least willing to engage in a conversation and is respectful of both sides of an argument, lawyers tend to be taken in. . . . In this town, style goes a long way."

Aron calls Clement "a movement conservative across the board" and a "true believer on the issues that drive the Bush administration: Guantanamo, civil rights, right to choose.""

http://www.kansascity.com/business/story/249528.html

The above story is a warning as to why you should never support a Democrat who runs as a conservative. The article does not say why our Senator rejected this judicial nominee, but you can be sure that it is because they were a conservative.

Despicable. Now even a totally green, nobody Senator is emboldened to defy this President. How pathetic.

The Senate should adopt a rule that a Senator from the same state can override another's blue slip.

If Clement does not remain acting AG for the remainder of the Bush administration, I think the nominee should be George Terwilliger, former SDNY judge Michael Mukasey, or Miguel Estrada. I doubt Schumer would be able to subvert Estrada's AG nomination as he did Estrada's COA nomination; it's a much bigger stage this time around. This would also help set Estrada up for a SCOTUS nomination in the Giuliani or Thompson administration to replace Stevens or Souter.

I disagree with red oakster that Cox isn't tough enough for the job. I'm certain he would be, as a veteran of years of battles in Congress.

I would also add Viet Dinh to the list. As one of the principal authors of the Patriot Act, his nomination would be a great opportunity to demonstrate just how much the administration (and Reps by extension) has done to protect us from terrorists. It would also be a great opportunity to show how the Patriot Act does great good and has done absolutely none of the purported harm the leftist crazies claim it has done.

It would also be an opportunity to bolster Dinh's resume for a future SCOTUS or COA nomination.

Viet Dinh would be a loose cannon on the Supreme Court. Since leaving the Justice Department, he has espoused several "liberal" positions. In particular, he wants to give the District of Columbia representation in Congress contrary to the Constitution.

As I recall, Ashcroft quit campaigning after Mel C died, exhibiting the ultimate in class. He had led throughout, but lost out to the sympathy vote and never whined about it publicly. She repaid him after she won by opposing his nomination as AG. What a piece of pond scum.

Is it just me, or has "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings" become "Each House may ignore the Constitution as it sees fit"? It makes my blood boil.

Perhaps, though I believe Dinh was representing a client. I still believe he would be an excellent, conservative addition to SCOTUS.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/28/AR200708...

According to the AP, the White House has narrowed the field down do five AG candidates:

1) Terwilliger
2) Hatch
3) Chertoff
4) Clement
5) Silberman

I am highly suspicious of this list. Hatch needs to stay in the Senate to preserve his committee placements. Naming Chertoff could bring up Katrina problems and force a second nomination for DHS. Silberman is viewed as too partisan. Of this list, only Terwilliger and Clement seem viable. I don't know why Bush just can't let Clement stay indefinitely as acting AG and avoid any confirmation problems that way. I'm really afraid that the Dems on the SJC will use an AG nomination to delay or derail valuable COA nominations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/28/AR200708...

"A half-dozen or so lawyers are being discussed among administration officials as possible candidates to replace Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, but no clear favorite has emerged, and President Bush is willing to fight for the right candidate, administration officials and Republican advisers said yesterday."

Among those who are said to be under serious consideration are Solicitor General Paul D. Clement, whom Bush picked to serve as acting attorney general after Gonzales's Sept. 17 departure; George J. Terwilliger III, a former deputy attorney general; former solicitor general Theodore B. Olson; Michael B. Mukasey, former chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; and Laurence H. Silberman, a senior judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit."

The part I don't like about this is that Bush is willing to have a fight over his confirmation. It is guaranteed that such a confirmation fight will push all COA nominations to the side. With only three COA confirmed this year, we do not need this distraction. After all, a new AG will serve only for 15 months at most. New federal judges, though, could serve for a lifetime. Bush should not be shortsighted in picking a fight now.

I say just recess appoint Clement today and be done with it. It will waste the rest of the year if there is a big fight over this.

The Dems could block judicial nominees if Bush does not go to them to get approval for the next AG.

The Dems will block as many judicial nominees as possible no matter what Bush does.

The key is to make sure that regardless of what the Dems eventually choose to do that the Republicans have not given them a feasible reason for doing so. To nominate a contentious AG candidate now could possibly give the Dems a perfect excuse to block and stall that the American public may view as reasonable. However, if Bush nominates a more consensus nominee, then the Dems will have a lot less political incentive to draw his confirmation out and push COA nominees aside in the process. That's not to say that the Dems won't delay any AG nominee, it only means they will look more unreasonable in doing so. In addition, any attempt to block COA nominees due to said AG confirmation will also look more unreasonable.

No matter who the AG nominee is, the Dems are going to demand they be given the keys to the office so they can "exercise their oversight duties" but might settle for the appointment of an independent investigator to do the digging for them. If the proposed AG won't agree at the hearings to allow unfettered fishing expeditions, the Dems will block him because "here he is already setting up a blockade to hide all the legal issues that got Gonzales in trouble" or some such claptrap.

I think we'd have been better off had Bush just recess-appointed someone and come out with a statement like, "The Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have already wasted too much time on things other than seeing judicial nominations through in a timely manner. This AG appointment is only for less than 18 months anyway, and I'd rather give the SJC as much time as possible to get back to filling these critical judicial vacancies that they have let go on far too long already." The Dems would have howled in protest, but he'd have absolutely nailed them for what they really are.

The Dems have made it clear they respond to any conciliatory moves by stabbing Bush in the back, so it's about time he told them to go pound sand. Time to move on.

Don't even need to recess appoint Clem, tho it's not a bad idea. Just dance around for a few months until the POTUS matchup is set, and then no one will care.

The spin is "SG Clement is doing a fine job as acting AG, and it is important to first resolve these long-pending emergency judicial nominations..."

Whatever Bush does, the Dems will still drag judicial confirmations out ALAP, and use the AG thing as a rally flag-whipping post, so what's the difference?

If Bush can't play this right he doesn't deserve anything anyway. Same deal with Bus Stop Larry. If we can't quickly deep six him & replace him w/a solid conservative who'll easily hold the seat in 08, we deserve POTUS Hillary & Justices Koh, McCardle & Berzon.

I see no reason to make a recess appointment...when it can only be interpreted as giving the Senate Dems the finger.

Leaving the AG spot empty is the smart thing to do, which is probably why Bush won't do it....I don't think he cares much for COA confirmations.

to be recess appointed, the nomination must already be pending before the senate went into recess.

"What most people really object to when they object to a free market is that it is so hard for them to shape it to their own will. At the bottom of many criticisms of the market economy is really lack of belief in freedom itself."

-- Milton Friedman

Throw him a bone for 2 years and make the Dems mad!! :)