Before anything has even happened, Greenwald is attacking the Democrats over what he thinks it's possible they might do. Bush will make a recess appointment, and Greenwald will blame the Democrats, then criticize the main stream media for blaming the Democrats.

And the circular firing squad loads up and starts firing.

Rove, Gonzales . . .

There is a shoe dropping and they are setting up the cop at the car-wreck line "keep on walking folks, nothing here to see [the guilty are gone"

Must be a big shoe . . . what part of the scandals has not come out -- could it be prosecutions by the US attorneys that did not resign. Siegelman/Canary? What?

It's important to get a good AG in, but it is also important to make sure that when the shoe is on the floor the Dems shove it painfully up the White House and Congressional Republicans fundament . . .

geez, Glenn

you now exactly how this will work out. Recess appointment of Chertoff. Democrats cry foul, "look it what GW has done this time, worst administration ever, 2008 blah blah blah" but don't do anything real.

What I "know" is that if the attitude of self-pitying, petulant defeatists prevail -- "we're all so doomed and powerless; it's all so hopeless; it's all stacked against us; there is nothing we can do" -- then that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

For all of you who adopt this mindset -- "oh, forget it, Bush will win - he always does - nothing to be done - I'm honestly curious: why do you bother to read and comment on political blogs at all? If you're destined to lose, if all is hopeless, if you're completely powerless to do anything - why do you even bother?

While I agree entirely with Glenn's column today, I found myself wondering: just what outside, independent, conservative Republican, Bush-trusted, Democrat-acceptable person is out there?

This is clearly a pretty small pool.

We also have to assume that such a figure would have to be up for a job that undoubtedly will require him to clean out a cesspool while fending off attacks from the White House and under intense public scrutiny.

So on top of integrity, political acceptability, and competence we would have to add an almost heroic devotion to the public good.

Any thoughts as to who would fit the bill? Assuming the Democrats will have to quash the nomination of a flack or two, or the threat of a recess appointment, one has to think it's the opposition's job to help the president--believe it or not--find a new AG.

Alberto Gonzales can be investigated and indicted by a grand jury, and then prosecuted. All without using the I word that makes so many Democrats feel weak in the knees and loose in the bowels.

A poor nominee should never even reach the floor for the 40 senators to filibuster. They can be blocked in committee, specifically the Judiciary Committee, so long as its democrats stick together:

http://judiciary.senate.gov/members.cfm

Feinstein worries me most in terms of propensity to bolt and vote with the Republicans.

I'd like to see this agreement. It's exact words. Is it a binding contract? If not (or even if it is) why do you think GW will abide by it. The only reason he would is that GW thinks that a filibuster would hurt the dems.

And the circular firing squad loads up and starts firing.

God bless the circular firing squad. Let the Democrats never adopt the lock-step 11th commandment mindless authoritarian mindset of the right. We criticize that which is wrong and your problem with that is?

Fuck being anyone's water carrier.

Nothing. I believe the pres. will honor his promise to Reid and eventually nominate someone unacceptable to Dems.

Certainly nothing could serve Bush better than to not only leave the post unfilled for the duration of his presidency, but to leave it unfilled in a way that keeps the congress bickering over it which also provides a nice distraction from Iraq.

All he need do is nominate someone qualified but obviously a bushie (yes I know that 'bushie' and 'qualified' are not usually found in one person in Bush's circle) sit back and watch congress fight about it, while he skates to the finish line, un-investigated.

I think it is reasonable to imagine the congress not beginning a serious investigation of the president while they are fighting over who will be the next AG.

Gonzo resigned in order to spend more time with his family. The Democrats will confirm whomever Bush appoint to replace him. The next AG will be as corrupt and patisan as Gonzo, but unlike Gonzo, he'll actually have some brains, which will make him even more dangerous.

for the first time in a long while i can imagine a truely independent AG. wow.

of course, there is a risk of a recess appoinment or of 16 months of "acting" AG clement... so nothing is for sure - and we have our work cut out for us on the senate democrats...

but, i can't help but be a bit hopeful... after their fisa capitulation and the angry response they received from their constituents, they might just understand that now they are better off doing the right thing.

Just speculating, but just before the break, Leahy asked the DoJ IG to investigate Gonzo's testimony, and that cat (the IG) was supposedly a fairly independent character. Maybe he was poised to actually investigate the AG and report the truth.

I'm going out on a limb here to suggest that Bush will appoint Sen. Hatch...good 'ol Orrin. He is too close to Leahy to get a real grilling. He will not get the job done.

Anyone want to wager? Gentleman's bet.

cliff

Lets see...

voting for the authorization of force

voting for the patriot act

voting for extension of patriot act

voting for war spending bill

voting to legalize the presidents illegal domestic spying program

fuck the democrats.

So, are filibusters good or bad?

If it's appropriate for Democrats to filibuster Republican AG candidates, then it's appropriate for Republicans to do the same to judicial and exec branch nominees should a Democrat be elected in 08...-- cestmoi123

The Republicans have already been "filiblustering" their asses off under the table by holding legislation hostage since they became the minority. In fact, they tried to suggest changing the rules wholesale to require a 60 vote majority in the Senate to even pass legislation. Funny how that never came up when the Dems were in the minority. The Dems should have called them on that particular bluster immediately every time they raised it.

Glenn is correct that the Democrats will be responsible if the new AG turns out to be as damaging to the Constitution as Gonzalez. We need to hold them to account and they need to use whatever tactics are available to ensure we return our country to the rule of law.