I don't know what to think. On the one hand, Bush AG appointee Michael Mukasey seems to be a stand up guy with a great resume and a solid career in civil service. On the other hand, Charles Schumer likes him. Phil reported earlier that there isn't likely to be much resistance to Mukasey, but conservatives still aren't sure whether they like this or not. On the anti- side we have Calabresi at Time:

But in dropping Olson and going with Mukasey, Bush has opened himself up to attack from the right. Conservatives are worried about Mukasey's 1994 denial of asylum for a Chinese man who said his wife had been forced to have an abortion under that country's one-child law, which they say indicates he's weak on pro-life issues. And though he has consistently ruled with the Administration on a number of important and high-profile terrorism cases, Mukasey broke with them in an early, crucial ruling, saying that American citizen Jose Padilla had a right to a lawyer, no matter what his status in the war on terror. Mukasey is also very close to former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, whom social conservatives distrust.

On the pro- side we have Peter Wehrner at the Corner:

In case you haven't heard, President Bush announced the nomination of federal judge Michael Mukasey as his next (and hopefully last) attorney general.

Mukasey was appointed by Ronald Reagan, has a rep as a law and order guy and yet the Dems will probably not oppose him. Why? Because they likely suggested him among others to the White House as being acceptable. Highly unlikely the WH is looking for yet another fight with the Senate and looked for a compromise candidate.

How could Mukasey, a strict law and order guy, a right winger in most things, be a compromise candidate? Well, as a judge in the Jose Padilla case he stood up to the Bush's then AG (that would be Alberto Gonzales) and told them they needed to follow the law in prosecuting people. He was apparently suggested by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and since Schumer would be a key senator in the confirmation process, that is the telling clue.

The fact the WH is avoiding a fight over this nomination is telling as well. They really don't have the forces to take on a unified Dem team but fortunately for them, they don't have to. The national Dems keep backing away from the big fights: defunding the war and/or impeachment because they don't have the votes in the Senate. Maybe they're right but some people think they should try. There's still 16 months of this Administration and so far they have reduced America to being something less than a super power, ravaged the military, the treasury, and can't even clean up after a hurricane. They're so incompetent it boggles the mind but at least they've stopped fighting over the AG. Let's hope this one can restore some professionalism at the Justice Department. It's long overdue.

According to the AP, it would appear that President Bush may have settled on his choice for Attorney General and it is possibly (nothing is official yet) Michael Mukasey. Bush's previous top choice was the former solicitor general Theodore Olsen, the man who had become famous for successfully representing Bush before the Supreme Court in 2000 to settle the contesting of the presidency. Olsen's name, however, was pulled off the table after Democrats in the Senate threatened to block the nomination.

Mukasey would replace Alberto Gonzales, an Attorney General whose tenure was not exactly a dynamic one. In fact, many grass roots conservatives were happy to see him go as they generally considered him a fairly weak Attorney General without a clear agenda.

Mukasey is a moderate and would probably be more acceptable to the Senate, although there is some grumblings in the conservative base about his possible selection. Generally, the conservative base is lukewarm about moderates in positions of power, but there needs to be a bowing to reality on this issue. Without the votes to successfully confirm a candidate, the candidate will not be confirmed. This process of Senate confirmation was devised by the founding fathers as a means to limit executive powers and that is the way the system works.

Ted Olson has had an outstanding careers as a lawyer, Solicitor General of the United States and other positions in which he has helped the conservative cause. That would be exactly why the Democrats fear him.

Olson is expected to be the nominee for the vacant Attorney General position last held by the politically inept Alberto Gonzalez. He would be an excellent candidate for that position as he has played the political game before and would not be stupid enough to be taken down by the Democrats for something that should not even have been considered a scandal in the first place.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has promised a fight and it appears the GOP may just find a backbone on this one and fight for a good nominee.

Olson is hated by the Clintons as his late wife wrote a scathing book about Hillary -- "Hell to Pay" -- that was among the best of that genre. She also wrote of the last days of the Clinton administration and was merciless as well. Then, while traveling to L.A to appear on Bill Maher's show, she was killed as four terrorists slammed the plane she was on -- Flight 77 -- into the Pentagon.

Imagine if a Democratic president nominated a highly-qualified candidate for a position who has lost his wife in a terror attack. Imagine the fawning media coverage that candidate would receive. There's no way a Republican-led legislative body would vote against that candidate because the media would destroy them. Unfortunately for Mr. Olson, he's a Republican so he'll receive no mercy from Senator Harry Reid or the media.

Earlier this month, at a news conference, Mr. Bush dismissed accusations that Mr. Gonzales had stonewalled or misled a congressional inquiry. "We're watching a political exercise," Mr. Bush said. "I mean, this is a man who has testified, he's sent thousands of papers up there. There's no proof of wrong."

HT to Volokh, the buzz of the day is that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has run out of luck and time.

The buzz among top Bushies is that beleaguered Attorney General Alberto Gonzales finally plans to depart and will be replaced by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. Why Chertoff? Officials say he's got fans on Capitol Hill, is untouched by the Justice prosecutor scandal, and has more experience than Gonzales did, having served as a federal judge and assistant attorney general.

Of course there's very little to go on, but this smells very much like a trial balloon, a deliberate leak from the White House, so it may be true. The problem of course is that there is only about a year and a half left for the Bush administration, and a lengthy confirmation battle might chew up a lot of that time. If the administration is serious, they will want someone that can be confirmed post-haste.

Or this could all be a big red herring. So far, President Bush has given absolutely no indication that he was open to replacing his attorney general.

I suppose that Democrats hope President Bush continues to stand by his attorney general and I guess that he is becoming a gross embarrassment to the Republicans, who probably wish he would just go away.

Per Merriam-Webster, "perjury" is defined as:

The voluntary violation of an oath or vow, either by swearing to what is untrue or by omission to do what has been promised under oath: false swearing.

It appears that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the top law enforcement officer in the nation, our top cop if you will, has repeatedly been lying, obfuscating, evading the truth, not remembering the facts and circumstances under oath -- call it what you will. New documents from the administration itself surfaced yesterday that directly contradict Mr. Gonzales' latest testimony with respect to the late night visit to former A.G. John Ashcroft's hospital room in order to talk him into approving a program that he had already refused to approve.

While many Bush supporters insist that Congress is not doing the people's business by trying to get to the truth of the numerous issues that have surfaced and will continue to surface with respect to integrity and credibility, I would suggest that there is almost nothing more important to the underpinnings of our government than the rule of law. When the nation's top cop displays utmost disrespect to the other branches of government, lies under oath to Congress and otherwise demonstrates what, at best, is gross incompetence and abdication of his responsibilities to White House politicos -- I would suggest that this issue is at the very heart of the people's business.

In case anyone missed the testimony of one James Comey, check out the clip below. If it doesn't give everyone pause to stop and think about what has been going on in this country, all I can say is Enjoy that Cherry Kool-Aid. There may have been movies made that are as dramatic as this testimony but I can't recall one at the moment.

It's well worth viewing. He tells the story of how Alberto Gonzales, when counselor to the president, and Andrew Card, then chief of staff came to the hospital room of an incapacitated then-Attorney General John Ashcroft to try and get him to sign authorization to conduct the now famous domestic spying. If you've been following this story, you'll know that most of the management of the Justice Dept. was prepared to resign to protect the Constitution. You'll hear of the ugly pressure tactics and know that the White House still got their surveillance program. Then remember who is the AG, now charged with protecting the country -- not the WH.

Mr Gonzales faced a fresh barrage of question from Democrats over the controversial firing of several US attorneys when he appeared before the House judiciary committee.

But Republican committee members largely supported Mr Gonzales and called for an end to the investigation, easing pressure on one of President George W. Bush's closest political allies.

Democrats have sought to prove that the firings of at least eight US attorneys last year were politically motivated, citing an e-mail by a Gonzales aide that judged federal prosecutors according to whether they were "loyal Bushies".

Bolstered by a fresh show of support from President Bush, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales sought Monday to move beyond calls for his resignation and lingering questions about his credibility after the firings of federal prosecutors.

Critics reluctantly conceded that Gonzales was likely to weather the political storm. But many scoffed at Bush's claim of having more confidence in his attorney general after Gonzales' Senate testimony last week that was filled with memory lapses.

Photos: Gonzales on the Hot Seat, April 19

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales faced a tough Senate this week, yet the Bush administration continues to support him:

"He has done a fantastic job in the Department of Justice," deputy press secretary Dana Perino told reporters traveling aboard Air Force One as President Bush headed for a speech in Michigan.

Generally in sports such as baseball, that would be the kiss of death. Several Republicans have broken ranks and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) took Gonzo down a few pegs for lack of preparation. The White House hoped that Gonzales would make a good showing and calls for his resignation would abate, that did not happen and instead those calls have gotten louder.

This entire charade is more evidence of the Bush administration's tone deafness when it comes to brewing scandals. They could have ended this before it started by saying loud and repeatedly that there's a long history of president's replacing federal attorney's, they serve at the pleasure of the president and he, in consult with his advisors, decides who should remain and who should not. Instead they allowed this to fester and allowed the media to run with the story culminating in the farce that was Gonzales' appearance this week.

Photos: Gonzales on the Hot Seat, April 19

This AOL headline caught my eye: "Some See Impeachment Option, Hagel Says." Wow, coming from a Republican, I immediately assumed that Alberto Gonzales was in a lot of trouble. Can they really impeach an attorney general? For that answer, I went right to the best source possible, the U. S. Constitution.

There's the answer, Article 2 Section 4 says:

"The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

The answer is "and all civil officers." So Hagel must be planning to impeach Alberto. Sounds like a great story.

I had read the other AOL story that said Senators Hagel, Specter (Arlen not Phil) and Lindsey Graham, had joined Sununu in thinking that the country would be better off with a new attorney general. As Specter said: "We have to have an attorney general who is candid, truthful and if we find out he has not been candid and truthful, that's a very compelling reason for him not to stay on."

Yesterday, Senator John Sununu became the first Republican Senator to ask that Gonzales resign. He is sick of Alberto and the way he has disregarded the civil rights of Americans. The firing of eight U.S. Attorneys didn't help. Some argue the dismissals were merely routine This is done all the time, goes the arguement. Hillary and Bill did it. Well, this time it's different. Why?

There were a few U.S. Attorneys who were just not moving fast enough to investigate Democrats. Though we like to believe that we have a fair legal system, this has to make you wonder. The prosecutor doesn't take action against the opposing political party, so he is fired. To those who claim the firings were not politically motivated, the Chief of Staff for the Attorney General himself called the plan "Preparing for Political Upheaval." Like the generals in charge of Walter Reed, the author of that plan got fired. And Gonzales? A senior justice department official described his performance before Congress "an unmitigated disaster."

The same article linked above, stated that Darrel Issa, Congressman from California, said that "anybody involved in this coverup of giving up the truth should step down." Enter the Judiciary Committee, chaired by Patrick Leahy and Arlen Spector. They will vote today on whether or not to subpoena Karl Rove, Harriet Miers and a few others. Looks like the lame duck administration is limping a lot.

The Senate's No. 3 Democrat said Sunday that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should resign because he is putting politics above the law. Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record) cited the
FBI's illegal snooping into people's private lives and the Justice Department's firing of federal prosecutors.

Schumer, D-N.Y., said Gonzales repeatedly has shown more allegiance to
President Bush than to citizens' legal rights since taking his job in early 2005.

He branded Gonzales, a former White House counsel, as one of the most political attorneys general in recent history.