Update: Talking Points has the actual arrest report. The incident was on July 11, the report was entered on July 12 by someone other than the arresting officer, and then edited by the arresting officer on June 26. I wonder whether he just blacked out stuff or made changes. Since Craig pleaded guilty, he has no ability to quiz the officer on cross-examination.

*****

Roll Call has the details from the officer's report concerning Idaho Senator Larry Craig's arrest in June on lewd conduct charges stemming from an incident in the men's bathroom at a Minnesota airport.

Sen. Craig pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct without counsel in August. He paid a fine and was put on a year's probation.

Why did he plead guilty? Was he trying to keep it from the press?

My first impression: The whole encounter sounds fishy to me. From the cop's statement that the bathroom had so many complaints it was necessary to go undercover to the ambiguous hand movements the cop ascribes to Craig. I'm having a hard time even picturing what the cop thought Craig was up to given the configuration of bathroom stalls and the cop's statement they weren't in the same one.

At 1216 hours, Craig tapped his right foot. I recognized this as a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct. Craig tapped his toes several times and moves his foot closer to my foot...

Really strange story.

Bush wouldn't dare, right? Josh Marshall says don't be surprised if Bush uses a recess appointment to name the next Attorney General, bypassing the need for Senate confirmation.

My take: Of course he would. What's he got to lose? He's already a lame duck. The Republicans didn't stand up for Gonzales, why should Bush care whether they catch flak over a recess appointment when 2008 comes around?

All this talk by Schumer and others about appointing a non-political Attorney General who will uphold the rule of law, as I said earlier, is just more verbiage. It sounds good but it will never happen so long as Bush is in office.

One of the perks of being President is getting to name your cabinet members. Bush isn't going to let anyone stand in his way. He might sound the Dems out on his replacement pick, but if they say no, I think he'll just go ahead by way of recess appointment. He hasn't cared what the Dems think about anything else, why would he start now?

Interesting note on Barack Obama in a Washington Post article on his Chief of Staff Pete Rouse today:

It was the fall of 2005, and the celebrated young senator -- still new to Capitol Hill but aware of his prospects for higher office -- was thinking about voting to confirm John G. Roberts Jr. as chief justice. Talking with his aides, the Illinois Democrat expressed admiration for Roberts's intellect. Besides, Obama said, if he were president he wouldn't want his judicial nominees opposed simply on ideological grounds.

And then Rouse, his chief of staff, spoke up. This was no Harvard moot-court exercise, he said. If Obama voted for Roberts, Rouse told him, people would remind him of that every time the Supreme Court issued another conservative ruling, something that could cripple a future presidential run. Obama took it in. And when the roll was called, he voted no.

Of course, other Democrats actually voted for Roberts, including Chris Dodd and Russ Feingold.

As I head off to the jail to see two federal clients in pre-trial detention whose cases won't be affected one whit by Gonzales' resignation, I thought I'd reprint what I wrote in April:

What will change with Gonzales gone? Bush will appoint another one of his loyal faves to replace him. The war on drugs, war on civil liberties and trend towards draconian sentences will continue. Say what you want about Gonzales, he's nowhere near the threat to constitutional rights that John Ashcroft was. He's continued Ashcroft's policies, but he seems to be more of a follower than a take-charge innovator of new ways to deprive people of their freedom.

As for the fired U.S. Attorneys, they all got the job in the first place because they had connections ... either to their state's Senators or to someone in the Bush Administration. None of them got the job because they were the most skilled litigators in their respective jurisdictions. Once installed in the top position, they all put people in jail, including non-violent drug offenders. They're prosecutors, that's what they do.

More...

Michael Chertoff, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security

Robert S. Meuller III, Director, FBI

Frances Fragos Townsend, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism

Readers can see their bios at the above links.

My take:

Update: Bush Live Statement: (Not a transcript, just live-blogging.)

Al Gonzales is a man of integrity, decency and principle. I have reluctantly accepted his resignation with appreciation for his service. He has played a critical role in the war on terror, in developing the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act. He made enforcement of civil rights laws a top priority. He did great on child sex crimes and in fighting corruption. He played a leading role in selecting Justices Alito and Roberts.

He has become a close friend. He and his family have sacrificed.

After months of unfair treatment, he has decided to resign. It's sad when someone like Gonzales is prevented from doing good work because his good name has been dragged through the mud for political purposes.

Solicitor General Paul Clement will serve as acting AG until a replacement is named and confirmed.

No questions taken. More...

Live Update: Michael Vick Statement. For most of his life he's been a football player, not a public speaker. He wants to speak from the heart. He wants to apologize for all the things he's done and allowed to happen. Apologizes to the Commissioner and other team people. He was not honest in his previous statements to them. He was ashamed and disappointed in himself.

He apologizes to young kids out there for his immature acts. What he did was very immature, he needs to grow up.

Asks for forgiveness and understanding as he moves forward to better Michael Vick the person, not the football player.

He was irresponsible and those things didn't need to happen. He blames no one else. He had bad judgment and made bad decisions. Dog fighting is a terrible thing. Through this situation he has found Jesus and has asked for his forgiveness.

More...

We'll be updating reactions to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' resignation as the day goes on. Gonzales' last day will be September 15.

Update: Democratic candidates weigh in.

Update: Charles Schumer's live statement: Touts himself three times for first calling for Gonzales' resignation. Who cares? Says the Justice Department has been in complete disarray. As I've said many times, that's just not the case. Life has gone on as usual in courtrooms all across America. Insists on a replacement that "will uphold the rule of law." A platitude. Says Dems will work with the White House on a replacement, urges them to seek out Dems' advice.

John Edwards: (live interview on CNN)Doesnt' think Chertoff should be the replacement. "We shouldn't replace the person responsible for Guantanamo with the person responsible for the aftermath of Katrina."

Harry Reid: Was never the right man for the job.... He lacked the spine to say no to Karl Rove.

More...

Update (TL): Gonzales will make a statement at 10:30 am ET, I'll live blog it in a new thread. Bush is also expected to make a statement, and CNN says he will not be naming a replacement today. CNN says Chertoff is the favorite for ultimate replacement, also naming Paul Clement.

*****

He finally did something right:

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, whose tenure has been marred by controversy and accusations of perjury before Congress, has resigned. A senior administration official said he would announce the decision later this morning in Washington.

I'm sure J. and TChris will have thoughts later.

Football on NBC tonight cut into Keith Olbermann's debut of Countdown on NBC in many parts of the country. In Denver, the network joined the show in progress at 9:30 pm, after the game.

I did get to see the "Worst Person of the World" segment, which was very good. If you missed it, Crooks and Liars has the video. From the transcript:

Limbaugh: “…..Democrats want to get us out of Iraq, but they can’t wait to get us into Darfur.” He continued: “There are two reasons. What color is the skin of the people in Darfur? It’s black. And who do the Democrats really need to keep voting for them? If they lose a significant percentage of this voting bloc, they’re in trouble.” A caller responded, “The black population,” to which Limbaugh said, “Right.”

Robert Sillen, court-appointed health-care receiver for California's plagued prisons has been making waves and progress.

So far $1.3 billion has been spent on improving health care.

He has the power to hire, fire, raise salaries, build facilities, waive laws, tap the state treasury and have jailed any bureaucrat who tries to thwart him.....

....“When people ask me how long and how much,” he said, “I have a stock answer: Long. Much.”

Not previously familiar with the criminal justice system, it sounds like Sillen has gotten a crash course.

More...

Matt Yglesias has a great post on how historically ignorant Broderism and its drive for a compromise, issueless pragmatism is. As Yglesais shows, Whiggery led to to the rise of an ideological partisan Third Party - the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln:

I feel like it's worth mentioning here how little time third party enthusiasts ever seem to spend thinking about the rise of the Republican Party -- the only actual precedent for anything of the sort. They often seem to talk as if Abraham Lincoln was just some kind of somewhat disaffected dude sitting around somewhere with this really insightful speech about a how divided against itself, threw his hat in the ring, and -- bam! -- tired old Whig and Democrat ideologies are shunted aside in favor of a bold new era of pragmatism and bloody civil war. One can't do justice to the actual origins of the Republican Party in a blog post, but suffice it to say that it didn't work like that. The history of meaningful third party anti-slavery politics goes back to the abolitionists' Liberty Party in 1840. They later moderated their agenda somewhat, added the support of many breakaway anti-slavery Democrats, and became the Free Soil Party starting in 1848. This party had some very substantial adherents, but still didn't do very well. Then, as the national debate over slavery grew ever-more-intense, breakaway anti-slavery Whigs joined the movement that was now further reconfigured as the Republican Party. This new party did well enough to become a "second party," polling 33 percent while the Whigs got just 21.5 percent.

Matt has written a great concise post that does not, obviously, delve into the complete history of the rise of the Republican Party and the demise of the Whig Party, but I want to explore how Broderism was at the heart of the demise of the Whig Party. To wit, Broder has it backwards - his approach killed a dominant political party and led to an NON-Unity, partisan third party. I'll explore this history on the flip.