The judge who will decide whether Larry Craig can withdraw his guilty plea isn't making that decision today. He won't decide until next week, after Sen. Craig's tentative resignation date of September 30. Will the delay affect Craig's decision to resign? Apparently so.

“Today was a major step in the legal effort to clear my name,” Craig said in a statement. “The court has not issued a ruling on my motion to withdraw my guilty plea. For now, I will continue my work in the United States Senate for Idaho.”

Translation: For now I will continue to be ineffectual until the court denies my motion.

While decrying what he terms "poll literalism," Kevin Drum then engages in a curious bit of poll hypotheticalism:

First, withdrawal from Iraq. A recent New York Times poll showed that 65% of respondents want to withdraw either some or all of our troops from Iraq. Hooray! The country is with us! But then the Times asked a followup question: "What if removing troops meant Iraq would become more of a base of operations for terrorists, then would you still favor removing U.S. troops from Iraq, or not?" Guess what? Of that 65%, only 30% still favored removal. That's a huge drop based on a single hypothetical, and in a real campaign that hypothetical would practically blanket the airwarves. It wouldn't convince everyone, of course, but it would probably convince a sizable chunk. The odds are that in real life — i.e., during a campaign

It would probably convince a sizable chunk? How does Kevin know this? Excuse me, this is ridiculous use of polling. Can we do one with a Democratic hypothetical and see what the results would be? Of course not. What Kevin is pointing to is actually push polling. Push polling is not ACCURATE polling and it is impossible to draw any conclusions from it. But Kevin sees value in it, as he then defends the Biden push poll that Celinda Lake performed:

Minnesota prosecutor Christopher Renz has responded to Senator Larry Craig's Motion to Withdraw his Guilty Plea.

Denying Craig's motion "prevents further politicking and game playing on the part of the defendant in relation to his plea," Renz wrote.

Renz wrote that Craig didn't decide to withdraw his plea until after he was hurt by the publicity of the allegations...."The defendant chose to plead guilty and consciously took that risk. The defendant's current pursuit of withdrawal of his guilty plea is reactionary, calculated and political."

Renz also complains that if Craig is allowed to withdraw his plea, there will be a "deluge" of similar requests from other defendants. His support for that belief apparently is a single call received from another defendant.

Renz writes of several calls he had with Craig before the plea. In one, his notes say he advised Craig to seek counsel.

You can read the 41 page memorandum brief here (pdf). His affidavit (with attachments)is here.

Some thoughts:

This weekend we reported on Attorney General Nominee Michael Mukasey's endorsement of enhanced interrogation techniques and opposition to closing Guantanamo and some of his rulings on federal sentencing guidelines and his promise to be independent of the White House.

Today, the New York Times has a very unflattering article about his conduct and treatment of material witnesses detained after 9/11.

Let's start with the material witness detentions:

Earlier I wrote about Attorney General Nominee Michael Mukasey's interviews with Senate Judiciary Committee members in which he professed his independence from the White House.

Michael Isikoff of Newsweek today reports on the same interviews and says Mukasey told the Senators he doesn't think Guantanamo should be closed and he favors enhanced interrogation techniques:

According to three sources, who asked not to be named discussing the private meetings, Mukasey said that he saw "significant problems" with shutting down Guantánamo Bay and that he understood the need for the CIA to use some "enhanced" interrogation techniques against Qaeda suspects. Mukasey also signaled reluctance with naming a special prosecutor to investigate Bush-administration misconduct, according to one participant.

As to Alberto Gonzales, Isikoff reports he's lawyering up.

The departed A.G. is now looking for a private lawyer to represent him, according to two legal sources who asked not to be identified because of the matter's sensitivity.

Jeralyn highlights the fool's errand that Howard Dean is on. This should drive home the point. Via Steve Benen and PFAW, here's why:

The Associated Press reports that in 1988, then-Judge Michael Mukasey issued a 15 page opinion declaring the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines unconstitutional. [via Sentencing Law and Policy.]

In his 15-page ruling, much of it written in a sardonic tone, Mukasey belittled the Justice Department's insistence that the guidelines were a function of the executive branch, while the U.S. Sentencing Commission simultaneously claimed them under the judicial branch.

"A survey of the results thus far calls to mind nothing so strongly as the band of blind men describing the elephant variously as a wall, a tree or a rope, depending on which part of the beast they touched," Mukasey wrote.

More...

Norman Hsu has been charged in federal court in New York with conducting a ponzi scheme to defraud investors of $60 mil and with campaign finance violations.

Today's charges stem, in part, from new allegations that Hsu defrauded a group of New York investors who entrusted him with more than $40 million, believing they were financing a clothing venture.

Hsu was charged with felony mail fraud and wire fraud in connection with the Ponzi scheme and a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act in connection with campaign donations.

Background on the New York investors case is here.

The campaign violation counts allege he made "contributions to candidates in other people's names."

The Complaint isn't unsealed yet on PACER. But the docket says the feds intend to seek his transfer to federal custody "shortly." Here's what the docket says so far.

Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu waived extradition to California today. He's expected to be returned tomorrow.

According to one news report, a spokesman for his lawyer's office says Hsu may have boarded the wrong train:

Jason Booth says Hsu was “sick and confused” and may have thought he was boarding a Bay Area Rapid Transit Train when he instead caught an Amtrak train to Colorado.

But according to the first article linked above, Booth had no comment on that explanation.

Jason Booth, a friend of Hsu's and a spokesman for the San Francisco law firm representing him, would not comment on an Associated Press story that reported Hsu was disoriented and ill and got on Amtrak train thinking he was boarding San Francisco's rapid-transit system.

Did James Brosnahan's office hire a friend of Hsu's as their spokesman? I tend to doubt it. I'm also having a little trouble crediting the wrong train scenario. His English reportedly isn't perfect, but still, he bought a sleeper ticket. And one would think after an hour or so on the train, he might have noticed, asked, or called someone.

Sen. Larry Craig has returned to Washington and resumed his Senate duties.

Some shunned him, some were friendly. His hearing on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea is September 26.

Meanwhile, the bathroom where he was busted has now become a tourist attraction.

The ACLU has filed a "friend of court" brief with the Minnesota Court considering Sen. Larry Craig's motion to withdraw his guilty plea over his bathroom sting arrest. You can read the brief here. The ACLU says (press release will be available here later today):

“The real motive behind secret sting operations like the one that resulted in Senator Craig’s arrest is not to stop people from inappropriate activity. It is to make as many arrests as possible – arrests that sometimes unconstitutionally trap innocent people,” said Anthony Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU. “If the police really want to stop people from having sex in public bathrooms, they should put up a sign banning sex in the restroom and send in a uniformed officer to patrol periodically. That works.”

After noting that Sen. Craig has not always been a friend to civil liberties, the ACLU says that doesn't matter and explains its legal reasoning:

More...

Update: Here is the text of President Bush's nomination of Judge Mukasey this morning and Judge Mukasey's acceptance.

******

White House sources said Sunday night Michael Mukasey has accepted President Bush's offer to be our next Attorney General.

What's up with Sen. Charles Schumer? First he touts Mukasey to Bush for both the Supreme Court and the Attorney General's position, and now he's promising a tough confirmation hearing and saying Judge Mukasey only has "potential" to be a consensus nominee?

Schumer said Mukasey will face questions about "important and sensitive issues," such as the controversy over the Bush administration's warrantless electronic surveillance program and the appointments of U.S. attorneys. But he said the former judge "has the potential to become a consensus nominee."

Maybe he should have ascertained the Judge's positions on these issues before he recommended him for the job.

More...