Bump and Update: President Bush may announce Mukasey as Attorney General on Monday. Glenn Greenwald has a lot more analysis, particularly on his role in the Padilla case.

****

White House officials seem to be testing the name of former U.S. District Court Judge Michael Mukasey for Attorney General. CNN and the AP are reporting he is now the leading candidate.

I've been reading up on him for the past several hours and will present the pros and cons below.

Preliminary assessment: He's independent-minded, extremely experienced and smart, and while more conservative on terror-related issues than I'd like, far too supportive of the Patriot Act and too close to Rudy Giuliani for comfort, he doesn't run rough-shod over defendants' rights. As compared to Ted Olson, Mukasey is an improvement.

So, who is Michael Mukasey? See below.

The New York Times and Washington Post have long articles today in which the reporters try to trace Norman Hsu's fund-raising contributions to Democrats. The articles practically take it as a given that Hsu's fund-raising was illegitimate because he was a a fugitive from California and they've managed to track down unhappy investors in his business deals that were unrelated to politics.

Despite new interviews reported in the articles both with people that knew Hsu and those whom he asked to contribute to various candidates, one critical allegation is missing: None of the contributors so far have said Hsu reimbursed them for their donations. Without reimbursement, there's no campaign finance crime. Bundling donations is legal and all the candidates have bundlers.

It's been my impression since the story first appeared in the Wall St. Journal that Hsu did nothing illegal in his fund-raising activities. The media keeps looking for and coming up short in discerning Hsu's motives in becoming a bundler for various campaigns.

Hsu strikes me as a political groupie, someone who wanted to go to the parties and mingle with the VIPs, and the way for him to do that was by becoming a big donor.

More...

"You gets no bread with your one meatball."

In Department of Justice news:

An internal Justice audit, released Friday, showed the department spent nearly $7 million to plan, host or send employees to 10 conferences over the last two years. This included paying $4 per meatball at one lavish dinner and spreading an average of $25 worth of snacks around to each participant at a movie-themed party.

This song has been around at least since the depression. Bing Crosby, the Andrews Sisters and Josh White sang it during WWII. I really like the versions by Baby Jane Dexter and Ann Rabson, but I couldn't find videos of them. Here's the lyrics:

I've long been skeptical of political polls and "polling inisghts." So of course I love this line from Ezra Klein's review of pollster Mark Penn's new book:

Penn['s] . . . new book Microtrends is so bad that the question—in a fair world—isn’t whether it will destroy his own reputation, but whether it is so epically awful as to take the entire polling industry down with it.

From Klein's pen to God's ears.

(Photo by Reuters)

Today is Alberto Gonzales' last day as Attorney General of the United States.

Who will replace him? Joe Conasen at Salon wonders whether Bush would dare to nominate Ted Olson. Reporter Matt Cooper, who hired Olson for his Supreme Court appeal in PlameGate, praises Olson.

Peter G. points out in the comments here, the valid reasons for not appointing Ted Olson are not his politics, but any lapses in his integrity, principles and competence. Criticism should be leveled at him for his own actions, opinions and choices rather than our opinion of his clients.

In my view, this is fair game:

Even before his dubious and much debated connection to the Arkansas Project and Richard Mellon Scaife, Ted Olson had issues. Big issues.

Check out David Neiwert's Salon article from May, 2001 when he ran into Judiciary Committee opposition during his confirmation process for Solicitor General.

In the mid-1980s, he became the focus of an independent counsel's investigation for much the same thing: giving misleading testimony to Congress -- some charged it was perjury -- that was intended to cover up his own misbehavior.

A careful examination of that episode raises serious questions about not merely his integrity but the legendary legal prowess to which even his critics defer. Indeed, the last time Olson served as a top presidential legal counselor, he left behind a political disaster area strewn with bad legal advice, wrecked careers and lingering scandals.

Harsh words, but read the article and decide for yourselves.

Norman Hsu left the hospital in Grand Junction last night. He was transferred to the Mesa, CO county jail where he will be advised by video this afternoon.

There are no charges in Colorado pending against him. The only warrant is the San Mateo, California warrant on which California is seeking to extradite him. A hearing on the extradition request likely will be scheduled at the advisement.

The Mesa County District Attorney will ask that Hsu's bond be set at $4 million.

The Wall St. Journal reports that Hsu mailed a suicide note to acquaintances and some organizations before boarding the train to Grand Junction, including the Innocence Project. Hsu had been a big contributor to the Innocence Project.

More...

Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid warned President Bush today not to nominate Ted Olson as Attorney General:

"Ted Olson will not be confirmed," Reid, D-Nev., said in a written statement. "I intend to do everything I can to prevent him from being confirmed as the next attorney general."

Sen. Patrick Leahy also said Olson would face a tough challenge. Leahy was a principal objector to Olson's confirmation as Solicitor General.

Some Republicans are suggesting that if Olson isn't acceptable, Sen. Orrin Hatch should take the position. Why would Hatch resign his senate seat to be Attorney General for a year and a half?

Alberto Gonzales resignation is effective Monday.

Update: Dave Neiwert has much more at Firedoglake today on why Olson should not be our Attorney General. And Marcy has an op-ed in the Guardian, They Have to Be Kidding.

The Wall St. Journal continues its reporting of Norman Hsu's financial dealings. The latest installment (free link): A New York capital venture firm, headed by Joel Rosenman, one of the three original Woodstock creators, has asked the District Attorney's office to investigate a $40 million investment in Hsu's firm, Components Limited.

Rosenman's partner introduced him to Hsu. Both invested personally with him and made a 40% return on their money. They then pitched the idea to Rosenman's firms' clients.

The investment pool would "lend to U.S. private label designers that needed interim financing to fill orders for a select group of well-known, high-end U.S. apparel retailers." Since 2001, [Rosenman] writes, "the return of these short-term (typically 4½ months) loans has been no less than 40%."

Here's how the deal worked:

More....

Blogger Beldar just got off the phone with the Hennepin, County Court Clerk. He was trying to find out if there was a Form 11 in the file showing Craig had been advised of and waived his right to counsel.

The Clerk said she didn't see one and told Beldar a hearing has been set for September 26th at 1:30 pm on Craig's motion to withdraw the plea.

Good work, Beldar. For anyone who hasn't read the motion yet, here it is (pdf), with exhibits. There's also a lively discussion by several lawyers in the comments here.

Update: Sen. Craig's motion to withdraw his guilty plea is available here.

****

The Idaho Statesman reports Larry Craig's motion to vacate his guilty plea have now been filed. CNN has more. I'm waiting to find a copy and will post them when available.

Some reported quotes:

“While in this state of intense anxiety, Senator Craig felt compelled to grasp the lifeline offered to him by the police officer; namely, that if he were to submit to an interview and plead guilty, then none of the officer’s allegations would be made public,” said the documents filed in Hennepin County District Court.

“Thus, rather than seek legal advice from an attorney to assist him in publicly fighting these charges and potentially protract the issue, Senator Craig’s panic drove him to accept a guilty plea, the terms of which offered him what he thought was a private, expeditious resolution of this matter,” the papers said.

Craig’s filing argued that his guilty plea was not “knowingly and understandingly made.” It also argued that the evidence was insufficient to support the plea as a matter of law.”

Larry Craig's lawyer Billy Martin said today he will file papers with the court in Minnesota tomorrow seeking to withdraw Craig's guilty plea.

Martin would not disclose the grounds, but said he was not concerned about Craig's political survival.

My job is to get him back to where he was before his rights were taken away," Martin said.

I'm still thinking, as I've been since August 30th, that the principal ground will be that the plea form (pdf)Craig mailed in did not advise him of his right to counsel. (Video here, about 3 minutes in.)

As other grounds, there's the argument that the facts he admitted to don't constitute a crime and in my view, a much weaker argument that he was illegally arrested because he was on his way to vote in DC and the Constitution prevents lawmakers from being arrested on their way to a vote.

Update: CNN has more, including statements from a source hinting at the grounds. All grounds will go to his plea not being made intelligently and knowingly because of his rights' violations.