"The lawyers looked at all these issues," said the official. "We believed they were not disqualifying."So, despite the fact that the issues raised with Kerik have been used on multiple occasions in the past to bring down other political figures, somehow the White House thought that he was special enough to get a free pass from both the confirmation officials and the media?
I think Dubya's "mandate" is going to his head.
I have no doubt that, as in the past, the Democratic party will find themselves submitting to Dubya's wishes once in a while even though they should not. I'm also hoping that these instances will be fewer than in the last four years. Still, it's one thing to look the other way on one issue in someone's past, and it's another to simply gouge out your eyes altogether.
As I write this post, the following allegations have been leveled against Kerik (as stated in the above linked article):
"...an immigration problem involving a family housekeeper."Any one of these could be used as a serious objection in his vetting process, yet the White House (if we are to believe the anonymous official) thought that they themselves and Kerik were immune.
"...two extramarital affairs...one with the corrections officer and another with New York book publisher Judith Regan."
"...accepted thousands of dollars in cash and gifts without proper disclosure."
"...had ties to a construction company that investigators believe is linked to the mob."
"...part of a series of lawsuits related to a New Jersey condominium owned by Kerik."
There's a part of me that wants to say that all of this was on purpose. The White House wanted to see how much they could actually get away with after their November victory. Further reading reveals that White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales was in charge of the background check on Kerik. Gonzales is himself about to go through a confirmation process for Attorney General, even though he is thought to be the engineer of the torture that went on at Abu Ghraib. Perhaps he was testing the waters to see how much scrutiny he would soon face?
All of this is conjecture, of course. I'm sure that the White House is not that diabolical. But I have to raise issue with a party that thinks a man with immigration problems and a record of theft is a safe bet for Homeland Security Chief, and that a man who thinks torture is A-OK is a great choice for Attorney General.
Of course, we liberals have already been told we have different values than red state-ers. Thank heavens for that.