The Liberal Case for Ted Olson

Lots of rumors floating about that the administration is backing off appointing Ted Olson as Attorney General because of Democratic objections. Look, he was my lawyer in the CIA leak case for my Supreme Court appeal. I had some disagreements with him which I chronicled in Portfolio. And if I was president, I wouldn't appoint him Attorney General because I'm not a hard-core conservative. But this president is. And Ted Olson, unlike Alberto Gonzales, is incredibly well qualified, maybe the best qualified person, to take the job under a Republican president. What's more, he's right wing but not, I think, reflexively so. After all, he sided with former Associate Attorney General James Comey in that showdown with Alberto Gonzales and Andy Card at John Ashcroft's hospital room. He's got a civil libertarian streak; see his work on First Amendment issues. As an experienced litigator, he's by nature less of an ideologue than a judge or academic. I think the Clinton witchhunts of the 90s were crazy and not just because my wife works for Hillary Clinton. Olson was a part of that, with ties to the American Spectator although he denies being part of the so-called Arkansas Project. I take him at his word. Maybe Bush would be better off with some national unity type attorney general. But he shouldn't have to neuter himself. He has a right to appoint who he wants if they're within parameters of integrity and competence. Olson more than meets those standards. And if Dems reject him, that's a bad precedent for their presidencies. They ought to be free to appoint liberals who are as partisan and brilliant as Olson.