The AG Bush Needs

"They also are demanding access to internal Justice Department memos that might provide information on a dispute over whether a pivotal post-Sept. 11 anti-terrorism program was legal."

Record Review

Philip Shenon and Benjamin Weiser write in the New York Times that a review of Mukasey's record "shows that he would defend the administration on the issue that matters most to the president, national security. . . .

"Mr. Mukasey, 66, now in private practice in Manhattan, has repeatedly spoken out to support the administration's claim to broad powers in pursuing terrorist threats, especially in conducting electronic surveillance of terrorism suspects and in imprisoning them before trial.

"As a judge after the Sept. 11 attacks, he ordered the detention of young Muslim men as so-called material witnesses in terrorism cases, decisions that were criticized by immigration lawyers and praised by the Justice Department.

"Mr. Mukasey has endorsed provisions of the USA Patriot Act, the law passed by Congress after 9/11 to grant wide new law-enforcement power to the executive branch. The measure has been universally condemned by civil liberties groups."

Amy Goldstein and Dafna Linzer write in The Washington Post: "Mukasey's willingness to defend aggressive legal anti-terrorism measures before a tough audience helps to explain his appeal to President Bush."

Marc Ambinder writes for the Atlantic: "Make no mistake: this is about policy. The president cares more about his 'terrorist surveillance program,' national security letters, and aggressive anti-terrorism prosecutions that he does about where a nominee goes to church or how many abortion-related cases he has argued. . . .

"Mukasey is fairly unique among federal judges for having anticipated and sanctioned many of the arguments the Bush Justice Department and David Addington employed to justify detaining enemy combatants. . . .

"In short, he is, in the eyes of President Bush and Vice President Cheney, the perfect advocate for the President's national security policies. He is the perfect foil for Democrats -- the administration, anticipating the fight about the renewal of the covert surveillance statute, wants the best team possible."

John Podhoretz writes in his New York Post opinion column that after presiding over the trial of the "Blind Sheik," Omar Abdel-Rahman, Mukasey was considered a possible target for violent reprisal.

"[H]e and his wife basically lived for years inside a security cocoon," Podhoretz writes.

"[T]hey were surrounded by a platoon of U.S. marshals, who stood guard outside their home and went everywhere with the Mukaseys - to the grocery store, the movie house, the bookstore, dinner with friends . . .