What Does The Kerik Fiasco Say About Bush's Judgment?

by Steve

As the White House scrambles to recover from the damage caused by its support for Bernard Kerik for Director of Homeland Security, the mind boggles at what Bush and Rudy Giuliani were thinking when they touted this man as one of the best law enforcement people in the country. It’s not like the problems with Kerik’s past weren’t known or out into the papers when Rudy pushed Bush to name Kerik, or that the administration itself didn’t know about Kerik’s profiteering or bailing out from his Iraq assignment early. But what kind of screening process does the White House have before they name someone? More importantly, what does this say about Bush’s judgment that he would tout someone like Kerik. And what does this say about the rest of his second-term picks?

The New York Times reports this morning that Rudy is in the doghouse with Bush over his recommending of Kerik for the job, after Rudy himself turned it down. Yet as Josh Marshall points out, this “moral values” White House was still willing to push Kerik through a confirmation process when they already knew about his graft, ties to the mob, misuse of government staff and property, unseemly profiting from his position, and conflicts of interest, not to mention his questionable management skills. After watching the ineptitude and incompetence of this Administration for four years, none of these flaws are disqualifiers to this cabal. Allegedly, it wasn’t until the nanny problem and the Newsweek tip came to the White House’s attention that Bush realized even he couldn’t hold his nose for this guy, which for Bush is saying a lot.

But maybe there were other reasons. We now know why Rudy was comfortable in pushing Kerik for the job he himself declined. You see, Kerik, like Rudy, was apparently accomplished at extramarital affairs and using staff to help him run interference for him. And while Director of Corrections for New York City, Kerik went so far as to retaliate against fellow employees of one of his two simultaneous flings, leading the City to settle at least one six-figure court settlement with one of the employees. The other employee is suing the city now. News about the earlier $250,000 settlement against the city was reported by the New York Daily News at the time of the settlement. Doesn't anyone at the White House or the FBI have Goggle?

And the other fling? His literary agent and Fox News contributor Judith Regan, which speaks volumes on several issues (as Atrios notes). Memo to the Daily News: Judith Regan is not "stunningly" attractive, unless you are drawn to the Ann Coulter-ish kennel of GOP women.

My, my, Kerik and Rudy have interesting ideas about the morals that apply to GOP men.

And where exactly was Alberto Gonzales in all of this screening process?

Moral values indeed.