Homeland Security nomination blunder
The black-belt nominee had a “nanny problem”, but that’s not all
Bernard Kerik with Bush Dec. 3 during the Homeland Security nomination announcement
Sure, the obvious irony of having a Secretary of Homeland Security, the highest official in charge of immigration, with a history of immigration law violations is too much even for this venal administration.
But, as the Times reports, the nanny problem only scratches the surface of what is potentially some very rotten pulp:
In just the last three years, Mr. Kerik, 49, made millions of dollars, mainly through his partnership in a security consulting firm headed by Mr. Giuliani and by serving on the board of a stun-gun manufacturer that has been seeking to do business with Homeland Security. Most recently, Mr. Kerik sold $5.8 million of stock in the stun-gun company.
Democracy Now! had a great segment on Kerik last Tuesday, leading with a troubling quote reported by Newsday on October 20, 2003, which had Kerik saying, “Political criticism is our enemy’s best friend”.
Sounds perfect for the Bush approach to “security”.
To top it off, Kerik has a history of misuse of personnel under his authority. In the same interview on Democracy Now!, Ellis Henican of Newsday discusses various incidents, including this striking example:
…the story essentially is that Ms. Regan, who is his [Kerik’s] publisher, lost a cell phone one day at Fox; and the story goes that he sent out some New York Police detectives to go into the homes in the evening of the hair and make-up people at the Fox news channel to investigate the disappearance of that cell phone.
The entire segment is worth a read or listen.
So at 8:30pm on Friday night, the very bottom of the week’s news cycle, the Kerik nomination was withdrawn as quietly as possible.

December 12th, 2004 at 05:16
You’ll love this, DB — the latest from the White House on Kerik at WaPo:
White House Puts Blame on Kerik
The usual anonymous White House suspects tell WaPo “said he was lying or showed terrible judgment.”
I remember how it was said that during the days of the Soviet Union folks just read Pravda for laughs. I’m feeling such a kinship with then now . . .
December 12th, 2004 at 06:54
Indeed.
In some ways we’re better off, though, because blogs can help reveal and decode what state media knows but does not want to say. See this, for example.