It’s not a sentence one ordinarily expects to see in one of the nation’s largest and most important newspapers: “The acting attorney general of the United States is a crackpot.” And yet, that was the first sentence in the latest column from Ruth Marcus, the Washington Post’s deputy editorial page editor.
It’s a provocative assessment rooted deeply in fact. Matt Whitaker, whom Trump appointed as the nation’s chief law enforcement official this week, is a rather ridiculous choice. We are, after all, talking about a shamelessly partisan loyalist, with a strange, far-right worldview, and with close ties to a witness who’s testified in an ongoing federal investigation.
Whitaker has bashed the federal courts. He’s condemned an investigation he’s now overseeing – and won’t recuse himself from, despite calls from 18 state attorneys general. He’s already decided what the outcome of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe should be. He’s perhaps best known for having advised suspected con artists.
Complicating matters, Matthew Whitaker is the first attorney general – acting or permanent – to ever hold the position without having been confirmed to the Justice Department by the Senate. Many experts have made a very credible case that the president’s appointment of Whitaker is plainly illegal.
The bottom line is unavoidable: this “crackpot” has no business overseeing the Justice Department of a global superpower.
All of which raises the question of how the president chose Whitaker for the position in the first place