Why anybody would trust a politician who "didn't know" that he was not drafted by an MLB team is beyond me. The man, no matter what else is on his resume, has a Clinton-like relationship with the truth. Obama should have known better.

I wouldn't exonerate Richardson yet but let's see all the facts come out first befor we start to crucify the guy. I mean it's not like the present administration hasn't ever tried to base or institute legal mumbo jumbo based on politics.

John Edwards and Richardson - aren't we glad that they didn't get the nomination?

isn't this the first time there have been leaks like this from the transition team? Indeed they must be pissed off ...

Jen F beat me to the post. That was my first thought too. Thank God Richardson isn't the president-elect.

this still ultimately comes back on Team Obama, although in the end it will be a minor blip.

if you are trying to have the cleanest government and smoothest transition ever, and your vetters "pressed for information and [Richardson] gave nothing," don't go forward. Seems pretty simple. Obama tried a little too hard on that one to do the Team of Rivals thing, and it lead him to overlook a red flag.

Hopefully it is a lesson learned at a very low price.

I'm with you, Zeit. But, I have an "in the big scheme of things" sophomoric question I'd like to ask.

How is Richardson's possible steering of a lucrative contract toward a campaign donor any different than all the bidless "rebuilding" contracts in Iraq that went to cronies and investors connected with Bush/Cheney? Shouldn't a federal prosecutor or two be looking into that stuff?

You know, before it's all shredded?

chrenson, I wondered about that myself! I'm waiting to pass judgment on Richardson until we have the facts, but it's definitely troubling.
This situation has been discussed several times on the local political talk show on PBS in Albuquerque, and from what one of the panelists said it seems this investigation has public since at least August. Richardson was criticized by some Republicans for not stepping down and letting Denish take over as soon as he had accepted the cabinet position, but I wondered if there was more to it, and this withdrawal seems to bear that out.

I won't take an opinion on the merits of the "case" but if it was felt that it was "bad enough" he felt he needed to withdraw, it was "bad enough" to have not accepted in the first place.

It's a real shame that Richardson lied to Obama's vetting team.
This scum of the earth got what he deserved for turning on the Clintons.

Quote: It's a real shame that Richardson lied to Obama's vetting team.
This scum of the earth got what he deserved for turning on the Clintons.

Posted by: Neo on January 5, 2009

Who do you think it was that gave Richardson the courage to lie?

And don't forget - when Bill Clinton wanted to give Monica Lewinsky a job that would keep her in the government (he wanted her in the government so that he would have a meassure of control over her) and Monica Lewinsky wanted to move to New York, Richardson, then Ambassador to teh United Nations, agreed to give her a job - and subsequently almost certainly lied about how she was picked to Kenneth Starr and others.

In 2008, Richardson felt free.

His problem now was only the Clintons know hwo to have everyone pass a vetting.

The Democratic Party did help before - while he was still loyal to Clinton - by making a scandal out of the firing of a go soft New Mexico federal prosecutor. You may remember that "scandal"

(I read today that the job remained unfilled, the office being taken over by his deputy (probably because it would be hard to get abnyone confirmed) until 3 federal judges named a U.S. Attorney (something that is their right under U.S. law and the Constitution)