Aside from the fact that he is currently overseeing the slow collapse of VA's GOP party? After all if Ed Gillespie does--as rumors suggest--take over where Dan Bartlett left off, then the VA GOP might have a much better shot at retaining John Warner's seat after he retires.
But I'd like to ask a different question. Why bring back a guy who, when the Republicans were about to get caught for illegally tampering with an election, played the fix-it and firewall role perfectly (well, kinda). I'm speaking, of course, about the New Hampshire phone-jamming scandal, in which Gillespie took all responsibility for the decision to pay James Tobin's legal bills, even though it's fairly clear the White House (the same White House that Tobin had called repeatedly during his phone-jamming operation) bought off on the decision too.
So here's the whole story as Gillespie tells it. He made an arbitrary decision that the RNC would cover Tobin's legal bills. Why? Because "it's the custom, not written anywhere, that you covered your people." - (N.B. according to Ken Mehlman, the RNC has since revoked this honorable, unwritten custom: "consulting contracts now explicitly declare that independent contractors must be prepared to pay their own legal costs in civil and criminal cases.") Having made that decision, he then informed someone at the White House, he can't remember who, that he was going to abide by this unwritten rule. But this was just a heads up, a courtesy, not a dialogue. It was non-negotiable.
Of course, Gillespie's forgetful stance looked dorky when he took it last May. But now that Tobin's conviction got thrown out because of the flawed language the NH USA used in the jury instructions, it looks downright brilliant. The GOP, caught red-handed trying to disrupt an election, is now off mostly scott-free. And those high ranking Republicans who were taking Tobin's calls to the White House as he decided what to do with his phone jamming scandal--people like Ken Mehlman? Off scott-free, too.
Which all suggests a guy like Gillespie could come in handy again, now that the Judiciary investigations have nowhere else to go but to Karl Rove, Scott Jennings, the recently-departed Sara Taylor, and the long-departed Harriet Miers (presumably some of the same folks who signed off on paying Tobin's legal bills). After all, it's just about the same kind of issue, right? Trying to explain away the calls people like Pat Rogers or Allen Weh made to the White House to fire USAs because they wouldn't tamper with elections? Trying to explain away the increasingly apparent plan to use the Justice Department to interfere with elections? It will all seem so familiar to Gillespie.
And of course Gillespie will waste no time coming up to speed, since he had the difficult task of prepping Gonzales for his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing back in April.
All of which makes the timing of Dan Bartlett's departure all the more interesting. After all, the same day that Bartlett announced his departure, Gonzales called a press conference to announce he was going to "sprint to the finish line" and serve as AG through the rest of Bush's term.
Did Bush have to choose between Bartlett and Fredo?