But on Wednesday, Mudd will speak for the first time since his Homeland Security confirmation debacle, on a subject well within his area of expertise. He’s scheduled to give a lunchtime speech, “Al Qaeda: The Domestic Threat,” at a panel assembled by the New America Foundation. Presumably Mudd will talk about the prospect of domestic infiltration or radicalization of American Muslims like Najibullah Zazi. Almost as if his intelligence experience could have come in handy at the Department of Homeland Security…

“Today I am announcing that I have decided to withdraw my name from consideration to be the Department of Homeland Security Undersecretary for Intelligence and Analysis. I know that this position will require the full cooperation with Congress and I believe that if I continue to move forward I will become a distraction to the President and his vital agenda. I would like to thank the President for the honor of being considered and I extend my good wishes to the exceptional men and women of the Intel and Analysis office; these professionals work hard every day to analyze and share information with state, local and federal law enforcement agencies critical to the security of the United States.”

The statement doesn’t contain an explicit reference to the allegation that Mudd had some (unspecified) knowledge about the former CIA enhanced interrogation program, but The Associated Press reported yesterday that’s the basis for the congressional antipathy to his nomination. White House spokesman Nick Shapiro adds:

“The President believes that Phil Mudd would have been an excellent Undersecretary for Intelligence and Analysis but understands his personal decision and the choice he has made. It is with sadness and regret that the President accepted Phil’s withdrawal from consideration as Phil once again demonstrated his duty to country above all things.”

Note the “personal decision” construction. And this is from Sean Smith, assistant DHS secretary for public affairs:

“Phil Mudd would have been an outstanding Undersecretary and we are disappointed by his decision but accept it. On an interim basis, the Office of Intelligence and Analysis continues to be led by Bart Johnson, an exceptional leader who is already making the critical changes that will transform this crucial office.”

Update: Laura Rozen fills in the blanks:

The anticipated withdrawal of the nomination of Philip Mudd, a veteran CIA analyst who had worked in recent years as a senior executive at the FBI, comes after an AP report yesterday that said Mudd had had “direct knowledge” of the Bush-era harsh interrogation program while serving in an analytical role at the CIA, as the deputy director of the Office of Terrorism Analysis.

Mudd is, as I wrote in October when I heard him speak at a conference, a real CIA luminary who served in a variety of counterterrorism and South Asia capacities since the 1980s. He has a pretty balanced view of where al-Qaeda stands now: ideologically a spent force, but metastacizing into something dangerous in Pakistan. Most recently he was at the FBI’s national security division, which gives him one of the most rounded-out national security backgrounds of anyone who’s come into or through DHS. (Well, him and Charlie Allen.) Along with former White House counterterrorism chief Rand Beers, who’s also nominated to be a DHS undersecretary, Mudd’s nomination is a pretty good sign that the department is shaping up as a power center.

Campbell is, with Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy, a co-founder of the Center for a New American Security, which is the most powerful global affairs institution since the Trilateral Commission, except that one day it will come up with a plan for intergalactic exploration and conquest. I hear Andrew Exum is writing a paper about a population-centric-counterinsurgency approach for the Alpha Centaurions.