Posted on 10/12/2005 2:52:26 PM PDT by Theodore R.
Miers to withdraw
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: October 13, 2005 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
Harriet Miers is never going to be grilled by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
She is going to withdraw her name from consideration before such hearings ever begin.
You can take that to the bank.
Why? Because, even though Democrats in the Senate seem more pleased with the choice of Miers than do Republicans, the questions that must be asked of the nominee for Sandra Day O'Connor's Supreme Court seat would be among the most embarrassing ever raised about her boss, President Bush.
Most of the attention on the nomination so far has focused on her lack of experience, her track record, her opinions on abortion, etc.
But the silver bullet that will do in the nominee is her cozy relationship with Bush – one that likely placed her in a position of covering up scandals in the Texas Lottery to keep secret the preferential treatment the president received as a young man to enter the Texas Air National Guard.
All it will take is a subpoena or two to get the whole sordid story on the public record – in front of a national television audience.
I don't think George W. Bush, already experiencing unfavorable public opinion ratings, will allow that to happen.
Democratic senators will overcome their apparent enthusiasm for the Miers pick when they realize they have an opportunity to embarrass Bush over the way he avoided Vietnam service.
All they would have to do is to subpoena two witnesses – former Texas Lt. Gov. Ben Barnes and former Texas Lottery director Lawrence Littwin.
It was Barnes, also a former House speaker in the state, who testified under oath in 1999 in a lawsuit brought by Littwin that he called the head of the Texas Air National Guard to put in a good word for Bush. Barnes later parlayed that favor into multimillion-dollar leverage as a lobbyist-consultant with a company called GTECH that won the business of running the scandal-plagued Texas Lottery.
After Littwin was hired by the Texas Lottery Commission, he made the unfortunate decision of questioning why GTECH should get Texas' business without facing competitive bids. He also questioned why the company should be paying former state officials like Barnes and contributing money, perhaps illegally, to other Texas politicians.
As a result, the commission headed by Miers fired Littwin. GTECH paid him off with a $300,000 settlement and bought out Barnes' contract for $23 million. The unusual settlement required Littwin to destroy all of his lawsuit documents, and Harriet Miers, the chairman of the Lottery Commission and future White House counsel and Supreme Court nominee, avoided testifying as to her knowledge of the whole sordid affair.
Does anyone really expect President Bush will allow this can o' worms to be reopened in Senate hearings?
No way!
In fact, every day Bush allows this nomination to remain on the table is another day he risks embarrassment over a scandal everyone thought was dead with the retirement of Dan Rather as CBS anchorman.
Can you imagine John Kerry's friends in the Senate passing up an opportunity to revisit the high-water mark of the Democrats' 2004 presidential campaign? I don't think so.
Frankly, I'm amazed the Democrats have been able to keep still as long as they have. They are keeping their powder dry for a reason: They want Harriet Miers to testify.
Somehow, this story has remained largely below the radar screen of the national press. Maybe they, too, can't wait for the real fireworks to begin in televised hearings.
So, now it's back to the drawing board for President Bush. Maybe Harriet Miers will decide she can't put her favorite client through this ordeal. She may suddenly decide she doesn't really want to be on the Supreme Court, after all.
In any case, mark my words, Bush is looking for his third choice to fill Sandra Day O'Connor's seat right now.
If Miers does withdraw, is Gonzales the certain replacement nominee? Then we might be longing for her nomination!
keep secret the preferential treatment the president received as a young man to enter the Texas Air National GuardAh ha! Those memos came from Harriet! She had one of those fancy Microsoft standard typewriters all along! Why do you think she never got married?!
Does WND still claim airplane contrails are a government effort to pacify the world with chemicals?
For the love of Pete.... the liberals and rabid leftist cannot lets this TNG thing go can they????
Columnist Farah supported GWB in 2004 in part because he thought that Rather had used forged documents to discredit GWB. Also because of the Swift Boat Vets. Now Farah says he regrets his 2004 vote.
I'm no great fan of the Miers nomination, but Joseph Farah comes across like a simpering twit with this nonsense.
Poor Joe is just screaming for attention.
The politics of the Harriet Miers nomination seem to be a complete a zero-sum game. The more the White House tries to reassure fuming conservatives that the Supreme Court nominee will "vote the right way" the more the Democratic opposition ramps up to oppose her. The Bush administration looks to be in a box with no sure way out. Unless the unthinkable is true: Maybe George W. Bush is far smarter than we think.This is where President Bush — or someone on his team — might have a clearer read of the political situation than it first appears. Conservatives opposed to Miers are essentially validating Miers as a conservative lite insufficiently opposed to abortion. Practically, that's just where Bush should want her to be.
For even as Republicans clash one against another, Democrats are still standing by, flat-footed and flummoxed and utterly unsure of what to do next. They have some hard choices to make because Bush chose Miers.
If he must, Bush will fight the Miers fight without conservative help, but against Democrats unsure of what to do.
This along with shards of Republican loyalty might be enough to get her on the court. If not, Bush goes back and selects someone else even more qualified, having spent the energies of all possible opposition. Harriet Miers will worship him regardless.
Right.
Farah is a nutcase and little he says is to be believed. I deleted my link to WND a long time ago. WorldNetdaily.com has about as much credibility as their favorite intelligence source, DEBKA, has.
Presidentfelon
Well, that part should be easy enough.
...having spent the energies of all possible opposition.
Someone needs to put down the crack pipe.
I wish I could believe a word that Farah has to say.
Farah is an idiot. He jumped the shark years ago.
If I took everything Farah said to the bank I'd be broke.
LOL....If he said I really, really ,really hate G.W. Bush?
I thought Farah had slipped off the deep end years ago but this is the height of absurdity - errh insanity!
I got special treatment to get into the guard and my father was a city manager! If you think he did not get special treatment, I have a bridge for sale!
Huh? I am implacably opposed to Miers. But this is, if not just crazy, at least over the top. Subpoena Ben Barnes? Sheesh.
What a peculiar little man this Farah guy seems to be.
Except for VoxDay's columns. Wow, if you haven't checked lately, he has the feminists in an uproar. That's why I keep WND as a bookmark--so on Mondays I can go to Vox.
Can we say "executive privilege"? Bush will not release any documents, and Miers will not talk about any of this. They can subpoena documents all day. They will be met with dead silence.
If that's how Democrats want to use their time, instead of actually questioning Miers, I predict every GOP Senator will vote for her, as will some disgusted Democrats.
Dear Farah, I'll take your bet. $1000. Right now.
It's Tin Foil Hat Time again.
So9
the liberals and rabid leftist cannot lets this TNG thing go can they????
Adrift in a sea of voters, and democrat/liberals clutch
at the only straw around.
I can not believe all playground taunts and name-calling and four-month words the last few weeks, by so-called conservatives journalists and posters, accusing President Bush of every evil thing under the sun. Are they now taking their "talking points" from Cindy-Sheehan. Heck, one guy on another FR thread called for his impeachment.
Is Farah now saying that Dan Rather was right in the fall of 2004?
Dear Farah, I'll take your bet. $1000. Right now.
I'm with you. I don't claim to know Bush's brain, but I would be stunned if he withdrew her nomination. (of course I'm stunned that he nominated her in the first place...) If he does, it will be due to opposition within the republican ranks over her qualifications, not this nonsense.
Listening to Ann Coulter, no doubt.
He very well might nominate Gonzales...and then he would kill the Republican party for about 15 years....but he doesn't have a good enough feel for the pulse of American conservatives to realize this.
Farah has a lot of kooky stuff (like 2nd-coming stories after disasters), but he also has some articles you don't see elsewhere first.
Had me going there till I reread the source.
Joseph Farah is a nut.
You can discount almost every kook conspiracy theory he espouses.
Airplane contrails, anyone?
What was your MOS?
Thank you, Dan Rather.
Have a look at this post.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1501376/posts?page=35#35
"It was Barnes, also a former House speaker in the state, who testified under oath in 1999 in a lawsuit brought by Littwin that he called the head of the Texas Air National Guard to put in a good word for Bush."
The problem is, Barnes was lying. He was proven to have not had any kind of relationship with the Bush family at the time of Bush's Guard stint. Not to mention, if I recall at the time Barnes was a nobody who would have had no power to influence anyone over anything. So why would the Bush's have sought out his help? Farah is letting his Miers-hate get the better of his good judgment if he's trusting the word of a proven liar and a now discredited trash-talking Bush hater. Who's he going to cite next? Bill Burkett?
At the time the popular Ben Barnes was the TX house speaker and the Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor. LBJ once predicted that Barnes would be the next Texan (after him) to become President.
It will never be a good idea to leave the Republican Party. Even when they are eventually for abortion except in the case where a couple is purposely trying to prevent the birth of a homosexual child, their positions will be somewhat more tolerable than the Democrats.
And there will be someone on FR who will proudly point that out and call you a traitor for even pondering the idea.
Is this what you refer to?:
QUOTE: ...Barnes' daughter stated to FOX's Sean Hannity that her father told her in 2000 that he had not helped Bush.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1216958/posts
Joe is still praying for the U.S. to be hit by an Iranian EMP strike or by Al-Qaeda nukes.
Preston E. Smith was Lt. Governor of Texas from 1963 to 1969.
Ben Barnes was Lt. Governor from 1969 to 1973.
His story was that he helped Bush get into the TANG as Lt. Governor, but Bush enlisted on May 27, 1968.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.