Posted on 10/10/2005 10:42:41 AM PDT by ejdrapes
OCT. 10, 2005: WHAT THE INSIDERS ARE SAYING More talking over the weekend to more conservative lawyers in Washington. It is hard to convey how unanimously they not only reject, but disdain, the choice of Miers. One commented on this news story that Miers' favorite reading was John Grisham novels: "Look, it's inevitable these senators are going to ask you some obviously stupid questions. You just can't give them obviously stupid answers. How hard is it to say that you are reading Jean Smith's biography of Chief Justice John Marshall?" Another told me of a briefing session to prepare Miers to enter into her duties as White House Counsel. A panel of lawyers who had served in past Republican White Houses was gathered together. After a couple of hours of questions and answers, all agreed: "We're going to need a really strong deputy." It's been reported the reason Miers was named White House Counsel in the first place was that she had proven incompetent as Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy. Her boss, Chief of Staff Andy Card, badly wanted to get her out of his office - but couldn't fire her because she was protected by the president and the first lady. So he promoted her instead. Now we learn that it was Card who was the strongest advocate of moving Miers out of the West Wing altogether and onto the high court - raising the question of whether the ultimate motivation for this nomination is to open the way to hiring a new Counsel by kicking a failed Counsel upstairs. Few of the people I talk to can talk on the public record, although Judge Robert Bork has courageously done so and as time passes others may decide that they have to accept the risks of stepping forward and telling what they know. In the meantime, ask yourself this: Think of all the conservative jurists you know and respect. Have any of them had anything positive to say about this nomination? I can think of only one, Ken Starr, when he was interviewed last week on Fox's Hannity and Colmes. And even Starr confined himself to vague generalities about Miers' "track record." I've reprinted the transcript below. Notice what Starr does not say. He never says Miers possesses a deep knowledge of the law, he can muster no praise for her intellect or abilities as a lawyer, he does not say she'll be a credit the court. He doesn't even say that this is a good nomination beyond a jovial: "She's terrific." In fact, the only specific praise he offers is praise for Miers' formal statement to the press accepting her nomination - a statement that, as Starr would know, was written for her by others on the White House staff. Starr in other words sounds to me like somebody who has been deputized to go on television and find something good to say - and who is searching for a way to be kind without saying anything affirmatively untrue. So, as Ann Coulter mockingly puts it, he emphasizes "how nice, tidy, helpful, and prompt" Miers is. As tepid as Starr's endorsement was, it is just about the only endorsement Miers has received from any conservative with an established reputation in the law. James Dobson, Charles Colson, and Richard Lane of the Southern Baptist Convention have all endorsed Miers heartily. Good men all. But suppose you needed a lawyer to go to City Hall to fight a parking ticket. Would you look to Dobson, Colson, or Lamb for advice on who to hire? I very much doubt it. You'd ask somebody with knowledge of and experience of the law - right? Choosing a Supreme Court justice is a lot more important than fighting a parking ticket. And yet in this matter, almost all the people whose advice you'd want - the people who told you that John Roberts was an outstanding choice - have gone rather curiously quiet, haven't they? Here's the transcript: COLMES: Welcome back to a special edition of "Hannity & Colmes." ... Joining us now, the dean of Pepperdine University School of Law, Ken Starr. Judge Starr, good to see you. Thanks for being here. JUDGE KENNETH STARR, DEAN, PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW: Good to see you, Alan. My pleasure. COLMES: Do you believe the president when he says she is the most qualified person he could find for the job? STARR: Oh, I think she's terrific. First of all, Alan, I've known Harriet Miers for over 15 years. And so forth. And she was the head of 400 person law firm committee on which I was privileged to serve many years ago. She is enormously talented, and I must say I'm a little bit surprised at some of what I read because those who have dealt with Harriet Miers, at the local level, at the state level, she was elected to local office. And I think they're also not taking account that, for example, William Hubbs Rehnquist, now, of course renowned, and he was, of course, of course, an outstanding chief justice of the United States, went directly to the Supreme Court of the United States from an assistant attorney general position at the Justice Department. She's now counseling the president -- yes, Sean. HANNITY: Hi, Judge, how are you? Welcome back, as always, to the program. Do you have any doubts whatsoever that she's an originalist in the mold of a Scalia or Thomas? You know her. I don't know her. STARR: Yes. I don't, and I'll tell you, Sean, I was very comforted by what she said yesterday when one of the first things that she said. Obviously, she's honored, as any lawyer would be. But one of the things that she invoked was a founding vision of the role of the judiciary. And one of the great and burning issues is who decides these tremendous issues such as the Supreme Court had before today, an end of life kind of issue. I think she means what she says when she says, "I respect the founding vision of a limited judiciary. HANNITY: The president believes that -- because remember, the president ran two elections saying that he would appoint people in the mold of a Scalia or Thomas. And I believe the president believes she fits that bill or he wouldn't have done it. I believe he's a man of honor and integrity. I don't question that in any way, shape, manner or form. I guess what I'm hearing from a lot of conservatives, Judge Starr, is that they feel they've been burned, that there are important questions here. Too much is at stake right now. Seven of the nine justices prior to John Roberts were appointed by Republicans, and many of them were disappointments. And you know, there's no track record here and they are very, very concerned. STARR: But there is a track record of, I think, extraordinary service in the practice of law and in doing things in a way that did... HANNITY: But what is her judicial philosophy? STARR: I think we know that by virtue of the fact that she has been very clear, certainly in her opening statement, or I should say, when she was first asked what does this mean to you? And when she invokes 1787 and 1789, I think that shows us the right kind of instinct. Now has she been a judge? No. But there are many justices of the Supreme Court who have not been judges. And I think we've gotten a little bit overly accustomed, frankly, to say that unless you bring your robe to the confirmation hearing, somehow there's a question about it. But I think we also need to bear in mind she has been the counsel to the president of the United States and served in other very high White House positions. COLMES: We thank you for being with us tonight. Good to see you. STARR: Oh, my pleasure, Alan
Why is every BS alarm in my house going off right at this minute?
If this is representative of Frum's thinking (or lack thereof) on the Miers issue.......
No rational, sane adult would hire a lawyer for a stupid parking ticket!
I used to respect Frum, but this article is causing me to reevaluate.
Frum is a pro-abort. I really have no use for what he has to say.
My biggest problem with the nomination right now is that it has split everybody down the middle. (Sekulow, Dobson, Robertson, FOR) (Noonan, Coulter, Bork AGAINST)(Estrich/Reid FOR)(Feinstein/Cleft AGAINST). Some of the others (Limbaugh) have left some wiggle room but are generally skeptical.
I do believe that killing the nomination and waiting for another one may result in something WORSE. (e.g. Edith Clement or that Hispanic "moderate" lady from California).
We actually have no choice but to trust Bush; because he has to initiate ANY nominee.
Frankly, I'd rather have a good conservative, which Meirs may well be, at least on the social issues that are more important, than a brilliant moderate or liberal. I do believe however, that if she was so politically flexible in the '80's, she may return to that. On the other hand, if Roberts is the real deal, than he and Scalia and probably persuade her better than Stevens and Ginsburg.
One VERY GOOD THING about an SMU grad like Meirs. She is almost certainly impervious to the temptation to yield to "social vanity" put before her by the likes of LAwrence Tribe. I wish I could say the same about Anthony Kennedy, who looked good...on paper.
President George W. Bush gets to pick the nominee and you get to piss and moan.
Harriet Meirs is an excellent choice!
Let The Good Times Roll!
thumbing comes to my mind. of course I am in a big minority here.
Yes, it's anonymously sourced, but I doubt whether Frum would dare tell an outright lie about this. And it's not surprising that it's anonymous, because whoever leaked this would "never have lunch in this town again" if his name were known.
Like the Alberto Gonzales reaction..."I don't like it when somebody talks bad about my friends" or whatever the exact quote was.
Or Lindsey Graham telling conservatives to "shut up."
I'll bet GWB was caught off guard that he may have to listen to his base (although I seriously doubt he will.)
Like the Alberto Gonzales reaction..."I don't like it when somebody talks bad about my friends" or whatever the exact quote was.
Or Lindsey Graham telling conservatives to "shut up."
I'll bet GWB was caught off guard that he may have to listen to his base (although I seriously doubt he will.)
This entire thing is so bogus.
I love it when so called conservatives all of a sudden discover that the only sources they can get to talk are all anonymous. And that doesn't raise alarm bells with ANYONE??
I think it's far more likely that Frum got squeezed out of any significant policy role beyond writing speeches and this is a bit of payback.
I won't believe anything Frum or Kristol or any of they rest of the Whaa Chorus reports "they heard" unless they name some names and those people are willing to back it up themselves.
It's been reported by whom? This sounds like the NYT and their usual sourceless stories.
They've now resorted to making things up out of whole cloth to Bash Miers. Frum is a crumb.
He and Coulter must have read a different transcript of the Starr comments from the one posted here.
The next blurb from Frum will be worse. Count on it. I can almost hear the voice of Jon Lovitz from SNL when I read his stuff.
I trust Bush more than I trust Frum.
"I think she's terrific."
"She is enormously talented."
"There is a track record of extraordinary service."
In fact, this is the least tepid I have ever seen Starr. Frum is a very strange person IMO.
One would hope. I am really amazed how out of control this whole thing has gotten. I mean, I was as PO'd as anybody. And I'm still very doubtful about this nomination. But even I calmed down after a couple of days. But this thing is just feeding on itself.
I'm a Harriet Miers agnostic (at best!) and I think this piece is over the top and ugly.
Frum's showing a side that I, frankly, don't much care for.
To stop Roosevelt's reforms, party bosses had him "kicked upstairs" to the vice presidency under William McKinley, thinking that in this position they could keep him under control.
Roosevelt's efforts helped insure victory for McKinley, who was assassinated one year into his second term in 1901, making "that damned cowboy," in the words of party boss Mark Hanna, President of the United States.
If Andy Card did in fact kick Miers upstairs, she might have a future as a Supreme Court Justice. - Tom
Korsakoff's syndrome?
I'm really surprised at the pettiness of some of this stuff.
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.