“A pitbull in size 6 shoes,” Bush calls her, according to an MSNBC reporter.1 Harriet Miers is Bush’s nominee for the Supreme Court. Miers is currently White House counsel and, in keeping with the Cheney modus operandi, was charged with presenting prospective SCOTUS nominees to Bush. She is 60 years old and active in Exodus Ministries, a Christian help group for felons.
Update [2005-10-3 12:31:5 by susanhu]: Because the thread here is filling up, I’ve begun a second story above, with Harry Reid’s official statement on Harriet Miers.
What possible strategy can we adopt for this Bushite stratagem? (Miers’ stratagem was not unlike that of clever dictators and ruling class of ancient Rome. Atia lives (!), albeit without progeny, but with the savvy to position herself perfectly before Bush — who really, as she surely knows, can’t see much beyond what’s in front of him anyway — as she discussed possible nominees with him during several White House dinners.)
I suggest we all research her heavily. Given the White House’s embarrassing and shoddy track record of investigating its nominees, we may unearth something that could make a difference. She has no judicial paper trail, so we must look elsewhere.
And, since Miers has never been a judge, tough Senate questioning of her will be difficult because her only record is in the White House, in her performance as a private attorney for clients such as Microsoft and Walt Disney, and in her brief stints in local (city council) and state office. As its chairperson, she was considered a driving force in cleaning up the Texas state lottery commission, and she earned the “pit bull” moniker from then-Governor Bush. The National Law Journal “named her one of the Nation’s 100 most powerful attorneys, and as one of the Nation’s top 50 women lawyers.” Her bio, published in the Washington Post, via the White House, is below the fold.
Legal scholar Jonathan Turley on MSNBC shortly after 6am PT): “No one I know would have EVER put her on the list.”
(Well, Jonathan, except perhaps Harry Reid who reportedly urged Bush to consider her. But was this a White House leak? Was it another Rovian strategem to get us Democrats off to a flat-footed start? Will Harry let us know soon? Or perhaps Reid has had dealings with Miers that impressed him? Update [2005-10-3 12:43:8 by susanhu]: See Reid’s statement above.] And Turley has never met her?)
Turley continued, “The people who should be most aggrieved on this should be conservatives.” The George Washington University law professor and MSNBC analyst named several distinguished conservative judges, and commented, “These are people who were bright stars of the right .. and Bush walked past them and picked a personal attorney. It’s also a problem for Democrats like Patrick Leahy who voted for a person [Roberts] who danced around questions about his decisions [which, by inference, Miers needn’t because she’s never been a judge].” (See Ezra Klein via Daou Report: “The Right is ready to jump off a cliff.”)
As for Sen. Leahy’s “[unreasonable] leap of faith,” well, I suggest that we first consider history. Any frank disclosure of the views of judicial candidates ended with Bork. No SCOTUS candidate in his/her right mind would openly reveal his or her views before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Sen. Leahy knows that.
Turley, on the court’s current cases: “It is a mess. Miers will vote on cases before the court this term (?) … her votes could be negated, challenged … a logistical mess.” There was no follow-up question, so I’m unclear what Turley meant.
In a tape of Bush a half hour ago, he announced that she “will not legislate from the bench.” Prior to Bush’s announcement, her name was brought before a group of Senators. Miers herself said that she has great respect for the legislative branch.
Adds Wonkette via The Daou Report:
“For an instant, we thought there might be more to Miers’s rehabilitation — Bush mentioned her work with ‘Exodus Ministries’ in his nomination speech. But it’s NOT that Exodus (‘Freedom from homosexuality through the healing power of Jesus Christ.’), it’s Exodus Ministries who ‘encourage ex-offenders [and] empower them to become self-sustaining, productive, Christ-centered members of society’. Whew. [Law Dork]”
BELOW, the bio. See also: Monday Morning Horrorshow, by Brinnaine, who discusses Minority Leader Harry Ried’s views on Miers.
____________________
1 The MSNBC reporter apparently grabbed that sound bite from the title of this Sept. 27 article, “‘A pit bull in size 6 shoes’,” forwarded to me by Sybil.
Ms. Miers received her bachelor’s degree in Mathematics in 1967 and J.D. in 1970 from Southern Methodist University. Upon graduation, she clerked for U.S. District Judge Joe E. Estes from 1970 to 1972. In 1972, Ms. Miers became the first woman hired at Dallas’s Locke Purnell Rain Harrell.
In March 1996, her colleagues elected her the first female President of Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell, at that time a firm of about 200 lawyers. She became the first female to lead a Texas firm of that size.
Locke, Purnell eventually merged with a Houston firm and became Locke Liddell & Sapp, LLP, where Ms. Miers became Co-Managing Partner and helped manage an over-400-lawyer firm.
Ms. Miers had a very distinguished career as a trial litigator, representing such clients as Microsoft, Walt Disney Co. and SunGard Data Systems Inc.
Throughout her career, she has been very active in the legal community and has blazed a trail for other women to follow.
* In 1985, Ms. Miers was selected as the first woman to become President of the Dallas Bar Association.
* In 1992, she became the first woman elected President of the State Bar of Texas. Ms. Miers served as the President of the State Bar of Texas from 1992 to 1993.
* She played an active role in the American Bar Association. She was one of two candidates for the Number 2 position at the ABA, chair of the House of Delegates, before withdrawing her candidacy to move to Washington to serve in the White House. Ms. Miers also served as the chair of the ABA’s Commission on Multijurisdictional Practice.
On numerous occasions, the National Law Journal named her one of the Nation’s 100 most powerful attorneys, and as one of the Nation’s top 50 women lawyers.
Ms. Miers also has been involved in local and statewide politics in Texas.
* In 1989, she was elected to a two-year term as an at-large candidate on the Dallas City Council. She chose not to run for re-election when her term expired.
* Ms. Miers also served as general counsel for the transition team of Governor-elect George W. Bush in 1994.
* From 1995 until 2000, Ms. Miers served as Chairwoman of the Texas Lottery Commission, a voluntary public service position she undertook while maintaining her legal practice and other responsibilities. When then-Governor Bush appointed Ms. Miers to a six-year term on the Texas Lottery Commission, it was mired in scandal, and she served as a driving force behind its cleanup.
Ms. Miers came to Washington D.C. in 2001 and began a period of distinguished and dedicated service that continues today.
* She was appointed to be Assistant to the President and Staff Secretary on January 20, 2001.
* In 2003, Ms. Miers was promoted to be Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff.
* Ms. Miers has served as Counsel to the President since February, 2005.
She is single and very close to her family: two brothers and her mother live in Dallas and a third brother lives in Houston.
(Source: The White House.)
On ABC this morning, they quoted her as a standout in the administration for her loyalty to George Bush, as evidence by her earlier statments that he was the most brilliant man she had ever met.
We are so screwed.
Apparently she doesn’t get out often enough. Democratic senators, here’s your cue to start screaming!
Those statements are prompting my more serious investigation of expatriation today.
Want to come to Finland with us? Sven is getting info. for me (we wouldn’t be able to go anywhere for at least a year, but the hub is intrigued with the whole idea!)
š
Can we at least visit? We promise not to stay long!! :<)
Have you looked at Margarita Island, Venezuela? Reading Hugo’s speeches will inspire you.
to make THAT assessment!
Argh!
The Book of the Courtier by Castiglione.
How is he so sure about her shoe size? What other of her sizes is he so sure about? Oh God, what if he is a foot fetish dude!
Reid has already fucking capitulated:
Yepper — nice, eh?
Susan, is there a way for you to incorporate my diary and the comments there into this one? It looks like we were typing at the same time…if there is, I’ll delete mine!
š
It is fucking outrageous…
Miers’ selection, or Reid’s apparent encouragement of her selection, or …?
…both.
Sure will! I looked through the recent diaries at 6am to make sure I hadn’t duplicated anyone — just looked at the titles, of course, because that was all the time I had* — but didn’t spot any. (Maybe add Miers’ name to your title?)
…..
*I had just gotten up, dashed through a story, then peed, then made coffee, then addressed cats who are hanging around me demanding attention …
Why is it dark outside?
I won’t say I told you so,
“We know even less about Harriet Miers than we did about John Roberts”
but I told you so.
In all seriousness, the standard has been set to disclose as little as possible to the American public for nominations, campaigns, etc. Who cares what you think?
Quoting from a comment at dKos:
“Dick Durbin this morning on WGN Radio said that HArry Reid suggested her to the President last week somewhat tongue in cheek. He said something to the effect of “Hey, remember how Cheney couldn’t find you a VP that you liked, so you just appointed him? Why don’t you give the job to Harriet?”
Apparently Bush looked at him like he had never thought of that.”
And Bush is the most brilliant man Harriet has ever met? No wonder she never married…
“We know even less about Harriet Miers than we did about John Roberts and because this is the critical swing seat on the court, Americans will need to know a lot more about Mier’s judicial philosophy and legal background before any vote for confirmation,” said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Judiciary Committee.
The 2nd act sounds identical to the first act. She’s confirmed. We’re screwed.
(I just edited my piece, and added the following.)
Harry Reid… reportedly urged Bush to consider her.
But was this a White House leak [this morning]?
Was it another Rovian strategem to get us Democrats off to a flat-footed start?
Will Harry let us know soon?
Why I am apt to believe this is because in the case of Roberts…. it was LIEberman (the real minority leader) who short listed Roberts as “confirmable”…
They are getting so good at their public Kabuki Hearings that no one wants a surprise ending.
I’m apt to perhaps believe it only because Reid has undoubtedly had dealings with her because of her positions in the WH.
Still … isn’t is STRANGE TO YOU how this SINGLE statement supposedly from Reid is ALL that is coming from the Democrats? And no Democrat, that I’ve seen, has gone on camera yet?
That’s what makes me wonder if the WH whispered that in some reporters’ ears this morning, to get the Democrats off any game plan.
I think it is true but they undercut the dems ability to “get their story straight”… for some odd reason it is only the Dems in DC who think that the GOPers “play fair”.
I heard Chuck Schumer on NPR this morning breathing a sigh of relief saying something to the effect, “Day one of this process is looking good”; meaning they were expecting much, much worse of a nominee.
grrrrrr
PARKER! I went to Reid’s site and grabbed his statement. I couldn’t believe it was up already. Above this story, it’s there — in all its laudatory glory.
(Please don’t explode. I LIKE YOU!)
any involvement in the Plame affair? After all, she is counsel to the president.
Is it just me, or does Bush take great pride in nominating people for national versions of a position which they have never held at any lower level than that?
Loyalty goes a long way in his kooky little mind.
Has she at least run a horse racing business into the ground?
a 28 year stint with the Texas Lottery Commission count? Someone, anyone, please tell me that I read that wrong in the bio up above…
Roberts breezed through confirmation with nary a whif of discontent. We knew precious little about his personal beliefs and they just gave him a pass. Why wouldn’t Bush try that again? This dame thinks that Bush is a genious, huh? If Democrats roll over on this one, I swear, I will consider changing parties and I’ve never said those words out loud before.
If Democrats roll over on this one, I swear, I will consider changing parties and I’ve never said those words out loud before.
Start thinking about it as she was on the Dem short list of confirmable candidates.
I think I’m going to be sick.
My only hope is that with the obviously pure cronyism involved – maybe they did another Bernard Keryk (SP?) on this one. Any possibilities here?
the one who vetted SCOTUS nominees for the ‘rez — kinda like Cheny picked himself for VP after being asked to scout for possible VP candidates for 2000…..
it never fucking ends.
Everything ends sometime. Some things just end badly or horribly and some things end on a good note and some things just end.
The people who should be most aggrieved on this should be conservatives
This was the same shit they said about Roberts…remember…”He can’t be so bad because the Redstaters have their panties in a twist over him”.
They “thought” Roberts was not convervative enough to take O’Connors place but he was suddenly acceptably conservative to take arch conservative Renquist place as Chief Justice.
Frankly, since we have unofficially become a one party nation… Redstater’s Kabuki dance is just performed to help the Democratic leadership get the Democratic base on board for another eventual capitulation…
Redstaters follow orders much better than the left’s blogosphere…perhaps it is because the GOP leadership panders to their base whereas ours can’t wait to sell us off.
As an attorney, I cannot help but look at this resume and question whether it meets a bare minimum of for an attorney to qualify for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.
That is not to say she is not a distinguished lawyer. But aside from being a personal friend of the President, I don’t truly see her qualification for the bench.
It seems to me that Bush has nominated two Trojan horses for the Supreme Court this year. Once confirmed, I would expect them to drop from their hiding places and sack any modern interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. I fear for a woman’s right to choose, a citizen’s right to be free from unreasonable searches, an accused’s rights to counsel and a trial, and a government that will be entangled with religious expression.
Time will tell. There have been pleasant surprises in the past, where Justices have turned out far different than would have been expected. I just don’t see it here.
I was raised and educated in a Country that took a relatively expansive view of civil liberties. I greatly fear that I shall now live, and die, in a Country that takes a far, far more restrictive view.
As an attorney, I cannot help but look at this resume and question whether it meets a bare minimum of for an attorney to qualify for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.
= ‘quaint’
Your game was close yesterday. Hope you had a good time. Hey, when’s your book coming out?
Ugh! Next to waking up in the morning to find Bush was being handed an election rightfully won by Gore, there was no worse feeling than watching my Spartans squander away a season. Ugh! I need to come to a great restaraunt with awesome service, and not act like a total dick.
Book coming soon. I will surely keep you posted.
Good e-seeing you Ryan.
BostonJoe — as an attorney — can you look in my story at what Turley said about this appt. possibly creating a mess for the current session of the SCOTUS, and tell us what he might have meant?
Unfortunately, his interviewer didn’t ask him to expound.
(Any other attorneys: Please also pipe up.)
I wrote comment before I read Turley’s remark. Not sure, but I will look at what you are saying and comment.
your Turley quotes. I am puzzled by these comments. Sorry I am no help. I respect Turley as a legal mind. I find him to be rational most of the time, though I don’t always agree with him. I am simply unfamiliar with any reason why an appointment and confirmation in mid-term would call into question later rulings by the justice. Without going to the text of the Constitution, I can recall no explicit prohibition, or timing requirements in that document, which would create such an issue.
A speculation — because she is currently Bush’s White House counsel, there are potential conflicts of interest with cases now before the Court where she is/ or has advised the President. Also, in future cases that might go before the Court (I speculate Bush v. Fitzgerald, in an abundance of hope). If she has advised the President, then she couldn’t/shouldn’t sit on that case. Of course, who is going to stop her. Is the Senate going to impeach her. They didn’t bat an eye when Scalia refused to step aside on his hunting-buddies case.
Just random thoughts. I really am not sure what Turley was saying, and I would suggest that he is a better lawyer than I.
If you do want to hear something scary about Miers, check out this entry by the National Review’s David Frum on 9/29, who’s queasy about the possibility of Miers as a Justice:
Attytood also has some interesting background on Miers. She knows all the inside dope re: Chimp and his National Guard “service.”
Early Freeper reaction…
Freepers get “Talking Points”…
They performed the same Kabuki dance about Roberts not being conservative enough for O’Connors post…until he was nominated for arch conservative Renquist’s post and suddenly he was conservative enough…
The GOP has mastered reverse psychology on Democrats…
Oh CRAP–FUCKED AGAIN
Pitbull is certainly an accurate description of her looks.
hee-hee
.
As a lawyer in Dallas, Miers became president in 1996 of Locke Purnell, Rain & Harrell, a firm with more than 200 lawyers where she worked starting in 1972. After it merged a few years later, she became co-manager of Locke Liddell & Sapp.
Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell have given at least $65,000 to Bush campaigns and are major backers of tort reform.
One case involved a unique law – passed under former Gov. George Bush – that blocked Texas consumers from recovering $6 billion in overcharges on car loans and allowed dealers to keep kickbacks secret. Two consumer groups have called on the Texas Legislature to repeal it. Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell were defendants of the litigation, which included auto dealers in Texas.
Miers was also Chairwoman of the Texas Lottery Commission and responsible for a chain of events involving GTech, which ran the Texas Lottery, former Lt. Governor Ben Barnes, and accusations of kick-backs and illegal contracts. Yes, that Ben Barnes, who says he helped George Bush get into the National Guard. His original deposition on that subject was given in 1999, during this Texas Lottery Commission investigation, and has been permanently sealed.
Nomination for SCOTUS
In the last 36 years, four Republican presidents have appointed seven of the nine justices, and yet this court, when it comes to social issues like school prayer, gay rights, abortion and affirmative action, has largely sided with liberals.
▼ ▼ ▼
.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) …
to advise Harriet Miers?
▼ ▼ ▼
“Longtime Confidante of Bush Has Never Been a Judge.” This is a joke or a bad dream. Maybe I am still asleep and dreaming. This makes no sense. It is like nominating your personal accountant to be Treasury Secretary.
I’m throwing up stuff as I run across it … and you’ve all added quite a bit.
Oui, your stuff shocks me.
Reid shocks me too.
PARKER & OUI — Have you read the August piece on Reid in The New Yorker? Harry’s kids are lobbyists in D.C., lawyers in Nevada who do deals that help out other kids … etc., etc.
(Harry argues that he carefully separates himself from all of that. But, the business and ruling class do not see the world as the rest of us . It’s just that simple, I fear.)
I just emailed Harry Reid and told him that I hope he goes public immediately and lets us know where exactly he stands, because the rumours are flying that he recommended her to Bush. I hope the version where that was just a tongue in cheek remark will turn out to be true.
Jeffrey Toobin on CNN this morning said that he attended a ceremony at the Supreme Court for Roberts this morning. He laughed when he said that 98% of the people there feel that they are more qualified than Harriet Miers. I’m getting more outraged by this nomination by the minute.
A Plan for the Democratic Senators
We already know how this is going to go, but for heavens sake could you at least make the most of this situation?
Some of you are going to pull your typical “we don’t want to appear mean“, “its the president’s perogative” typical abrogation of your duties as people elected to represent US.
Some of you are going to you going to play your “talk tough, but confirm anyway”, practicing the recent Democratic strategem of “look tough but fair” while not actually taking any real risks.
And some of you will do the right thing. Thank you.
But you’re all probably going into this thinking “There are 55 Republicans, we don’t want to filibuster and appear ‘obstructionist’, so what can we really do?”
Here’s what you can do
Either she’ll be so flustered as to spill details, or she’ll mum up, and the American people will start to wonder “hmm, what is the answer to that question? Is she hiding something?” This is your chance to frame the debate, the White House, and the Republicans
If you’re lucky, your colleagues across the isle will make the mistake of rallying around the President, tying their fates to his sinking Administration. What better gift could you give yourselves for 2006?
If you don’t feel you can take down a weak nominee, at least get started on taking down a WEAK ADMINISTRATION
Drinking it while reading the screaming howls coming from the anti Roe vs. Wade portion of Bush’s base. Mmmmmmmm, it’s good to the last drop! What’s that you say? You have had it with these guys? No more money to any of them? You aren’t going to show up at the polls in 2006? Dear God, he is going to have to promise something here and if he does overturn Roe vs. Wade in 2006 he dumps all of his moderate Repubs who will get a cold slap in the face because they do exist out there who firmly believe that he would never do such a thing. Otherwise he dumps the religious right portion of the Repub base…….I think the Repubs are fucked for 2006. He used this wedge issue to create a larger base for himself, but people want pay off now and if he pays he is going to piss off a lot of that base and if he doesn’t pay he is going to piss off a lot of that base. He has been deliberately absent in the abortion fight except for late term abortions, but the polls show that most people find late term abortions offensive so he was safe there and he used that whole late term thing as show time and a carrot on the stick for the religious right! Gee, if you want to blindly follow the Republican party robotically and play the stupid slut please stop whining when they use you like a dirty whore!
play the stupid slut please stop whining when they use you like a dirty whore!
Too funny, I almost made a similar comment earlier this morning…I wonder where I had heard that before? š
This seems like an idiotic choice no matter which side you’re on.
mixed up on his dog breeds also or he only looks at her bio retouched photos and never looks the woman dead on face to face or eye to eye. I’m not so sure that she is much of a pitbull when she isn’t retouched. I think she is more of a Shar-Pei.
Shar-Pei
Pitbull
No that is just mean… hehehe…
I think you’re right, and pitbulls are better looking than poor Harriet.
When I saw him making the announcement and her in the background, I thought, God, who is that scary looking woman in the background? When I heard she thought George was brilliant, I shrieked…
Ooh, the most brilliant man I’ve ever met.
But then again, there’s that Bolton guy.
No, no. Dear Leader is my man.”
—
that there is no way Laura has been doing much with his dick……not Cheney you guys…….his other dick. I think this is the bootypoodle. Oops, I mean the bootypit! She looks like she is on pins and needles waiting for that Liv-a-snap. I mean come on guys……she does!
I started looking around the net for info and found this-kind of interesting:
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/local/12422587.htm
So,with that and the involvement with the National Guard paper purge I guess she would have some leverage?
Theme of the next senatorial drive-by at dkos.
Another nail in the coffin of corporate seizure of the United States.
Ah Jeez. Where to start.
Read her resume and every attorney knows what she is. Never wrote an opinion in her life. Never been out of the air conditioning. ABA big firm suckup. Has never represented a person who didn’t have a corporation, and damn few of those people.. Represented Big Corporates. Pioneer woman in corporates–almost certainly more corporate than thou. Never been on the street or out on the breezeway bullshitting with the other attorneys and hearing the stories. Never represented an old lady or an unwed mother or a suburban homeowner with a land title problem or a car accident victim or ….. Never been a Law School professor who wrote a book. Never tried a case. Shit, shall I go on?
Politics. North Dallas Republican. nuff said.
George’s paperwork dragon.
Aww !@#$%^&*
Pretty darn good rundown …
one quibble: “Never tried a case.” She was known as a highly capable litigator. (Or did she settle all litigations out of court?)
Yep, you’re right. I left out ‘misdemeanor’. She was a litigator of the high civil type.
We don’t know anything about this woman and we’re already against her confirmation. Do we think we’re gonna get a pro-choice, anti death penalty progressive out of Bush if we just hold out long enough?
I don’t like the fact that not having a “paper trail” seems to be a prerequisite for nominees these days, but that doesn’t change the fact that we don’t know enough about this person yet to advocate rejection.
We should all slow down and take a deep breath – and the remarks about her looks don’t cover us with glory either.
she looks more like a Shar-pei than a Pitbull….and she so adores W I think she is the bootypit or is that spelled booteypit? I also said that it is awfully funny how certain he is of her shoe size, I mean look here…..my husband doesn’t know my shoe size and I could tell him every morning for the next 20 mornings and he probably still wouldn’t know it if someone didn’t tell him there was a test at the end. I’m not sure that that can all be classified as rejecting her, maybe that I could be biased but not rejection.
Oh, please. How is anyone supposed to take any of this seriously anymore? Bush’s personal lawyer who says he is the most brilliant man she’s ever met for Supreme Court. The democrats singing her praises — she’s a lock and we have to live with it for the rest of our lives. What else is there to do BUT mock — our whole system of government (and i use that term loosely) is a SHAM!
I agree with this wholeheartedly:
The problem is, if we opt out, all that’s left is them.
Look here
She sounds like a true fundamentalist, according to this guy on Free Republic.
Translation: she’s in favour of neutering the Supreme Court, and minimizing its ability to rule on constitutionality issues. Given the language, she’s very probably a small government arch-conservative, and will seek to augment the power of the legislative and executive branches in the social realm while limiting it in the economic.