Harriet Miers in her Dallas office, 1991 – Chicago Tribune (thanks, Rosemary!)
Are there so many cracks now that Harriet Miers’ nomination may crumble? From George Wills’ condemnation of Bush’s decision-making and choice to Trent Lott’s dismay (calling it a “mistake”) to this — “Cracks begin to emerge in mantle of Republican majority” — just in from John Byrne, publisher and editor-in-chief of Raw Story.
Byrne writes in an e-mail, “The mainstream press has yet to pick up on the fact that Brownback, Lott and Warner are all suddenly challenging Frist’s control of the Senate — which may spell trouble down the road. Meanwhile, the Gang of 14 is meeting at 4:30.”
In fact, the media has featured Trent Lott’s statements before the cameras today — the footage has been replayed hourly on MSNBC and CNN. And Scarborough and others are talking up Brownback’s opposition. (Of course, meanwhile, the increasingly laughable NYT — the paper of record no more? — has done another shoddy job of vetting its source on Miers’ background.)
Byrne has written a fine piece that puts it together for us:
WASHINGTON — It began on a quiet Thursday afternoon in May. Fourteen senators from both parties reached across the aisle to form a pact that ensured that a longstanding rule preserving the rights of the minority party – the Democrats – would survive.
That evening, Republican leader Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN) took to a nearly empty Senate chamber to denounce the deal. His voice was defiant but tempered with defeat – Republicans would not get an “up or down vote” on their President’s coveted judicial nominees.
In retrospect, the deal likely marked the first crack in the levee of the Republican Congress. Since then, a fissure in Senate Republican discipline – paired with the triple indictment of House Republican mastermind Tom DeLay (R-TX) – has sent the conservative caucus spiraling into increasingly entropic waters.
On Tuesday, two leading Republican senators broke ranks. The first was Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KN), who signaled that he might oppose Harriet Miers, President Bush’s nominee to the Supreme Court.
More BELOW:
The second was Senate veteran John Warner (R-VA). Warner openly criticized Frist for stalling the military’s budget bill. For a man known to prefer backdoor channels to bare-knucked politics, the senator’s words rang like an air raid siren through the halls of Congress.
[…]
And on Wednesday, former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-TN) joined in, saying President Bush’s choice for the Court was “clearly not” the most qualified person for the job.
While hardly all-out rebellion, the three senators’ comments may presage unrest to come. As Senate leader, Frist sets the timetable for when legislation is voted on; he is the gatekeeper of the President’s agenda.Frist has prevented a vote on the military budget because he is certain to lose a battle over an amendment authored by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) which prohibits the Administration from employing torture — a measure that President Bush has threatened to veto. …
[…]
Bush’s nomination of his trusted counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court has further illustrated the growing divide in his party. Miers received an “underwhelming” rating from many grassroots conservatives; Brownback is not alone in concerns that Miers may not be the best conservative the President could have selected.
The party is also restive about the budget. Fiscal conservatives are aghast that Bush has presided over the largest increase in government spending in U.S. history. Even the American Conservative Union – on whose board sits Rove ally Grover Norquist – slammed Bush and the Republican Congress for reckless spending in mid-September.
“Conservatives throughout the United States are increasingly losing faith in the President and the Republican Leadership in Congress to adequately prioritize and rein in overall federal spending,” ACU chairman David Keene quipped.
Where Democrats have struggled to maintain party unity, it has been the Republicans’ ability to ensure party fealty that drove President Bush’s aggressive legislative agenda through Congress. Like Democrats, Republicans hold a panoply of differing views on social and fiscal issues, but their ability to vote along party lines has given them the mantle of certainty.
What was once a hairline fracture in party cohesion is now a broken bone. Whether Republicans in Congress can reform a disciplined cavalcade behind the party’s agenda and its leadership – as the Democrats did on Social Security – may be the difference between holding onto the presidency and Congress and losing control in the years to come.
And as for the fourteen senators who held together the filibuster and marked the first crack in Republican hegemony: they’re meeting today at 4:30.
Read all at Raw Story
She may not even make it to the Fab 14. She may be stopped in her tracks in the committe. Can’t just one person put a hold on her and start crying during the meeting for the unborn sperm that is swimming around trying to find an egg to create something that will not be 9 months old if/when it is born but 1 day old? Just wondering if she will make it out of the committe. Can you imagine the Dems screaming that she deserves an “Up or Down Vote”.
If I were she, I’d bow out.
What sane person would want to subject themselves to a Senate grilling for which they are in no way qualified to handle?
It’s crazy.
Cross-posted at DailyKos, where they’re pointing out that O’Connor was once anti-abortion too.
they’re also Recommending a Diary that Reid is ‘brilliant’ for orchestrating all of this via his support of Miers. Utter bullshit, so desperate for Dem leadership they give him credit for something they have zero evidence of and couldn’t be more wrong about.
I’d be willing to bet that the only way she’ll not be confirmed is if the pressure against her causes the Bush regime to tell her to withdraw her name. (I don’t think this will happen, but if she does go down it will be a withdrawl by her, not a retraction of the nomination by BushCo.)
The we’ll get wingnut extremist Luttig as the nominee and the chance to wage the filibuster battle.
Now that Judith Miller has spent time in prison, I’m going to start calling the NYT “The Paper with a Record”.
Sulzberger the younger and Keller are destroying the NYT almost as fast as the Bush regime is destroying democracy in America.
What an strange picture of Miers, like a multiple personality. Scary! and hard to understand looking in from over the ocean.
I think once the Bushista era is over, there will be one winner and that’s Hollywood. So many unbelievable stories to be told and put on the screen.
What an strange picture of Miers, like a multiple personality. Scary! and hard to understand looking in from over the ocean.
If it’s any consolation, it’s equally bewildering from this side to watch Blair, Schroeder, and Chirac.
What an strange picture of Miers, like a multiple personality.
But, it’s soooo “LA Law”!!! Check out those shoulder pads. Hmm? Doesn’t it just scream, “Harriet Miers, you have arrived!”
Thank you! I was thinking 1991?!? That dress is soooo 1989! But LA Law works, too. Obviously, after seeing that dress, this woman’s judgment is not to be trusted.
Gee what would the Republican Party look like ‘cracked’ — kind of like the Democrats, I suspect.
Listen, the Democrats should stop this BS about Miers and come out solidly against her — for crying out loud she’s never been a judge. Sure, there have been Supreme Court justices who had never been a judge before, but they had a few other little things going for them like being constitutional scholars and such. Miers main qualification is that . . . let me think about this a bit, I’ll come up with something that makes her qualified. Oh yeah, I know now: Harry Reid likes her.
I want them to do that too, but I’m hoping the gang of fourteen will do it. There’s something heartwarming about the idea of George having some of his own lock-step marchers turn on him.
Here’s an excellent compilation of web sources for all things Harriet, from The Left Coaster. Check it out, loads of information.
MoveOn referred us to this by Alexander Hamilton, from Federalist #76:
This from Counterpunch:
According to the InterNet Bankruptcy Library (IBL), Locke Liddell & Sapp paid $22 million in a suit alleging it aided a client in defrauding investors. The Dallas-based firm agreed in April of 2000 to settle a suit stemming from its representation of Russell Erxleben, a former University of Texas football star whose foreign currency trading company, Austin Forex International, was a pyramid get-rich Ponzi scheme.
Erxleben later pleaded guilty to federal conspiracy and securities-fraud charges. “It’s a very simple legal proposition: a lawyer can’t help people steal money,” George, of George & Donaldson told reporters at the time. George’s firm had represented investors who lost close to $34 million in Erxleben’s company.
All this was going on while Harriet Miers was co-managing partner of the law firm at the time. Miers denied that settling the suit indicted that they her firm was somehow complicated in Erxleben’s criminal activities. “Obviously, we evaluated that this was the right time to settle and to resolve this matter and that it was in the best interest of the firm to do so,” Miers said.
Make sure you check out this diary with great research from mkt on Miers’ stint as host of the Q & A sessions on the White House website. </blog pimping>
Howard Fineman’s take on Bush’s “Mother Hen” Appointee:
There are a few digs at Georgie in the article, go check it out.