Ken Mehlman held a conference call Wednesday with right-wing bloggers with two goals in mind:

  1. to engage the blogosphere more (like the Dems)
  2. to push the Miers nomination for the SCOTUS

According to some right-wing bloggers who participated, the call was far from impressive. Professor Stephen Bainbridge, a corporate law professor at UCLA (according to his online bio), liveblogged the call and posted his transcript and thoughts online. Even after assurances from Mehlman, Bainbridge is still not convinced that Miers is the person for the job.

See excerpts from his transcript below…
Bainbridge’s thoughts are in parentheses.

11:40 Mehlman established his own credentials as a Federalist Society member

11:41 Miers will not be swayed by the “Georgetown cocktail set.” Mehlman acknowledges that conservatives have been burned by past GOP nominations, but emphasizes that Bush knows Miers better than past GOP Presidents knew their nominees. (But what happens if we don’t trust Bush’s judgment anymore?) Miers was involved in getting people like Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owens renominated and confirmed. (A point in her favor)

11:43 Judicial activism is interfering with the GWOT by “micromanaging” decisions. Miers will be solid on executive prerogative. Acknowledges that she’ll have to recuse herself in some early cases. (Did she support use of torture?)

The “Georgetown cocktail set”? Oh how they hate intellectuals.

Good to see that we aren’t the only ones concerned about whether Miers supported Bushco’s torture policies.

11:46 Questioner asked for concrete evidence she’s a Scalia or Thomas. Mehlman says she is but doesn’t support it with any facts.

“Trust me”.

11:53 Tough question, which is basically how can we trust Bush after he flip-flopped on McCain-Feingold. Mehlman’s answer is that legislation involves compromise, whereas judicial nominees are your legacy. (So what? The President has an institutional obligation to veto legislation he thinks is unconstitutional not to punt to courts.)

Good point, Professor.

11:54 Somebody (I think it was Ed Morrissey) asks why we’re getting stealth candidates when we control the White House and Senate. Mehlman says we’ll get information at the hearings (but what if Miers cleaves to the Ginsburg rule with both hands?)

11:57 The GOP wants to make sure that young lawyers feel comfortable doing things like joining the Federalist Society, but it’s more important to get conservatives on the court. (But if you’re putting forward stealth candidates, doesn’t that defeat the former purpose?)

Good question.

11:58 I get to ask whether Miers’ records on preferences suggests she’ll be more like O’Connor than Scalia or Thomas. Mehlman won’t comment on Miers role, but defends the position the administration took in the Michigan affirmative action litigation. I also comment that Miers needs to be forthcoming at the hearings. Mehlman says she’ll lay out her philosophy, but comport with the judicial code of ethics (which says to me that she’ll pull a Ginsburg and we won’t learn much from the hearings other than how well she can spout platitudes).

Call ends. My mind is unchanged. It was a lot of assurances but not a lot of facts. And facts are what we need.

Mehlman failed. He’s sticking to the administration line and cannot even come up with one thing that would reassure the base. Obviously, that call was a waste of everyone’s time. Others involved in the call were unimpressed as well.

In other news, Pew Research released some poll numbers on the Miers nomination (see more specific details on their site) and those numbers confirm what we already know:

Americans are divided over whether Harriet Miers should be confirmed to the Supreme Court. Based on what they have heard so far, a third say they favor Miers’ confirmation, while 27% are opposed; four-in-ten express no opinion.

40% with no opinion. That’s very telling.

Opposition to Miers is largely partisan, but at this early stage she has not drawn enthusiastic support among conservative Republicans. A narrow majority of conservative Republicans (54%) favor her nomination;

Democrats can win this one with such a slim majority of Republicans supporting Miers. And yes, that begs the question of who Bush might pull out of his cronyism hat next if her confirmation fails. Will he pander to his base and cave by nominating someone more to their taste? The administration has said repeatedly that it will not withdraw her nomination. The hearings are scheduled for December. That’s a long time to do damage control with absolutely nothing to back up the reasons for trusting Bush’s choice. In the meantime, the Dems need a coherent strategy. I’m putting together a diary about that and will post it soon.

0 0 votes
Article Rating