 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:51 pm Post subject: Harriet Miers Withdraws Nomination |
 |
|
From Lucianne.com
Late Breaking News!
Harriet Miers Nomination for Supreme Court Withdrawn
She says she has become a burden to the White House and her nomination is not in best interest of the country.
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9837151/
| Quote: | Miers withdraws Supreme Court nomination
Stunning news in tense D.C.; Bush accepts decision ‘reluctantly’
BREAKING NEWS
NBC News and news services
Updated: 9:41 a.m. ET Oct. 27, 2005
WASHINGTON - Confronted with criticism from both liberals and conservatives, Harriet Miers on Thursday withdrew her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a statement, President Bush said he “reluctantly accepted” her decision to withdraw, after weeks of insisting that he did not want her to step down.
“It is clear that senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House — disclosures that would undermine a president’s ability to receive candid counsel,” Bush said. “Harriet Miers’ decision demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the constitutional separation of powers — and confirms my deep respect and admiration for her.”
Miers’ surprise withdrawal stunned Washington on a day when the capital was awaiting news on another front — the possible indictment of senior White House aides in the CIA leak case.
Miers notified Bush of her decision at 8:30 p.m. Wednesday, according to a senior White House official who said the president will move quickly to find a new nominee.
'Perfect storm'
A White House source, who had been working on Miers’ confirmation, told NBC News that the withdrawal was the result of a “perfect storm” of events — including a call to the White House Wednesday from a conservative Senate Judiciary Committee member who “hoped” the nomination would be withdrawn.
In a letter dated Thursday, Miers said she was concerned that the confirmation process “would create a burden for the White House and our staff that is not in the best interest of the country.”
She noted that members of the Senate had indicated their intention to seek documents about her service in the White House in order to judge whether to support her nomination to the Supreme Court. “I have been informed repeatedly that in lieu of records, I would be expected to testify about my service in the White House to demonstrate my experience and judicial philosophy,” she wrote.
“While I believe that my lengthy career provides sufficient evidence for consideration of my nomination, I am convinced the efforts to obtain Executive Branch materials and information will continue.”
Waves of criticism
Miers’ nomination has been under withering criticism ever since Bush announced her selection on Oct. 3. There were widespread complaints about her lack of legal credentials, doubts about her ability and assertions of cronyism because of her longtime association with Bush.
The nomination drew fire across the political spectrum and caused a rebellion among the conservative core of Bush’s supporters who doubted her qualifications and wanted a nominee who they felt would be a reliable vote against abortion, affirmative actions and other hot-button issues.
On Capitol Hill, there was meager support among Republicans for Miers and her nomination appeared in serious trouble.
Most recently she has been Bush’s White House counsel. Bush said that with her withdrawal, she would remain as counsel. He did not indicate when he would name a successor.
“My responsibility to fill this vacancy remains,” Bush said in a statement. “I will do so in a timely manner.”
Nomination speculation
Before Bush chose Miers, speculation focused on Miers and two other Bush loyalists: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Bush’s longtime friend who would be the first Hispanic on the court; and corporate lawyer Larry Thompson, who was the government’s highest ranking black law enforcement official as deputy attorney general during Bush’s first term.
Other candidates mentioned frequently included conservative federal appeals court judges J. Michael Luttig, Priscilla Owen, Karen Williams, Alice Batchelder and Samuel Alito; Michigan Supreme Court justice Maura Corrigan; and Maureen Mahoney, a well-respected litigator before the high court.
NBC’s chief legal correspondent, Pete Williams, noted that Miers’ decision was exceptional, since only seven of 150 nominations have been withdrawn in the history of the court.
Conservative concerns
Miers had been expected to respond Thursday to a new set of questions from senators after her first responses were criticized by Senate Judiciary chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and senior Democrat Patrick Leahy of Vermont.
The committee had scheduled Nov. 7 confirmation hearings for her, but Specter and Leahy said Miers’ answers to their original questions were “incomplete” and “insufficient,” one of several setbacks Miers faced over her nomination to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
While none of the Senate’s 55 Republicans had announced opposition to her, several groups like Concerned Women of America had called for her withdrawal.
“We believe that far better qualified candidates were overlooked and that Miss Miers’ record fails to answer our questions about her qualifications and constitutional philosophy,” said Jan LaRue, the conservative group’s chief counsel.
The Associated Press contributed to this report. |
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
msindependent
Vice Admiral
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 891
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| well, i guess it's no news that i'm disappointed, mier's deserved better. she didn't receive her right to due process and that's a pity. i'm sure bush will nominate another conservative like mier's is. perhaps this one will have pro-life stamped across their forehead so the easily fooled extreme righties will get it this time. the smearing, coverups and excuses continue and that's uncalled for in my book. let's hope the next one gets an up or down vote in the senate, you know, the way it's supposed to be. we can't have a double standard folks. kudos to lindsay graham, orrin hatch, john cornyn, and kay bailey hutchison for having the guts to not wuzz out. watch for the smear attacks from democrats on these four now. i found a new hero through all this (and a couple of other things currently going on), hutchison is getting my campaign money from now on. to bad she doesn't want to be president. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Deuce
Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 19 Mar 2005
Posts: 589
Location: FL
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The beatings will not stop until moral improves...
dunno what made me think of that old adage from times gone by! In this case it would probably better read "The demonization of conservatives will not stop until liberals get rid of a bush" 
Deuce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
USAFE5
PO2
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 362
Location: Reno Nevada
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think Janice Rodgers Brown should be nominated.
I also like what Rush says GW should do.
_________________
"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I’m here to help." Ronald Reagan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GM Strong
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 18 Sep 2004
Posts: 1579
Location: Penna
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Without trying to make a debate, this was getting to be a stinker. No one was attacking Harriet Miers personally, that is what the ultra left and the Clintonistas do (and don't think the left wasn't planning to trash her). We had a legitimate philosophical discussion and the base made a crackdown(I defer to Rush in his WSJ article). No one disrespected or attacked Harriet Miers. It was a pick made from weakness and the base said no. Never run from a fight when the principle is legitimate. It came down to the fact she was not what was promised and as the vetting went on this was shown to be true. She did the right thing and is respected for it. We elected a Senate majority and put a President in office for among other reasons to make a difference to the Supreme Court. When the mandate is made the people elected need to pay heed. We will support his President to the Max when he is right, but we will let him know when we think he is wrong.
There is no gloating, no smugness. The issue was important enough, the base wan't no more of Souters and Kennedys. We wanted what we voted for. The Court has debased and overreached it's authority and the citizens have had enough.
Now is the time for the fight and the Liberals are scared (make no mistake). With the right candidate the support will be there and the Leftist Liberals will be brought to heel. McCain and the other spineless/wimpy 6 had better take notice with the rest of the gang of 14. McCain will have to forget his '08 aspirations and do his duty to the people who elected him.
_________________
8th Army Korea 68-69 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anker-Klanker
Admiral
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Posts: 1033
Location: Richardson, TX
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | No one was attacking Harriet Miers personally... |
| Quote: | | No one disrespected or attacked Harriet Miers... |
| Quote: | | There is no gloating, no smugness.... |
You can try to rationalize it, your can try to re-spin it, you can deny the ugly scene "the Base" (estimated to be somewhere between 10-30% of right-of-center voters) made, but with all due respect...
BS! BS! BS!
Does anyone realize how dangerously close to an Iranian style of government we have drifted? You know - the one where the President is elected but has no real power unless he kow-tows to the Council of Imams, the keepers of religious purity. (But the far right is in good company; the far left want that form of government, too!) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Navy_Navy_Navy
Admin
Joined: 07 May 2004
Posts: 5777
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| msindependent wrote: | | she didn't receive her right to due process and that's a pity. i'm sure bush will nominate another conservative like mier's is. perhaps this one will have pro-life stamped across their forehead so the easily fooled extreme righties will get it this time. |
I think you're right. There was a lot more to Harriet Miers than readily met the eye. I don't think the President would have nominated her had he not believed her to be a strong Constitutionalist.
And strong Constitutionalists believe that Roe v. Wade should be overturned based on the fact that it was a bad LEGAL decision, not just a bad MORAL decision.
And the moral precept is what all the legal ones are built upon. When our basic right to life is stripped from us, all the other rights are mere discussion points - no more meaningful than tea leaves in the bottom of the cup.
It's not a choice, it's a child. Four thousand of them are murdered every day in this country.
God help us.
I believe that "the base" was horribly wrong on this one. This one was going to slip in under the radar - a nomination straight from the flapping jaws of no less than crazy Harry Reid himself could NOT have failed if "the base" had simply had a little more trust in the President and a little less petulance.
They had a shot at getting a pro-Constitution, (and in all likelihood pro-LIFE) judge into the Supreme Court and they whined and pissed and moaned until she resigned.
You always see that fake Seal of the Democratic Party with the baby crying - well, that's what "the base" was in regard to this nomination. A giant, crying baby.
It's a sad day for pro-lifers.
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SBD
Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 1022
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is from an earlier post about Bush not releasing documents about Miers.
http://www.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=21040
| SBD wrote: | Bush made a mistake with this nomination and it should be withdrawn before things get real ugly. Do we really want to see Dan Rather and Memogate start all over again? Didn't the President know that by nominating Miers, it gives more credence to the allegations that she helped kill the Guard story while at the Texas Lottery and this nomination could be seen as a payback?
| Quote: |
The Dallas Morning News
July 28, 1999, Wednesday THIRD EDITION
SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 23A
LENGTH: 989 words
HEADLINE: Ex-official wants Bush's testimony;
Accusations sur- rounding Guard assignment denied
SOURCE: Austin Bureau of The Dallas Morning News
BYLINE: George Kuempel, Pete Slover
DATELINE: AUSTIN
BODY:
AUSTIN - Attorneys for former Texas Lottery Director Lawrence Littwin want to question Gov. George W. Bush under oath about how he landed a spot in the National Guard at the height of the Vietnam War.
Court records indicate that they are trying to determine whether former Lt. Gov. Ben Barnes, an ex-lobbyist for Gtech Corp., the state's lottery operator, helped Mr. Bush get into the Texas Air National Guard in 1968.
And they are questioning whether Bush allies, in return, helped Gtech fend off efforts by Mr. Littwin that might have upset its lucrative state lottery contract.
Gtech officials have denied the allegations. Mr. Barnes has said he doesn't recall whether his office interceded with the Guard on behalf of Mr. Bush, now the GOP front-runner for president.
Mr. Bush has said he received no special treatment, and spokeswoman Linda Edwards said he would have nothing to add in Mr. Littwin's suit.
"There is no reason for the governor to go to court because the governor was not involved in the Lottery Commission's decision to dismiss Mr. Littwin," she said.
Mr. Littwin contends in his suit filed last year in federal district court in Dallas that Gtech was responsible for his firing in 1997 as lottery executive director.
He said he was let go after five months because of his aggressive investigation of alleged contract violations by Gtech - against the wishes of his bosses on the Bush-controlled Lottery Commission.
He said Gtech also opposed his attempts to encourage competition for the company's $ 150 million yearly state contract.
Gtech officials have denied that. Commissioners said at the time of his dismissal that they had lost confidence in Mr. Littwin.
Scott Levine of Dallas, one of Mr. Littwin's lawyers, has twice notified Attorney General John Cornyn of his plans to question Mr. Bush in connection with the case, according to Mr. Cornyn's office. Mr. Levine did not return several calls.
Ted Delisi, a Cornyn spokesman, said the attorney general will challenge any subpoena for Mr. Bush's testimony.
In documents filed with the federal court, Mr. Littwin accused Gtech of hiring Mr. Barnes to ensure that the company won and kept its contract.
"Barnes . . . is alleged to have helped the current Governor George Bush avoid active duty during the Vietnam War," Mr. Littwin said in the documents.
Mr. Bush, who has faced questions from political rivals about his Guard service, said no strings were pulled. Mr. Bush and Guard officials who approved his application said he qualified for existing vacancies as a jet pilot in a unit based in Houston.
Questions by Mr. Littwin's lawyers about the Guard were prompted by copies of an unsigned letter to federal prosecutors in 1996 that the the lawyers obtained along with other records in pursuing their case.
The letter was sent after the three-member Lottery Commission voted unanimously to extend the Gtech contract for five years rather than seek new bids.
It alleged that Gtech was allowed to keep its contract in exchange for Mr. Barnes not revealing his help in getting Mr. Bush into the Guard. A former top Bush aide who now lobbies for Gtech brokered the deal between the governor and Mr. Barnes, according to the letter.
Both the former aide and Lottery Commission Chairwoman Harriet Miers of Dallas rejected the accusations.
"At no time did the governor request or suggest that I take action or not take action with respect to Gtech," Ms. Miers said.
Mr. Barnes was speaker of the Texas House when Mr. Bush joined the Guard.
In a recent deposition conducted by Mr. Littwin's lawyers, Nick Kralj, a former Barnes aide, spelled out in part how some Texans contacted the speaker's office for assistance in joining the Guard. Such domestic units were seen by many as way to avoid going to Vietnam.
Mr. Kralj, an Austin lobbyist, testified that Mr. Barnes and one of his assistants, Robert Spellings, sometimes passed on to him names of people wanting to get into the Guard.
Mr. Kralj was a member of the Texas Air National Guard and an assistant to the late Gen. James Rose, head of the Texas Air National Guard. Mr. Kralj testified that he turned the names over to the general but did not know whether they were accepted.
Mr. Kralj also said that he couldn't recall any of the names but that Mr. Bush's was not among them.
"I guess the bottom line here we want is that I did not help George Bush Sr. [then a congressman] or George Bush Jr. get in the National Guard," he said during questioning by Mr. Levine.
Pressed further, Mr. Kralj said, "I didn't do it because I think that, you know, it would have been something that I would have remembered. He was a United States congressman. It would have been his son. I think I would have recalled something of that."
Mr. Kralj also said Mr. Spellings sometimes gave him names of people seeking placement in the Guard.
Mr. Spellings, in a telephone interview, said there were no such calls on Mr. Bush's behalf. "I knew everything that was going on in that office, and that didn't happen," said Mr. Spellings, a Austin lawyer.
Mr. Barnes has not been deposed in the case.
As for the lottery dispute, Gtech's contract was about to expire in 1996, and lottery commissioners considered putting it up for bid.
A Gtech rival, Automated Wagering International, said it wanted to compete and asked for more time to prepare a bid. But commissioners instead voted that May to extend Gtech's contract for five more years.
Ten months later, after questions arose about Gtech's business practices, they reversed themselves and decided to take bids. Gtech complained and declined to submit a bid, suing the agency instead.
Automated Wagering and another company did present bids. But lottery executive director Linda Cloud, who succeeded Mr. Littwin, rejected both. That left the business with Gtech, which later dropped its suit.
|
SBD |
Also, this story from the WSJ
Lotto Trouble
The Miers nomination pits a Swift Boat author against a Bush National Guard detractor--in reverse
http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110007431
SBD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GM Strong
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 18 Sep 2004
Posts: 1579
Location: Penna
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Like I said, it was turning into a stinker. Miers did not need to be put through the meat grinder the Libs were preparing and it was apparent. She is too decent a person and was unmatched for the job. She was no Constitutional scholar either. Schmucky Shumer and his hacks were prepared to trash her on several points and it would have been embarrassing.
_________________
8th Army Korea 68-69 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
