Is the other (elephantine-sized) shoe now slowly dropping in the ongoing saga of President George Bush’s generally-panned nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court?
With each passing day, the trend certainly seems to increasingly point towards a bleak or historically unenthusiastic endgame for GWB’s lawyer, whose selection sparked howls of protests from many conservatives who didn’t want a “stealth” conservative candidate and were underwhelmed by Miers’ legal qualifications. To make matters worse, reports suggest that some Senators who met her had the same reaction to the depth of her thought in private conversations.
The saga continues with several key tidbits that should perk up the ears of anyone following this dramatic political tale of a President being thwarted by many in his own party over a nomination not considered bold or solid enough.
First, conservatives are taking to the Internet in a big way, by launching two anti-Miers websites, the Washington Post reports:
Conservative activists intensified their opposition to the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers yesterday, launching two Web sites and planning radio and television advertising aimed at forcing her withdrawal.
The advocacy groups, which had expected to use their vast mailing lists and fundraising networks to support President Bush’s Supreme Court nominees, instead are employing those tools to sow concern about Miers’s conservative credentials and lack of judicial experience among their constituents outside Washington.
The weblog Crooks And Liars characterizes one of the websites as the “nuclear Christians” — Evangelical-oriented GOPers who want a rock-hard conservative nominee and would relish the unleashing of the “nuclear option” by the GOP to eliminate filibusters on judicial nominees.
Then, there’s this post on the great GOP site Red State by Eric, who has good White House sources and often posts solid inside White House info:
RedState is able to report this morning that, very quietly, certain third parties have begun going back through the list of potential judicial nominees at the behest of the White House. Sources tell RedState that while the White House intends to make a public display of moving the Miers nomination forward, the reality of the situation has been conveyed to the President — namely that it is increasingly likely that Harriet Miers will meet a bipartisan effort to block her nomination.
As a result of growing chatter about the nomination, the White House is, as the Washington Times reported, trying to develop an exit strategy. At the same time, the White House does not want to withdraw the nomination without having a replacement close by. Notwithstanding that, the White House is relying on trusted third parties to initially help reformulate a list of candidates that would unite and rally the base.
This will be a fascinating process to watch because if Miers bites the nomination dust and GWB goes for another selection that excites and unites the GOP’s base, that likely will mean more of a “red meat” conservative that could spark a Democratic filibuster, the nuclear option, etc…What will the impact be on Bush’s overall approval rating? And — the biggest question — will the next candidate also be a “stealth” candidate or someone who will proudly state his/her positions? OR: suppose Bush finds another candidate akin to John Roberts? But would conservatives accept that kind of candidate or now insist on an unadulterated hard-line, out-of-the-closet conservative?
You could dismiss this post as just another Internet speculation, except Eric does seems to have good sources in the White House.
And, finally, you have Bush’s comments today:
Recently, requests, however, have been made by Democrats and Republicans about paperwork and — out of this White House that would make it impossible for me and other Presidents to be able to make sound decisions. They may ask for paperwork about the decision-making process, what her recommendations were, and that would breach very important confidentiality. And it’s a red line I’m not willing to cross. People can learn about Harriet Miers through hearings, but we are not going to destroy this business about people being able to walk into the Oval Office and say, Mr. President, here’s my advice to you, here’s what I think is important. And that’s not only important for this President, it’s important for future Presidents.
Writes MSNBC’s Tim Curry:
Bush’s statement sets up a standoff that could sink the Miers nomination — because senators might not be able to determine on what issues Miers worked and thus won’t be able to figure out on what future cases Miers would need to disqualify herself, if she wins confirmation to the high court.
Blogger and law professor Ann Althouse contends this is a clear sign that Bush plans to withdraw the nomination:
I read this as a sign that the nomination WILL be withdrawn: he’s setting up the Krauthammer exit strategy with the documents; he did not address the question that was asked directly; and he fuzzes things over with irrelevant assertions about what a fine woman Miers is…
Conservative columnist Krauthammer has suggested that the President can withdraw the nomination gracefully by saying that since she was his lawyer and the politicos demand documents relating to his attorney-client relationship with her is defending an important legal principle of executive privilege by taking her out of consideration.
And that would fit this White House’s unmistakable modus operandi, wouldn’t it? Never just cut your losses and move on, but construct an alternative explanation that is a bit…ahem…at variance with the actual facts but plays a bit better in the media.
Althouse goes on to write:
I was watching this press conference on TV, and it seemed as if Bush was making a planned withdrawal speech. He hesitated a lot and put his words together carefully. Note that he did not express confidence that she would be confirmed or that she would make a fine Justice. He focused on her general excellence, unrelated to the position she’s been nominated for, and on the Senate, stepping up the pressure to give her a fair hearing — right after turning up the heat about the denial of the documents. It seems as though he wants the Democratic senators to make more of a stink about the documents so that he’ll look more credible blaming them for forcing him to withdraw her name. I’ll bet they are too smart to make that move, though. Let him twist in the wind while they hold their fire until the hearings. Or maybe even — crazily riskily — just go ahead and support her and leave Bush to solve his own problems, without using them for leverage.
She hits the nail on the head AGAIN. It would also fit the modus operandi of this White House to try to blame the sinking of the Miers nomination on partisan Democrats (and liberals), and downplay or completely ignore the fact that many conservatives are clamoring for the nomination to be deep-sixed.
PREDICTION: If Red State’s Eric and Althouse are correct in their analyses, then you might make some money when you’re in Vegas by placing a bet on the Miers nomination eventually sinking in the La Brea Political Tarpit in which it is now stuck. The possible consequences: a more conservative nominee that excites the GOP base and a “blame game” aimed at Democrats for supposedly sinking the nomination just in time for the 2006 elections.
This is unless Miers wows them in her hearings (if it gets that far).
Or unless Bush can come up with another — or clone — John Roberts.
FOOTNOTE: There’s one more factor that can’t be measured yet and it’s entirely speculative (but interesting).
Could there be any possible connection between a White House shift (if one is in fact going on) away from a do-or-die, big push to get Miers on the court and the possibility that some top White House officials could get indicted in Plamegate? Perhaps (and we’ll know more in coming weeks depending on how the nomination and the Plame leak case unfold) some political bigwigs in the White House figure they’ll need their base to weather any indictments, particularly if the argument is made that any officials indicted were victims of an overzealous prosecutor and if charges of perjury are pooh-poohed in spin as trivial.
If Barry Goldwater-descended law ‘n order conservatives are mad at the White House over Miers, they could also be a problem if there are indictments.
So then the question becomes: if Miers is withdrawn and the White House gives them an nominee they love, will conservatives stick to their guns on the same issues that mattered when they swirled around Bill Clinton?
Or, if Miers is withdrawn and they get a nominee they like, will the price of a more acceptable nominee be enough to buy loyalty and adherence to the White House line on any possible indictments?