Bush Withdraws Miers Nomination At Her Request

by Last Night in Little Rock

This just in from CNN: President Bush has withdrawn the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court at her request. The NY Times article is here:

Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination to be a Supreme Court justice Thursday in the face of stiff opposition and mounting criticism about her qualifications.

President Bush said he reluctantly accepted her decision to withdraw, after weeks of insisting that he did not want her to step down. He blamed her withdrawal on calls in the Senate for the release of internal White House documents that the administration has insisted were protected by executive privilege.

"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 told the president she was withdrawing at 8:30 p.m. Wednesday.

Now we're going to get somebody we really can't stand or Darth Vader, unless "Bush on the ropes" becomes conciliatory because of Rowegate.

Nah. It isn't in Bush's character to be concilitory because he is deluded into believing that he has a mandate.

Update: President Bush in a statement essentially blamed Congress for asking for internal papers Miers was responsible for, and that violated separation of powers, and he commended her for her commitment to separation of powers by withdrawing. Her letter is here.

More update: Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) is speaking on the floor of the Senate about how Miers' withdrawal shows Miers' commitment to protecting executive privilege.

What a crock.

< Fitzgerald Re-Interviews Adam Levine About Rove | No Leaks Announcement Today >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Re: Bush Withdraws Miers Nomination At Her Request (none / 0) (#1)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:26 PM EST
    Say... what's it called when you support one thing and then support another? I'm sure there used to be a word for that, oh, about one year ago...

    I have feared that Miers' was a straw candidate. One calculated to draw attack and then to be withdrawn. The official party line is that Miers' nomination was withdrawn rather than disclose confidential internal memos. A scenario that was forseeable given the President nominated his personal lawyer. I fear, now, that Bush hopes to nominate someone who is a true neo-con (neanderthal?) -- like Janice Brown or Edith Jones -- in Miers' place. Hopefully Patrick Fitzgerald's Grand Jury work investigating the outing of Valerie Plame will knock Bush's game off a bit and prevent this, but I fear we've been played for fools.

    Re: Bush Withdraws Miers Nomination At Her Request (none / 0) (#3)
    by Punchy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:26 PM EST
    We have not been played for fools--Dems had little to do with this withdrawl. In fact, Reid supported her. I can guarentee we'll be seeing the most conservative, outrageously backwards justice in America nominated. You can bet the house on that.

    Re: Bush Withdraws Miers Nomination At Her Request (none / 0) (#4)
    by aw on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:26 PM EST
    I dunno. If there are indictments and and expansion of Fitzgerald's investigation, do you think they will be able to foist another one of their kind on us again? Will the Dems finally find the courage to oppose them?

    Here's the play: Appoint Patrick Fitzgerald to the Supreme Court (get him out of the Special Counsel's office ASAP!) and appoint Harriet Meiers to be Special Counsel! All problems solved!

    Miers was simply not qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. However, that isn't why her nomination failed; it failed because Miers was too pro-choice for the comfort of the mullahs who have veto power over Republican nominations. It is clear that the right wing has a litmus test. So they are now in no position to criticize Democrats for having a litmus test of their own.

    Re: Bush Withdraws Miers Nomination At Her Request (none / 0) (#7)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:26 PM EST
    It looks like Bush got kicked in the *ss by the horse he rode in on.

    My two Harriet Miers theories: 1. Harriet Miers is a strawman appointment with the true dark lord to come. We'll see re: this theory shortly. 2.- and my preference du jour: This was a shameless Bush family power grab for the Supreme Court. Imagine a close family friend who has demonstrated allegiance and no obvious independent thought sitting on the bench. Texas, Florida, the US, Iraq does their hubris know no bounds? Prediction: this is the first of a flood of Bush family patronage payoffs that will stand out for their blatancy and multitude. Couldn't hook up Harriet? I hope the WH didn't read graphicus' post above.

    Re: Bush Withdraws Miers Nomination At Her Request (none / 0) (#9)
    by nolo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:26 PM EST
    I think we're in the middle of a political strategy set up by Harry Reid, and it could be masterful. Remember, Harriet Miers was on the short list of acceptable candidates provided by Reid to the President. And think about it -- Harry was making a great bet. From what I can tell so far, the worst thing that would have happened if Miers made it through the approval process is that we'd have ended up with a pro-business hack with a fairly hands-off attitude about social issues. Whoop de do. The Right, however, was not going to sit still for a non-ideologue, and it's the Right that shot her down. Now, when Bush ponies up some whacko ideologue and the Democrats get feisty (which they now have carte blanche to do), Reid can say that we tried to be reasonable, but it's the nutballs being harbored by the Republican party who are making it impossible. Moreover, the Republicans are going to have a really hard time recycling their cant about "up or down votes" this time. If that's what happens, it will have been a stroke of genius.

    Nah, I just think Dubya, like Poppy before him, has trouble with the "appointments" part of his job. He doesn't like it. He prefers playing the grand chess game -- figuring out which country to invade next. Bush had the same problem with Alberto Gonzales (charges of appoingting friends) and Tricky Dick Cheney (vp candidate who really didn't add anything electorally to the ballot since Wyoming is solid Republican anyway, but was a friend). Remember as well that Poppy picked Dan Quayle to be Veep without vetting, and ran into the same kinds of problems (hugely unqualified candidate for higher office).

    Re: Bush Withdraws Miers Nomination At Her Request (none / 0) (#11)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:26 PM EST
    nolo-I agree about Reid, but
    Now, when Bush ponies up some whacko ideologue and the Democrats get feisty (which they now have carte blanche to do),
    Let's hope the Dems are up to their part in the Reid scheme.

    Re: Bush Withdraws Miers Nomination At Her Request (none / 0) (#12)
    by nolo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:26 PM EST
    I agree, Squeaky. Much will depend on Reid's ability to impose discipline. From TL's more recent posts, it's looking like Reid's teeing the issue up, though. The Right wanted an apocalyptic showdown. Reid's made sure that this administration (not to mention Senate Republicans) will be going into that showdown with weakened shields and very little political ammunition. If Senate Democrats can just keep their s**t together, things might work out ok.

    Nolo/Squeaky: You give Reid far too much credit. Frankly, I don't think the man can think with such depth (though I sure the hell hope he can!). I see this more as the Dems catching yet another incredibly lucky break - on a recent string of very lucky breaks. Now, let's see if they are judicious enough (pun intended) to use those lucky breaks to annihilate The Rovian Machine. I doubt it, if their track record has anything to say about it.

    Re: Bush Withdraws Miers Nomination At Her Request (none / 0) (#14)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:27 PM EST
    I don't know, Lav. Reid may be smarter than he looks. That is a great insight Nolo.

    I would like to applaud regular posters for NOT responding to charley the troll. Reid is certainly smart, and so is Pelosi. When one side violates all semblance of comity in government, when radicals seize control with vote-fraud (of Congress as well), then the inherent flaws in the Congress are shown all too clearly. Anyone with a decent education into US history understands that the Congress has GENERALLY failed to respond to crises on demand. Blaming that on Dems is just scapegoating. OUR SYSTEM has built in weaknesses, and the system depends on fair actors. Once there is a coup, the system breaks down. We elect representatives to work within the functioning system. There are no easy or quick answers to a diseased government. We have to work out our salvation, a bit at a time. Reid called this one perfectly, as is becoming usual for him. Let them fall on their own swords.