Harriet Miers was behind asserting *'s Const priv secrecy on Roberts recs

[liveoaktx]

http://allianceforjustice.libsyn.com/index.php?post_year=2005&post_month=08

Fri, 12 August 2005
Doc release news
Mildly encouraging news out of the White House yesterday evening: in a letter to Sen. Patrick Leahy, Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, White House Counsel Harriet Miers sets forth a timeline for the release of more Reagan-era Roberts documents. Though this is encouraging, at least two issues of great concern remain.

First, the Bush administration has not backed off from its refusal to release documents from the three-plus years Roberts spent as the Principal Deputy Solicitor General during the Bush I years his most recent and most powerful public policy-making position. Hopefully, today's letter from Judiciary Democrats to Attorney General Gonzales will change some minds.

Second, Miers' letter contains three eyebrow-raising references to a so-called Constitutionally-based privilege, which she says may be invoked to withhold some of Roberts' documents. You can do your due diligence and check for yourself, but the Constitution we've been reading doesn't contain any passages about a presidential privilege to shield information from the public.

[DoYouEverWonder]

1. Talk about a walking bag of conflicts of interest

This nominee should be rejected just on that basis alone.

[AuntiBush]

8. NOW it's time for Dem's to Filibuster!

If ever there was a time, it is NOW!

[maine_raptor]

2. Oh, this will piss off some Senators

"three eyebrow-raising references to a so-called Constitutionally-based privilege"

Even some moderate GOP senators were a little taken back by the WH refusal to release the Bush I docs, wonder how they'll feel when they have to question and vote the one who raised their eyebrows?

[progressoid]

5. Boy, let's hope so. You're more optimistic than me.

I see a bunch of Dems throwing up their hands and saying "oh well, what can we do?"

[Benhurst]

3. Good find, liveoaktx. Not that our "leaders" will have

enough backbone to stand up to her on this.

Recommended.

[SpiralHawk]

4. k and R

[Hepburn]

6. Harriet and *'s NG Records....

Moreover, Newsweek reported on July 9, 2000 that the Bush campaign "launched a secretive research operation designed to scour all records relating to his Vietnam-era service" during preparation for Bush's 1998 re-election campaign. They paid "hard-nosed Dallas lawyer named Harriet Miers" $19,000 to review the records. According to Newsweek, one result of her work was to deflect charges that former Texas House Speaker Ben Barnes helped Bush get into the Texas Air National Guard despite low qualifications and a long waiting list. Barnes was later forced to testify under oath that he helped Bush.

http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=171

IMO, this woman is a piece of shit and not fit to clean the chambers at the SCOTUS.

:yoiks:

[AuntiBush]

9. You're Photo Backdrop "Wording" Says It All!

Pieces of shit: The entire gang!

[AuntiBush]

7. Well...

Isn't it a bit late to investigate Roberts if he's already been voted for? And Miers, well... if all the Democrats don't vote against her, I'm going to start drinking.

Fed-up w/the Corruption of *&CO! Our Dem Senators have to start speaking-up NOW - it's called "SPINE!"

I no longer recognize my country anymore.

[1democracy]

10. Just like the constitutions says

"one nation under God, " according to Karen Hughes. Maybe they both went to some radical school!

[AuntiBush]

12. Really.

Hope someone is keeping track of this gang. They're pile of crap continues to reach sky-high.

[Supersedeas]

11. finding a privilege where there isn't one: Constitutional Activism?