It wasn’t the documents

I can appreciate the spin as much as the next guy, but it’s worth noting that the White House excuse for Harriet Miers’ withdrawal — the dispute over documents — is demonstrably silly.

Bush’s statement this morning explained that 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.” To be sure, that’s the best excuse available, but that doesn’t make it true.

It’s not at all clear that senators wouldn’t be satisfied until they got all the documents. To date, just three senators (Brownback, Graham, and Leahy) had contacted the White House about releasing documents relating to Miers’ work as White House counsel. This wasn’t a constitutional showdown between branches of government; it was a side debate in a broader controversy.

In fact, as Salon’s Tim Grieve noted, just the opposite appears to be true. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, far from demanding open files, was publicly discussing ways to cooperate with the White House to work around possible executive privilege problems.

Granted, the Krauthammer Scenario was a convenient exit strategy, but the fact remains that the White House didn’t expect widespread Republican disgust, didn’t know how to deal with it once it flared up, and ultimately blinked when the GOP base stared the White House down. It is no coincidence that Miers apparently decided to withdraw the same day the right went apoplectic over her 1994 on “self-determination” regarding abortion and school prayer.

The Bush gang will stick to the script — they can’t very well admit they blew it — but the rhetoric won’t match the reality.

There is a lot of coverage of this this a.m. as you all know. What hasn’t been covered (or raised by that dipshit Inscreep on NPR when he was interviewing Brownback) was the whole “up or down vote” demanded the past, what, three or so nominations. No one has the balls to ask them this–“well, you and your party were all clamoring for simple up or down votes, without any real investigation for the last three, why not this one?” And, “you now state that advice and consent means you have to check things out, get a paper trail–why did that not apply in the past and why did you try and deny this Senatorial right when the Democrats were claiming this right?” And, “you chastised Democrats in the past for requesting such documents from the white house and failed to support them, why are you now seeking such things?”

The media is still a bunch of fucking nitwits.

But this is all “background noise”–indictments coming soon.

  • Poor Shruby, Kneecapped with a 6 lb cross. Riding that bike uphill is getting harder all the time.

  • Wonder if they set that whole document thing up. It seems obvious to me that a president’s discussions with his private lawyer are confidential — just as they are for every other US citizen.

  • Comments are closed.