It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

High Court Nominee Has Never Been a Judge

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 11:33 AM
link   
WASHINGTON - President Bush nominated White House counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court on Monday, turning to a lawyer who has never been a judge to replace Sandra Day O'Connor and help reshape the nation's judiciary.

"She has devoted her life to the rule of law and the cause of justice," Bush said as his first Supreme Court pick, Chief Justice John Roberts, took the bench for the first time just a few blocks from the White House.


www.comcast.net...
 


What the hell? Can she even be a judge without being a judge? Of course she is from Texas.

[edit on 3-10-2005 by SpittinCobra]




posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 12:06 PM
link   
It only tells you how The state of Texas and Bush Texas friends are gaining their place in the white house and in the courts. Its pay back time.


I read some blogs in the Internet that do not talk very kindly about this lady, specially her devoted life, 60, unmarried, no children, may be some skeletons somewhere.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 12:19 PM
link   
"A pit bull in size 6 shoes"


That was then-Governor George Bush talking about the then-chair of the Texas Lottery Commission, Harriet Miers. Today, rumors surfaced that Bush is considering Miers as a possible replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor. Miers currently is serving as White House Counsel, and she has two attributes other than her gender that make her an appealing candidate. First, she is a longtime and loyal confidant of the President. At one time, Miers was Bush's private lawyer, and this profile in WaPo, quoting her former law partner in Dallas, suggests that she had the right stuff:
www.theconglomerate.org...



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Some of her critics believe that she failed as policy understanding in her position next to bush.



"She failed in Card's office for two reasons," the official says. "First, because she can't make a decision, and second, because she can't delegate, she can't let anything go. And having failed for those two reasons, they move her to be the counsel for the president, which requires exactly those two talents."


I guess she in her role as judge with not experience what so ever will be taking decisions not making them because she can not delegate so her vote as a justice could be worst than the O'Connor's was.


www.law.com...



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
I read some blogs in the Internet that do not talk very kindly about this lady, specially her devoted life, 60, unmarried, no children, may be some skeletons somewhere.


external image

The thought of closets and skeletons just can't be ignored... Can they?

Butch Lawyer Monkeys, not just for coaches shorts and mullets anymore...



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 01:12 PM
link   
I read somewhere that she gave money to Gore, for his campaign. Or something.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by cargo
I read somewhere that she gave money to Gore, for his campaign. Or something.


Not that unusual. Odds are she voted for him too. Most Americans did.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
Most Americans did.


LOL, I alomst missed that.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 02:55 PM
link   
dint that Democratic Leader Senator Reid recommended to Bush to pick Miers? its somthing to wonder about.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Here's a little of what MoveOn.org has to say:


Miers is a long-time political appointee, campaign counsel, personal lawyer and Bush loyalist who has never served as a judge.

...vital national positions must be filled with qualified candidates, not political friends with limited experience. With such a thin public record, how can Americans know Harriet Miers' approach to critical issues like corporate power, privacy and civil rights?

...

Here is a quick chronology of Harriet Miers' career, courtesy of the Coalition for a Fair and Independent Judiciary, to help jump start your research.

1970—Graduated from Southern Methodist University Law School
1970-1972—Clerked for U.S. District Court Judge Joe Estes
1972-2001—Joined Texas law firm, Locke, Purnell
1985—Elected president of the Dallas Bar Association
1986-1989—Member of the State Bar board of directors
1989-1991—Elected and served one term on the Dallas City Council
1992—Elected president of the Texas State Bar
1993-1994—Worked as counsel for Bush's gubernatorial campaign
1995-2000—Appointed chairwoman of Texas Lottery Commission by Gov. George Bush
1996—Became president of Locke, Purnell, and the first woman to lead a major Texas law firm
1998—Presided over the merger of Locke, Purnell with another big Texas firm, Liddell, Sapp, Zivley, Hill & LaBoon, and became co-managing partner of the resulting megafirm, Locke Liddell & Sapp
2000—Represented Bush and Cheney in a lawsuit stemming from their dual residency in Texas while running in the Presidential primary
2001—Selected as staff secretary for President Bush
2003—Promoted to Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy
2004—Selected as White House Counsel

There are many important questions that need to be addressed, including:

What policies did she advocate for on the Dallas City Council?

What was her record at the head of the scandal-ridden Texas Lottery Commission?

What cases did she take on while working as a corporate lawyer in private practice, and what positions did she fight for?

What has she written or said in and outside of her law practice about her views on constitutional issues like privacy, the "commerce clause" or equal protection?

As White House councel Alberto Gonzales played a pivotal role in softening America's stance on torture. What positions has Harriet Miers advocated for in the same role?

Has she ever publicly distanced herself from George W. Bush?

...

The Bush spin machine has been prepared for this nomination for some time and is already cranking at full speed. The strategy is to move Miers through as an enigma. We need to make sure the facts about her views are known.




posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 04:23 PM
link   
psyopswatcher

I will like to know also what she did and for who she fought.



Presided over the merger of Locke, Purnell with another big Texas firm, Liddell, Sapp, Zivley, Hill & LaBoon, and became co-managing partner of the resulting megafirm, Locke Liddell & Sapp


As usual Bushes buddies has always been linked to big corporate groups.

Mirthful Me
I almost forgot about our very own Reno.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Not that I necessarily agree or disagree with the decision, but remember, nobody's had the job you appoint them to. She may very well have a lot of the same necessary faculties as a judge simply by being an excellent lawyer for years. Bush had never been a president before, and neither had Clinton, or FDR. Washington didn't even have a country before him. The idea is to pick someone who can rise to the occasion. It's also nice sometimes to get someone who isn't already part of the system.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
It's also nice sometimes to get someone who isn't already part of the system.



"...isn't already part of the system. "


good one!

I agree about 'rising to the occassion'. But in this case, she's a crony and the object is to stack the court with republicans. As Jr's personal lawyer, staff secretary, Deputy Chief of Staff, WH Counsel, she knows where the skeletons are hid and how to keep them that way.

That's what they need, and the sheer audacity of this move is stunning.


Couple more questions from MoveOn:

# What are her views on environmental protections, corporate crime, and the right to choose?

# What else should the public know about Harriet Miers?


Here's mine: What are her views on money laundering, campaign contribution fraud and are there any connections to DeLay's Funnel, Inc.?

[edit on 3-10-2005 by psyopswatcher]



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 06:01 PM
link   
How can you judge on life issues if you haven't really lived a life.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Actually for the looks of Frist and Delay and the on going "struggles" in Texas I would not be surprised if she was part of the bunch too.

And yes, perhaps it would not be so bad taking in consideration that, marriage, children and choices has never been in the lady agenda.

But then again I get the nagging feeling that she is just the bait for what is coming next.

Perhaps the whole point is for her to fail in the appointment and have the ideal choice in the background.

Do I smell Gonzales?



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 06:37 PM
link   
I doubt it Marg, Gonzo's gonna be on the defense end of this play.

With DeLay's indictments that ball of wax could go all the way to the VP office and the Justice Dept to the SCOTUS. They're up to something alright, and I think it's more of the same they dished out to Texas in the 90s--stack the court and rule as they will:

Published on Monday, December 18, 2000
Was the Fix In?
New White House Counsel Accused of Favoritism for Cheney's Halliburton


Corporatocracy indeed.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Well if is not Gonzales who else, Owen, I guess is so many candidates that are out there without a "Traceable" past.


If the democrats are against the women minority, will been against another minority like Gonzales makes them look bad?

I imagine that after eliminating the poor littler lady, it will be not other choice but Gonzales, dirty or not.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I don't like this pick.

Bush blew it. Just like his dad when he picked Souter.

Why not John Ashcroft, Roy Moore, Janice Brown, or any of the nominees that the Democrats tried to fillibuster? I would have picked an "in your face" conservative that the Democrats would have had heart attacks over.

What did he have to lose?

The more I think about it the more disgusted I get.

The White House and the RNC will surely here about this.



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
How can you judge on life issues if you haven't really lived a life.

If you are saying she has no life becasue she is childless and unmarried, I think that is unfair.
She needs to know the law to judge issues. She needs to uphold the Constitution. Whether or not she has a full social life doesn't enter into the equation.

We may not call sinlge women past a certain age spinsters anymore, but the stigma is still there



posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
We may not call sinlge women past a certain age spinsters anymore, but the stigma is still there


Amen sista!


I think people not capable of performing in a job are often the most critical of who gets that job. Experience is experience, and the law is the law. She's not bad JUST because she hasn't been a judge. If she can show herself worthy, then so be it. A number of people obviously think she is.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join