Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senators Say Miers' Answers Insufficient ("incomplete to insulting.")

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:45 PM
Original message
Senators Say Miers' Answers Insufficient ("incomplete to insulting.")

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1230623

Senators Say Miers' Answers InsufficientSenators Demand More Information From Miers Before Hearings; Leahy Calls Responses 'Insulting'

WASHINGTON Oct 19, 2005 The senators in charge of Harriet Miers' confirmation are demanding more information from her before hearings begin, one describing the Supreme Court nominee's answers so far as "incomplete to insulting."

...

Miers returned a 57-page questionnaire to the Senate answering questions about her legal career and background and such issues as how she would deal with court cases involving the Bush administration if confirmed as the replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Specter and Leahy said both Republicans and Democrats on the committee felt she did not tell them enough.

"The comments I have heard range from incomplete to insulting," Leahy said.

"Senator Leahy and I took a look at it and agreed that it was insufficient," Specter said.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
soleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. I hope Sandra Day O'Connor didn't have any travel plans
cause she's going to be sticking around for a while yet
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deadparrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:48 PM
Response to Original message
2. Maybe because she's clueless?
The woman has no idea what she's talking about, I'm sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. And maybe because her qualifications are incomplete and insulting? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
journalist3072 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. You just hit the nail on the head!! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tight_rope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
35. Ding! Ding! Ding!....We have a win! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kostya Donating Member (769 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. She filled out the questionairre with her STAFF present, so
they are all clueless or covering up, trying to pull a Roberts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
39. guess her crash course on Con Law
hasn't taken root yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alien8shon Donating Member (9 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
3. Arlen "Magic Bullet" Specter's Standard of Proof....
Should be low enough for Mike Brown to pass it.

And Myers ain't making it over that huge, carpet-ripple-like hump?

Wow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurgherHoldtheLies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Sorry, totally disagree.
Specter was precise and relentless on the stari decisis (legal precedent) issue with Roberts.

And don't forget, it was Specter who kept bat-shit crazy Bork off the court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurgherHoldtheLies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
4. INCOMPLETE on the written exam?!?!?!?
Geez, I expect an F-minus when Specter and Leahy grill her in the judiciary committee.
:spray:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. Specter
If there is one person in the world I'd hate being grilled by, it would be none other than the former prosecutor, now respected GOP Senator Arlen Specter. He is one mean assed SOB when he cares to be. I must admit I've always like Sen. Arlen Specter even though I know he is a Republican. He is one of the few "old school" Republicans to be found IMO. :toast:

They had a whole documentary on about Sen. Specter's life a couple of years ago and I was very impressed by him and his life (which has been no piece of cake by a long shot btw).

So grill old Harriet the stupid incompetent * loving right-to-life know nothing, never read a book idiot good until that grilling scathes her sorry incapable ass!

:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunny planet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. Yes, and remember when the * crime family and Frist took him behind
closed doors and worked him over right after the election, threatening to not allow him to chair the Judiciary committee because he had had the nerve to say * shouldn't appoint extremist judges. I think Ol' Arlen is going to be very happy to grill whatever picks Jr. has made because he's pissed about how they treated him then when they thought they were omnipotent. Seems like post-Katrina, post-Plamegate, post-Delay indictment, post-Fristula SEC investigation, the moderate leader of the Judiciary commmittee just got a whole lot more mojo to mess with non-moderate nominees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canadian Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. I wonder if they marked for spelling and grammar? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. And that was for the 'take home' portion of the test!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurgherHoldtheLies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Bwahahahaha!!!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #4
58. How come the rest of us don't get Mulligan's on written exams?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Burried News Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
5. From the men that accepted Bush's rationale for war in Iwreck?
Boyz you are all so past getting insulted ...

And George - leave it for the next Prez to nominate a suitable candidate.

Empire of the Petulant

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MGKrebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
8. "...court cases involving the Bush administration"
I like the sound of that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 04:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
LevelB Donating Member (181 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
12. This is gonna leave a mark :)
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kipling Donating Member (929 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
17. Hohoho! That political capital is starting to go into the red.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
19. How do you insult someone in the Senate these days? They've sunk so
low it seems impossible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. Maybe something like
N/A to a dozen or more questions. Followed by the asterik * ( I don't have to answer that, George Bush told me so)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zara Donating Member (470 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
20. Is blood in the water (wounding Bush) or a "moderate" more important
Taking her out could mean worse for the Supreme Court. But what an opportunity to defeat his crony, and show all the B.S. behind the Republicans fealty to the President's choice.
Issue is, short term gain versus long-term harm if a more radical right winger gets on the court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blasphemer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. An independent thinker is essential
Edited on Wed Oct-19-05 08:14 PM by Blasphemer
She is a radical right winger so I don't think it gets much worse on that front. I don't think she can change as a Justice because she's clearly not an independent thinker. Her votes would undoubtedly line up with Thomas and Scalia and she'll be looking to them as her guides. We will get a right winger but I hope this nomination dies so that we can at least get one who has shown that they have a mind of their own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
21. When does B*** submit his 57 page questionnaire?
1. "What I did on summer vacation."
2. "Dirt biking for beginners."
3. "Suiciding Detractors."
4. "How to make people think you're in charge."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McKenzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
23. Senators Say Miers' Answers Inadequate
Edited on Wed Oct-19-05 09:14 PM by McKenzie
<snip>

WASHINGTON - The senators in charge of Harriet Miers' confirmation are demanding more information from her before hearings begin, with one lawmaker describing the Supreme Court nominee's answers so far as "incomplete to insulting."

</snip>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051019/ap_on_go_su_co/mier... ;_ylt=A0SOwlSI7lZD9j4BSB2s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-

<edit>minor typo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-19-05 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. My dad just called me with this.
He sounded so excited. I hated to tell him I had already heard it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClintonTyree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
26. Her entire nomination is incomplete to insulting.......
it's been the worst thought out (if indeed there was any thinking involved at all) in the history of the Supreme Court. It just further proves that when the fake cowboy/president makes decisions on his own the outcome is disastrous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicaholic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
27. She has a lot to hide, ie, being unqualified...or is that nothing to hide?
If she has no answers and is completely unqualified then she filled out the questionair to the best of her ability.

Obviously her ability is incompetant and lacking in the basic skills it takes to be on the United States Supreme Court. That's fine. Lets just move on.

If you sent in an incomplete resume for a job would you get the interview? No. Lets not spend tax payer's dollars on her, she obviously doesn't want to put in the time it takes to do the job adequately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VegasWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
28. I found her response to Question 28b particularly troubling;
Q: Who are your favorite philosophers?
A: George W Bush and Jesus Christ.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #28
33. That's funny
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ckramer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
29. Senators demand details from Miers
Calling her responses "inadequate" and "insufficient," the top Republican and Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee took the highly unusual step Wednesday of asking Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers to redo significant portions of the questionnaire she had submitted to the committee just a day earlier.

link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
30. With Harry Reid on the case
Why would ANY nominee bother to give straight answers or turn over documents?

I sure as hell wouldn't if I thought the Dems were going to roll over- like they have every time before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gronk Groks Donating Member (582 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #30
52. Harry is smarter than you think...
...put his arm around her and said it was a 'good' choice. That was the 'kiss of death' to the conservatives. Remember, if the reThugs all voted together they could get a ham sandwich to sit on the supreme court.

No one in the mis-administration ever saw him put the knife in her back. Not bad for a miner's kid. Do NOT underestimate Senator Reid; toughest SOB with a politician's smile you ever met.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #52
56. Be nice if you were right, but
Edited on Fri Oct-21-05 12:58 AM by depakid
His record shows otherwise.

He's lost every single battle, and most of them without even the appearance of a fight. He allowed three of the most extreme justices ever nominated to be seated for life on the federal bench after threatening to shut down the Senate. He even crossed party lines to vote for the bankruptcy bill! At this point, the far right doesn't take him seriously- and there's no reason why they should.

And before you say he's a minority leader- look at what Bib Dole did during 93-95 with a much smaller minority.

Thus far, I haven't seen him show any leadership skills whatsoever- or, God forbid- enforce a little discipline in the party.

I never thought in a million years I'd be pining for Daschle, but even he would have been a huge improvement on what's going on now.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DS1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
31. She's just another bush-sucking piece of trash
Useless in every aspect of the word
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GrimReefa Donating Member (161 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
32. Why are they suprised?
They confirmed John Roberts when he didn't bother to answer any questions. What reason does Ms. Miers have to do any differently?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #32
55. Welcome to DU!
And you're absolutely right!!!!

:pals:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
34. From the liens to the dues all this adds up to one thing.....boozer
I'm just saying. Someone who loses that many loose ends..... :beer:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
36. Yikes! A not so smart man got a not so smart women to
run with a bunch of smarty pants. It looks like she won't fly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiabrill Donating Member (218 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. LOL
one describing the Supreme Court nominee's answers so far as "incomplete to insulting."


:rofl:


Will we ever have the opportunity to see what she initially submitted?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strabo Donating Member (37 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
38. STFU Specter
They may be incomplete and insulting, but they're her answers. What happened to being locked in goose step with Shrub? It was ok for the candidate to not answer candidly when they were a stooge for corporate interests, but now that you're facing a candidate who ISN'T the stooge for fundie social conservatives you were expecting, non-candid answers aren't ok?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
40. Raw Story: Miers provided misleading information to Judiciary Committee
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Miers_misleads_Senate_Jud...

President Bushs nominee to the Supreme Court, Harriet Miers, provided erroneous and incomplete information to the Senate Judiciary Committee about her membership on a Board of Directors for a real estate investment company, RAW STORY has learned.

Miers also neglected to mention a class action lawsuit that accused the firm, Capstead Mortgage, of violating federal securities laws. The suit, which was later dismissed, came during the period Miers failed to include in her responses to the Senate questionnaire.

According to Capsteads 1999 annual report (pdf file) filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Miers remained on the board as late as March 9, 2000. Miers opted not to stand for re-election, and in April of 2000, the former senior managing director at Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc., Howard Rubin was voted on to the board and replaced her as chair of the Audit Committee.

But Miers 57-page questionnaire returned to the Senate on Tuesday claimed that her tenure at Capstead lasted only from January 1993 to 1997 (link).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #40
41. You mean she lies?
She's incompetent like her hero? Good one, pickles!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
samdogmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. This was an intentional oversight. It's a way to have her step aside
Edited on Thu Oct-20-05 02:35 PM by samdogmom
gracefully so Bush doesn't lose face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #40
43. Oops!!!!!!!!
Another liar and crook. She's perfect for Shrub's admin.

Left of Cool
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. my thoughts exactly, she's just another liar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chat_noir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #40
44. Lies of omission
A lie of omission is to remain silent when ethical behavior calls for one to speak up. A lie of omission is a method of deception and duplicity that uses the technique of simply remaining silent when speaking the truth would significantly alter the other person's capacity to make an informed decision.


http://www.choice101.com/19-lies.html#LiesOfOmission
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #40
46. NEXT.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #40
47. her pathetic response to the questionnaire. now this.
It has to be on purpose. She must have been promised something fantastic in order to become a make-believe candidate, just to take the attention off of the White House in advance of the Fitz indictments.

No one could be so incompetent, so inane, as to act like they have with respect to this nomination unless this is all a dance, a performance, a masquerade, a sham.

There is no other explanation. unless someone here has one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lochloosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Nope...you have it right IMO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indie_voter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. Bush is a narcissistic sociopath and thinks he can do whatever he wants
Edited on Thu Oct-20-05 03:12 PM by indie_voter
So he nominates her.

She in turn either thinks his teflon coating extends to her or has been infected with the neo-con bug, Lyitis.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. a very good observation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressivebydesign Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #49
51. yeah, but chicks DIG him. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ronbrynaert Donating Member (222 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #47
53. well
I certainly can't think of one.

Along with putting her tenure before the lawsuits...and not mentioning the suits....she also neglected to mention that she chaired the Audit Committee from, at least, 1996 - early 2000 (actually i think in 95, too...have to check my notes).



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarsThe Cat Donating Member (978 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-05 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
54. I think her entire nomination is a decoy-
Edited on Thu Oct-20-05 10:36 PM by MarsThe Cat
she's been set up to run interference for the real eventual nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fortyfeetunder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 03:08 AM
Response to Original message
57. What's the incentive for her to answer?
donning :tinfoilhat:

Ms. Miers has no incentive to tell us a thing of interest.

I think she has some really good dirt on inside 1600 PA Avenue.

Bush is no dummy when he selected her. This was a strategic move.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 19th 2014, 06:12 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC