Harriet Miers gave false answers to the Senate?? (RawStory)

[Roland99]

Harriet, sweet Harriet.


So conniving.

So deceptive.


So unlove-ed.

[InternalDialogue]

1. Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis.

Now I can never watch that movie the same way again. Thanks for ruining it. ;-)

[Roland99]

3. heh heh....here's the detail on it >>>>>>

Miers provided misleading information to Judiciary Committee
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Miers_misleads_Senate_Judicial_Committee_on_1020.html

Miers gives wrong dates in questionnaire; Firm was sued during period omitted

President Bush's 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 CapsteadпїЅs 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)....

[whatever4]

2. Not just one omission, but two.

I could be stupid, but doesn't this about do it for her nomination then? She didn't leave out a few months, she left out years of her history. And she didn't leave out just one pertinent event. The events in question are ethical and are potentially embarrassing. She surely could not have forgotten. She's a lawyer! A practicing lawyer. You'd think, I'd think, those events would be something you'd try to explain beforehand, just because they're potentially embarassing. Rather than trying to excuse your actions later, if they're noticed. That's what I would have done. If I were innocent of wrongdoing, that is.

What's funny, to me, is that she, her being a lawyer, thought she could get away with it. What's up with that? Are these types of omissions done all the time, did she think it would fly? Did she think no one would ever notice? As controversial as her nomination is? She can't be that dense...can she?

[cassiepriam]

4. Poor Harriet, not good at details and paperwork is she?

Hopefully she will get a good clerk who will take care of all of that for her when she is on the SC. Her talents lie elsewhere don't they?

[leesa]

5. This surprises anyone?

What is it with Fundies and their incessant lying?