Here is the possibility of an opening to resist Roberts. It's not the best in the world, but given the fact that Bush's
favorbility ratings are under 50% even in the recent FOX poll and that almost
one half of Americans view him as untrustowrthy, this is an excellent time to start pounding this theme of "why won't they release the documents?" No documents, then there will be war (and there may be anyways depending on what's in them) and Bush will have to gamble that he can go nuclear and win.
As this article in the Guardian shows, the White House is up to their old tricks again.
More below the fold.
WASHINGTON (AP) - Citing privacy and precedent, the Bush administration indicated Sunday it does not intend to release all memos and other documents written by Supreme Court nominee John Roberts when he worked for two Republican presidents.
The leading Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which will conduct hearings on Roberts' nomination, disputed the assertion that privacy was at stake and called such a position a ``red herring.''
Roberts worked in the Reagan White House counsel's office from 1982-1986. He also was principal deputy solicitor general in the administration of the first President Bush.
Gee, I wonder what's so bad that the public and the UNITED STATES SENATORS can't find out what is in them even in secret. Since this administration slaps TOP SECRET on anything that is written down in the White House, it could be anything. Still, this stuff must be radioactive. And do you get the idea that Al Gonzales is a bit miffed at not being selected for the Supreme Court?
``Generally, that's not something that the administration or any White House would be inclined to share because it is so sensitive and does, in my judgment, does chill communications between line attorneys and their superiors within the Department of Justice,'' Gonzales said on ``Fox News Sunday.''
``That would be something that we'd have to look at very, very carefully,'' he said. ``Rather than prejudge the issue, let's wait for the Judiciary Committee to make its requests, and then we can evaluate the requests and hopefully reach an appropriate accommodation.''
And the best part is, the Democrats already some established precidents! Here is one from the article:
Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, the senior Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said other nominees, including Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, have provided material they wrote in confidence while working in the Justice Department.
``It's a total red herring to say, 'Oh, we can't show this,''' Leahy told ABC's ``This Week.'' ``
``And of course there is no lawyer-client privilege,'' he said. ``Those working in the solicitor general's office are not working for the president. They're working for you and me and all the American people.''
And remember what happened the last time the White House tried to bully through an appointment by withholding documents from Congress and refused to answer questions? Granted, he may still get a recess appointment, but there were a whole lot of Republicans that started to get unnerved when the White House told the Senate to F you on the John Bolton documents. This time the stakes are a lot higher and more people are watching from the outset.
Besides, even your most ardent Bush zombie understands that you aren't going to give a lifetime job to someone that you can't ask questions to. Anyone who has ever done a job interview knows that. And that's exactly how it should be phrased in clear and simple terms.