[CDB]

At the time of Bork's nomination there were many Republican senators who were adamantly opposed to having Bork on the court -- mainly because his role in the Watergate affair indicated a lack of principle, an excess of political ambition, or both.

Such a bad rap. Bork was told by the AG (Elliot Richardson)and Deputy AG (William Ruckleshouse) to assume acting AG, not because of ambition, but because Bork was the final political appointee in the Justice Department's chain of succession. Had Bork joined the AG and Dep. AG, the next in line would have been a civil servant, and likely would have created what Richardson and Ruckleshouse dubbed a "constitutional crisis." Source: private conversation with Richardson and Ruckleshouse.

[Alberta's Child]

Had Bork joined the AG and Dep. AG, the next in line would have been a civil servant, and likely would have created what Richardson and Ruckleshouse dubbed a "constitutional crisis." Source: private conversation with Richardson and Ruckleshouse.

If either of those two are still around and you have the opportunity to speak with them, you might want to ask them why they didn't think about this before they submitted their own f#%&ing resignations. What kind of principled stand was that supposed to be? "I'm resigning because I don't want to fire this guy, but I want you to stick around to fire him because otherwise it might be a 'problem.'"