Bush's Guard service may affect Miers nomination

The Austin American-Statesman ^ | Tuesday, October 4 | Ken Herman

[counterpunch]

A former Texas Lottery official said he wants to talk to senators about the Supreme Court nominee's role in covering up his Bush's record

WASHINGTON -- A former Texas lottery official, who claimed that then-Gov. George W. Bush's desire to cover up his National Guard record helped steer decisions about a key lottery contract, said he wants to talk to senators about Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' possible role in that effort.

"If I were to be subpoenaed to come to the thing, I would come," said Lawrence Littwin, who filed a lawsuit after he was fired as the lottery's executive director in 1997. "I would say the committee, I think, would be interested."

Littwin claimed in a federal lawsuit that lottery operator GTECH held sway over the Texas Lottery Commission because former GTECH lobbyist Ben Barnes was involved in helping get Bush into the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.

GTECH, which settled the suit in 1999 and paid Littwin $300,000 without admitting wrongdoing, said in court filings that Littwin's Guard-related claims were "preposterous."

A Bush appointee, Miers served as chairwoman of the Texas Lottery Commission when it was mired in controversy. President Bush cited that record Monday in announcing his nomination of his longtime friend and adviser to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Littwin was hired in 1997 to replace Nora Linares, who had been fired after it was revealed that her boyfriend was working as a consultant for GTECH, the Rhode Island-based firm that has run the Texas Lottery since it began in 1992.

Littwin was fired after five months on the job. He said he was let go because of the aggressive approach that he advocated in scrutinizing GTECH's performance, including investigating whether the company made illegal contributions to public officials.

Littwin sued the company, seeking $2.6 million and claiming that it had arranged his firing. The lawsuit cited GTECH lobbyist Ben Barnes' claims that as Texas House speaker he had helped get Bush into the Guard. Littwin's suit said GTECH had been given preferential treatment by the commission, which controlled the contract.

Under pressure from the lottery commission, GTECH had severed ties with Barnes before Littwin was hired as executive director. GTECH paid Barnes and partner Ricky Knox $23 million to end their consulting contract.

Barnes, who for years had remained silent about his role in getting Bush into the Guard, was forced to discuss it during a September 1999 deposition in the Littwin lawsuit. Barnes' lawyers issued a statement saying that when he was House speaker, Barnes called the head of the Texas Air National Guard to put in a good word for Bush at the request of Bush family friends.

In the statement, Barnes' lawyer said no one from the Bush family had contacted him about the Guard slot.

Littwin, citing confidentiality provisions in the settlement with GTECH, has declined to discuss Miers' role. A federal judge, ruling against GTECH, said Miers did not have to give a deposition in the case.

Before the settlement, Littwin had questioned Miers' performance at the commission, charging that she ignored state law requiring annual audits of GTECH.

Under terms of the settlement, Littwin would have to forfeit $50,000 if he violates the confidentiality agreement. He said Monday that his lawyer told him he could testify if subpoenaed by the Senate.

In the agreement, Littwin said that he had "no personal knowledge of any of the criminal activity alleged in support of his claims against GTECH."

When the case was settled, GTECH said a "business decision" caused it to opt for the settlement instead of taking the case to trial.

kherman@coxnews.com

[decal]

"Are you telling me Ted Kennedy isn't going to make any hay out of this?"

Are you telling me you give a hang what that sot has to say on ANY subject?

[KingKongCobra]

"I didn't write the article."

No, you just posted it.

"You need to be asking yourself if you want to have this debate all over again,"

Damn right I do. This is already answered in the minds of the electorate. There's nothing that will boost the popularity of Bush faster than for the Dems to bring this crap up again. Notice that a week ago Barnes said "Talk to me, me, me". There's been not one Senator take him up on it. He's a loon and they know it. You should know too but your Bush hatred blinds you.

[sinkspur]

Of course they're going to dredge it up again.. and Abu Ghraib, and Guantanamo Bay, and the case for war in Iraq, and the 9/11 PDB... you name it.

For the fifteen-thousandth time:These are matters of executive privilege, since she was an attorney in the White House when these matters were discussed. She will not answer any questions about these subjects.

[counterpunch]

During the Inquisition, Miers will rightfully claim attorney/client privilege in answer to many questions they'll throw at her regarding GW's NG service, etc.

Then the Democrats will have all the reason they need to reject her.
Half of the Democrats voted against Roberts because they claimed he was evasive and the Bush administration didn't cooperate on documents requests.

The more "I can't answer" replies she gives all week, the worse she will look (and by extension, the President)......

Exactly. And this is why the Democrats have all been so supportive of her. They don't want to do anything that might deprive themselves of this opportunity to really tear Bush a new one when the moment comes.

[jveritas]

And tell me counterpunch do you want to join the democrat in these utter lies about President Bush National Guard service that they tried many times before and failed so miserably?! I will not be surprised that some conservatives blinded by hate and anger will join the Democrat in this utterly failing endeavor hoping that Miers will be defeated. Hate is a very destructive force, and it will mainly destroy those who hate much more than those who are hated.

[sinkspur]

You mean to say this Lottery Official doesn't really exist?

He does. It will cost him $50,000 to break the confidentiality agreement he signed.

[sinkspur]

Hatch was brutal to Anita Hill. Don't you remember that?

[KosmicKitty]

Calling Mary Mapes, please pick up the white courtesy phone

[jveritas]

You are extremely naive if you think that President Bush and his advisers did not consider all this; extremely naive.

[NeoCaveman]

I'm wondering who was the genious that covered up the DUI that almost lost Bush the presidency in 2000. Surely Miers knew about it. Did she advise him wisely, as in get it out early or did she advise him the other way?

[counterpunch]

For the fifteen-thousandth time:These are matters of executive privilege, since she was an attorney in the White House when these matters were discussed. She will not answer any questions about these subjects.

Yeah, and that's the politics of stupid. Only you would suggest her dodging these question with "Executive Privilege". Bush would be tried and hanged in the media. He and Miers would look guilty as hell if they don't cough up the documents and answer the questions.

Not only that, but Miers would also most certainly be voted down by every Democrat for not cooperating to their liking, "attorney-client privilege" or not. Half of them voted against Roberts for being too "evasive" and because of a lack of cooperation on 15 year old documents from a different administration.

Democrats make up their own rules as they see fit, and in the case of Miers and controversial Bush White House memos, they will demand them and raise holy hell if they don't get them. I don't know why you keep insisting that the rules apply to the Democrats.

[RichInOC]

The day the Republicans pull a nominee because the Dems on the Senate committee might ask him or her stupid questions about stuff they've already raked over multiple times to their loss and thus make themselves look like even more bitter, arrogant pinheads than they already do is the day I quit the Republican Party. That would be a chicken[bleep] move.

[SandRat]

[jveritas]

Just unbelievable. I hope that Jim Robinson is watching what is going on FR. Some people on this site have really lost it.

[sinkspur]

Only you would suggest her dodging these question with "Executive Privilege". Bush would be tried and hanged in the media. He and Miers would look guilty as hell if they don't cough up the documents and answer the questions.

You are stuck on stupid on this. You don't have a clue about public reaction to documents that are "executive privilege."

If the Democrats want to vote her down over that, they'll have to deal with the consequences.

[Cboldt]

The left wing blogs have a plagerism charge against Ms. Miers too.

I found this Barnes/GTECH thing in a random search ometime last week. And I agree, it is more baggage - uneccsary diversion from discussion of constitutional principles.

[kpp_kpp]

where's the "not this s*** again!" picture?

[counterpunch]

And tell me counterpunch do you want to join the democrat in these utter lies about President Bush National Guard service that they tried many times before and failed so miserably?! I will not be surprised that some conservatives blinded by hate and anger will join the Democrat in this utterly failing endeavor hoping that Miers will be defeated. Hate is a very destructive force, and it will mainly destroy those who hate much more than those who are hated.

Thanks for the advice, Yoda, but I'm just telling you what the Democrats' strategy is going to be, so we can be ready for it, if we decide Miers is even worth wasting our time on these tired battles all over again. I say she's not. I say we deserve a nominee who will inspire a national debate on the role of the Judiciary, not someone who will just inspire yet another debate about George W. Bush.

I'm beginning to think that Bush purposely invites this kind of thing just so we can all talk about him some more. He's starting to turn into our very own Bill Clinton.

[claudiustg]

I support Miers very much because of arguments like yours. They have the same stench of unreason and fanaticism as many of the Dim's arguments against Bush in the last election. In fact this one is just a thinly retreaded version of the very Texas Guard allegation that was beaten to death not so long ago by our mortal political enemies.

[mplsconservative]

National Guard "Scandal". I would give a month's pay to see a NEW attack from the Dems. I mean, it's really just getting boring. How about some creativity? I thought all those Hollywood people were supposed to be good at that?

Just take a look at most of the junk coming out of Hollywood. They don't have an original idea anymore. Everything's a rehash of something's that already been done.

This appears to be right along the same vein.

I actually hope they do it again, maybe another MSM blowhard will fall!

I agree wholeheartedly, and they can take Teddy 'the swimmer' down along with them!