Posted on 10/13/2005 4:36:02 PM PDT by Conservative Coulter Fan
XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU OCT 13, 2005 11:32:41 ET XXXXX
HIDDEN TESTIMONY REIGNITES MIERS FIRES
**Exclusive Details**
The DRUDGE REPORT has obtained a copy of sworn testimony given by Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers in 1989 in which she said that she “wouldn’t belong to the Federalist Society” – a conservative and libertarian lawyers’ organization – because it was “politically charged.”
But Bush's Supreme Court nominee did not include in that category the NAACP and other liberal groups, the transcript reveals!
Word of the testimony circulated late last week, roiling conservatives and setting off a scramble among lawyers to obtain the actual testimony. Sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT that conservatives demanded that the White House and its allies release copies of the testimony, but their demands were ignored.
A source close to the Bush administration says, "the process requires the White House to prepare documents to turn over to the Senate Judiciary Committee and only after the committee has had the courtesy of receiving them are such docs made public."
MORE
Miers testified in a voting rights lawsuit claiming the Dallas City Council had too few black and Hispanic members.
The DRUDGE REPORT can now reveal that not only did Harriet Miers testify that she would not join the “politically charged” Federalist Society -- she testified that she had joined a liberal organization – the Democratic Progressive Voters League.
[According to the Handbook of Texas Online [http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/DD/wed1.html], the Democratic Progressive Voters League is a Dallas political organization closely associated with the Democratic Party.]
Miers was also asked whether she considered “the NAACP [to be] in the category of organizations” that she considered to be “politically charged.”
Her answer: “No, I don’t.”
In 1987, the NAACP launched a campaign to defeat the nomination of Judge Robert Bork to the Supreme Court; In 1989, the group organized the Silent March; over 100,000 protested U.S. Supreme Court decisions the group claimed "reversed many of the gains made against discrimination."
[The Internal Revenue Service has threatened to revoke the NAACP's tax-exempt status after the civil rights group's chairman, Julian Bond, condemned Bush administration policies on education, the economy and the war in Iraq, during a speech last summer.]
MORE
Now presented here for the first time, the testimony.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MS. JULIAN: . . . . .
Q. Ms. Miers, are you a member of any predominantly minority organizations, such as the NAACP, Black Chamber of Commerce, Urban League or any other predominantly minority organizations?
A. Women minorities?
Q. Well, maybe predominantly racial and ethnic minorities?
A. No.
Q. . . . . In your capacity as an at-large member do you think being involved in such organizations might assist you in having a perspective that – bring a perspective to your job that you don’t have?
A. I attend meetings designed to give me that input. However, I have tried to avoid memberships in organization s that were politically charged with one viewpoint or the other. For example, I wouldn’t belong to the Federalist Society any more than – I just feel like it’s better to not be involved in organizations that seem to color your view one way or the other for people who are examining you. I did join the Progressive Voters League here in Dallas during the campaign as part of the campaign.
Q. Are you active in the PVL now, do you intend to be?
A. No, I am not.
Q. Do you think the NAACP and Black Chamber of Commerce are in the category of organizations you were talking about?
A. No, I don’t. . . . .
Transcript of Trial, Roy Williams et al. v. City of Dallas, No. CA-3-88-152-R, pages V-46 to V-47 (U.S. Dist. Ct., N.D. Tex. Sept. 11, 1989).
END
-----------------------------------------------------------
Filed By Matt Drudge
Reports are moved when circumstances warrant
http://www.drudgereport.com for updates
(c)DRUDGE REPORT 2005
Not for reproduction without permission of the author
The case is building...oppose this nomination...demand she withdraw...demand better from President Bush!
I think it is interesting and important to note the relative proportion of membership in various religious groups on the Supreme Court. I think that would make Harriet Miers the only evangelical baptist on the court.
And that could be why some conservatives, consciously or unconsciously oppose her. So, if Harriet Miers is confirmed, she will be the only evangelical on the U.S. Supreme Court. “faith and trust alone”
Because I trust the President and that brings me to trust his choice of Harriet Miers.
Conservatives dont like OUIJI BOARD picks. THis was was disrespectful to conservatives most, the court and even the lowly liberal.
Already posted
'nuff said.
Good grief people... Let the woman have her day to speak before the pitchforks come out.
We still have a lot to learn before we make any leaps.
bump!
If Drudge thinks this is a scoop, he's mistaken.
This info has been about for a week or so.
What puzzles me about the opposition, assuming it's
solidly founded, is that these conservative figures
thought so little of their own influence that they
felt the need to carry on a public campaign, rather
than just complain privately to Bush ...
... or maybe they started privately, and didn't like
the response they got.
Why? Its nice to feel like a liberal once in awhile.
And you just completely ignored the other item on Drudge...y'know, the one that says she praised the Federalist Society in 2005.
I don't when her "conversion" was...and yes.
When did I "ignore" it? My...how you leap to conclusions..
Not even close, RBA.
I am watching this situation very closely, and I want the truth to be heard. That's all I'm saying.
Sheez...
Evangelical as in: “Faith and Trust Alone”
Because I Faith in the President and that brings me to Trust his choice of Harriet Miers.
She would be the only evangelical baptist radical leftist Dukakis Supporting justice on the SCOTUS.
The greatest success of Democrats in the last 50 years has been their Republican SCOTUS nominees. They have seminars for communists now on how to become Republican SCOTUS selections..."become an evangelical baptist" is rule one.
If I might ask, what of her acceptance of NAACP and the Democratic (really Communism Lite) Progressive Voters League contrasted with her rejection of the Federalist Society as unacceptable do you have trouble understanding?
For your information, "Progressive" is the term chosen by socialists, Liberals, the whole Communism Lite bunch, as a code word to identify that which is acceptable to their Party Line.
And in so joining those organizations, so did she accept their Party line.
Meaning no personal offense, may I suggest that trusting any man with the keys to Liberty was specifically warned against by the Founders?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.