[Earthdweller]

"She gave money to Al Gore, or she didn't."

Not that simple..her firm gave the money during a time when Texas was mostly Democrat..fuzzy info.

"She goes to a fundamentalist church, or she doesn't."

Irrelevant to a Scotus nominee.

"She supported IOLTA, which writmeister was talking about, or she didn't."

Vague assertions.

"She defended a lawsuit against the law firm of which she was president, in which unethical and illegal behavior by her firm was alleged, and lost -- or she didn't. (Hint: She did.)"

Unsubstantiated accusations.

[writmeister]

How can Ms. Miers' support for IOLTA programs be a vague assertion when it was one of her primary emphasises as Texas State Bar President. If you read Ms. Miers' monthly column in the Texas Bar Journal from her year as President, you will see that she raises this issue in nearly every column.

Why is the IOLTA issue important because it is an example of the government taking property from a private citizen (interest earned on a client trust account) and using it for some social purpose without any compensation to the private citizen. Perhaps, it can be analogized as a low-value eminent domain (except without any compensation).

[lentulusgracchus]

[You quoting me] "She defended a lawsuit against the law firm of which she was president, in which unethical and illegal behavior by her firm was alleged, and lost -- or she didn't. (Hint: She did.)"

[You, leading with your chin] Unsubstantiated accusations.

Not really. Get your lawyer or librarian boot Lexis/Nexis and pull up, searching on Miers's law firm and Lomas & Nettleton, a Texas state case decided in IIRC 1995 in the state district court in Texarkana.

The opinion in that case is substantive, not "unsubstantiated", and the allegations of improper conduct with respect to a client's property, and the opinion of the court in granting in part a motion by Lomas's new counsel for summary judgment, add up to specific and substantial accusations borne in and found true.