Replies

I read the whole, long, complex discussion by Beldar of the Lexus search for cases in which Harriet Miers was lead counsel. I've analyzed Supreme Court cases in a monthly column. It's hard-slogging work with tedious texts. My instinct about Beldar's research on Miers was that he did a good job.

Do you have a different impression about that particular write-up? Or about other work Beldar has done and posted? I'd appreciate hearing from you.

John / Billybob

Hon. B-B -- I had to take a family break. I am pleased that you would ask my opinion. I would like to respond to you tomorrow if that is OK with you.

My basic opinion is that Beldar shamelessly hyped a lot of routine occurrences into some type of glorification of Ms. Miers. I'd like to give you some specific examples of that when I can pull my file and report.

Nothing in the reported cases says anything bad about Ms. Miers. But nothing says that she is so exalted as Beldar (I can't believe that Bill calls himself that) would have you believe.

Ms. Miers is not being presented as an extraordinary Supreme Court nominee based on her prowess as a trial attorney, insofar as I know. Therefore, I was taken aback by cites to Beldar's blog that she is supposedly some kind of super trial lawyer and that justifies her nomination. She can rightfully say that she is a successful trial lawyer, but to present her as a superstar is incorrect and I believe unnecessary.

But I will be more specific tomorrow. You may be the only person who will appreciate the details of this discussion, but will gladly do it for the chance of an exchange of ideas with you.