Posted on 01/26/2006 6:51:27 AM PST by katieanna
Thanks for posting that. I listened to the delightful Senator Sessions deliver these remarks and it was a pleasure to read this. I am getting the sense that he has a wicked funny sense of humor in addition to his many other talents and good qualities.
I just read this post...and Session's speech...thank you!
I just LOVE Sessions...I could listen to him all day.
Mr. Sessions (R) “My conversations with Harriet Miers indicate that she is a first-rate lawyer and a fine person. Her legal skills are proven and her reputation throughout the legal community is excellent. It is not necessary that she have previous experience as a judge in order to serve on the Supreme Court. It’s perfectly acceptable to nominate outstanding lawyers to that position. I look forward to the confirmation process and to learning more about her judicial philosophy.”
And your reason for posting that is?
Make your own conclusions.
My conclusion: Thank you for posting that quote from Sessions...because it shows that he is equally gracious in respecting both of President Bush's nominees...but, for Harriet Miers, it was for different experience and qualifications than it was for Alito..
Why wouldn't you just state them?
My conclusions from Sessions statement on Miers was that he is a party guy above all else...how 'bout you?
Well, I completely agree with Jeff Sessions statements about Miers. There is not a word I would change.
Now I have noticed that the dem Senators did enjoy bringing up this subject this week. That seems to be your MO.
Senator Sessions fleshed those considerations out more fully on Thursday.
I think it's obvious that Senators are generally circumspect in their public utterances. Even the GOP Senators who thought Harriet Miers was not a good pick did not say so, and I think rightfully not.
We don't know whether or not Senator Sessions would have supported Harriet Miers with an "affirmative" vote should she have made it through hearings. But clearly he is biased in favor of the President's selections, and I think that is entirely appropriate.
As a bit of an aside, Senator Leahy made a comment about the nature of the debate over Alito, saying on Friday, " We could have had the great ideological debate that so many on the far right seemed to want to have when the President's nominee was Harriet Miers." We had EXACTLY the type of debate that should accompany a SCOTUS nomination.
Read Senator Byrd's speech, where he talks about separation of powers, the role of the Senate in confirmation of judges. Read the speeches by the GOP Senators, who talk about the same, including that objections to Alito are based on unfounded character assassination, issues-advocacy, and pure politics of the moment. I speculate that with Ms. Miers, the debate would have centered first on her intellect regarding ConLaw, and second on the subject that Senator Sessions brings up below -- her association with the President on matters of executive privilege.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, they want to say this has something to do with that. They have been hankering for Harriet Miers, which is rather odd, I think. They have suggested somehow that some rightwing cabal caused President Bush to withdraw her nomination. She didn't have a lot of constitutional experience. I am not aware she has ever argued a case before the Supreme Court. Very few lawyers have, although Judge Alito has argued 12 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. She has not served as a judge. He has served 15 years as a Federal appellate judge.At any rate, she is a wonderful person who has many fine qualities. I am not at all sure that she would be any more restrained or any more liberal in her interpretation of judicial decisions than Judge Alito. I don't know what her philosophy would be. But I do know this: They have complained steadfastly that Judge Alito somehow is a tool of President Bush to defend his national security policy and his war on terrorism and that Judge Alito is going to be a part of his efforts to arrogate powers to the executive branch.
Who has been at President Bush's right arm for 5 years? It is Harriet Miers. She is the counsel to the President of the United States. She is his personal lawyer. She sits right by him. She has been involved in every one of these decisions about executive branch powers, National Security Agency wiretaps of al-Qaida telephone conversations. She has been part of all of that. You think they would have let her come through here? They say: Oh, we think she would be a fine nominee. What would they have done to her? Those in this Chamber who think she would have gotten a pass on those issues, raise your hand. And she knew that. That is why she withdrew herself. She wrote the President a letter and said: It has been insisted that if I come before the committee, I have to divulge my private conversations with you, the President of the United States, my advice to you on all these issues. It would violate attorney-client privilege. That is something I cannot do and will not do. I am in an untenable position. I am honored to serve you. I would like to continue to serve as your chief counsel, which she does today. But I ask you to withdraw my nomination.
That is all that was about. Goodness. It indicates how desperate they have gotten to find complaints about this fine judge.
By the way, Judge Alito has not been a part of any of this national security, Washington, inside-the-beltway stuff. Judge Alito has been sitting on a Federal bench in the Third Circuit--living in New Jersey--outside Washington, DC. He has not had a single case I am aware of dealing with any of these national security or Presidential wartime powers issues. He comes at it as a skilled scholar, a person with a demonstrable record of fairness, and great intellectual capacity. I think when these cases come before him, as some may, he will decide them fairly. That is what everybody who knows him says.
Thanks once again...
Just as I thought...Sen. Sessions was being gracious and respectful of Miers...for her strengths...and the same for Alito with his strengths...
AND, in the meantime, manages to pound the hypocrisy button of the dems over that subject...
Just catching up on the buzz, it would appear that you are correct. Kerry mentioned Miers in his statement on the floor a few days ago.
Not to worry, from what I have read there won't be a filibuster. The agreement with the Gang of 14 calls for extraordinary circumstances for a filibuster.
It appears however that this will be a '08 election issue.
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.