[Miss Marple]

1. The memoranda are not the property of Estrada, and he can't release them.
2. The release of the notes would violate client privilege, which is grounds for disbarment.
3. All 7 living former solicitor generals, INCLUDING 4 DEMOCRATS, support the administration's position on this.
4. Estrada worked for the Clinton administration as well. He may have personal views, but is apparently non-partisan, which I find an excellent qualification for a judge.
5. You may now leave, since you are WRONG on all counts.

[Inspectorette]

5. You may now leave, since you are WRONG on all counts

Aww, can't we let her stay? It's so much fun to smack her around. She must like it, too - she keeps coming back!

[YaYa123]

"By Helen Dewar
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 13, 2003; Page A04
The White House yesterday emphatically rejected a demand by Senate Democrats for internal Justice Department memoranda written by judicial nominee Miguel Estrada, intensifying a partisan deadlock that could scuttle the nomination."

Reading that scares me, it allows for the possibility that democrats could actually scuttle this nomination. I can't conceive that Democrats, after the election, during war, with this popular president, could actually derail this nomination. If that happens, something is still wrong with the RNC and the Senate's Republican leadership. There's just no way it should happen. Especially since it's known that there are enough votes on the floor to put him on the bench.

[MurryMom]

The memoranda are not the property of Estrada, and he can't release them.

My post (mischaracterized in yours) said that the WHITE HOUSE refuses to release the memoranda written by Estrada. Surely, even you must recognize that the WHITE HOUSE is able to release the memoranda without any ethics breach.

Besides, they're only memoranda, not blueprints for nuclear weapons. During President Clinton's term, how many of the Repukes whose talking points you quoted would have cared whether a WH counsel's memoranda were released publicly?