Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Evidence? What evidence?


It's always fun to watch White House Press Reptile Scott McClellan twisting in the wind these days. For instance, pay no attention to that actual evidence:

Q Scott, the material that the White House sent to the Senate today about Harriet Miers' nomination included a 1989 questionnaire that said that she supported a constitutional amendment to ban abortion except to -- when the life of a mother is at stake. Do you take that 1989 statement to be a conclusive statement of her position on abortion?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, what we take that to be is a candidate expressing her views during the course of a campaign. The role of a judge is very different from the role of a candidate or a political office holder. And what she was doing in that questionnaire was expressing her views during the course of a campaign. The role of a judge is to apply the law in a fair and open-minded way. That means looking at the facts, and then applying the law.

In other words, what she actually said is of no import since, well, that was then and this is now. Right, Scottie?

MR. McCLELLAN: I would also -- I think Senator Schumer indicated to you all yesterday that Harriet Miers said that no one knows how she would view on any particular case.

Actual signed questionnaire supporting a constitutional amendment notwithstanding, of course. And gaze in awe on how Scottie can chew up minutes saying, well, nothing, in response to a fairly direct question:

Q Scott, what did Harriet Miers tell Arlen Specter yesterday about the right to privacy?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, they had a lengthy discussion yesterday. This was the second time that she sat down and visited with Senator Specter in person about her nomination. And as a general rule, just like Chief Justice Roberts, Harriet does not get into talking about specific cases, if that's what you're asking. But these are --

Q I'm asking more about the generalized constitutional right to privacy.

MR. McCLELLAN: These are courtesy visits that she's having with members of the United States Senate. As I said, she's -- by the end of the day will have visited with some 18 to 20 members of the United States Senate. She will be having confirmation hearings in a few weeks. I know people in this room would like to get on with those confirmation hearings, but this is a process that is moving along. And there will be many issues that come up during the time of the confirmation hearing --

Q It would be helpful to us in writing a story, actually, if we could get a clearer understanding of what, exactly, it was she said. Arlen Specter said, "She believes there is a right to privacy in the Constitution." Dan Coats was quoted in The Washington Post saying that she cited the liberty clause as implying the right to privacy in the Constitution. And White House spokesman Jim Dyke, who was briefed about this meeting, said that she was asked about privacy and she cited the Constitution's liberty clause.

So we have two White House people saying that she spoke to the liberty clause with respect to privacy. We have a senator, the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, saying that she thought there was a right to privacy. What did she say?

MR. McCLELLAN: Okay, Bill, let me respond to your question, because I was coming to the answer to that question. I appreciate that you want to write stories and there will be plenty of opportunity to write stories about Harriet Miers' views and her experience and her judicial philosophy as the confirmation process moves forward. These are courtesy visits. As I said, as a general rule, Harriet has not gotten into discussing specific cases. Now, there will be confirmation hearings that will be taking place. These are issues that I fully expect will come up during the course of those confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Harriet looks forward to answering the questions that they bring up and talking about these matters, and let's let those confirmation hearings take place.

Why no one in the White House Press Corps hasn't bludgeoned Scott to death with a tire iron by now is a pure mystery.

No comments: