Can Karl Rove survive the CIA leak scandal?
July 24th, 2005
-
It’s 6/1 against him having to go
The Dublin-based international betting exchange, Tradesports, has opened a market on whether George Bush’s closest aide and architect of his election victories, Karl Rove, will announce his resignation on or before 30 September 2005. The current price is about 6/1.
The heart of the issue is whether Rove told a journalist that the wife of a prominent critic of the White House’s Iraq polcy was a covert CIA agent and if he did whether this was illegal.
The affair began in July 2003 two months after the “ending” of the war in Iraq when the woman’s husband, Joseph Wilson, wrote an article in the New York Times in which he accused the White House of twisting intelligence.
-
This all happened at the same time as the David Kelly case exploded in the UK and has a number of similarities - the war, how intelligence was used and alleged secret briefings which revealed the identity of Government employees
It is alleged that administration officials leaked the name of Wilson’s wife as a way of undermining him. A Time magazine reporter has said that Mr Rove did not disclose the name of Valerie Plame name, but said the wife of a government critic was a covert CIA agent.
George Bush has a record of being very loyal to those closest to him and although the Democrats are raising the heat we think that Rove will hang on. The price is nice - but not nice enough.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Mike. What are the odds on Rove being arrested? This report on CBS http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/21/eveningnews/main710816.shtml?CMP=ILC-SearchStories seems to indicate that the leak was a Federal crime.
Although going back to your original point. Didn’t Bush say he would fire who ever was responsible for the leak of Plame’s name (now there’s a headline ‘Blame Game over Plame’s Name’). Depending on how things go, it could well be out of Karl’s pudgy little hands.
My sense is that Rove’s fate will hang on what continues to emerge, as I understood it there was an on going investigation and while Bush is very loyal to his inner circle he is on record as saying that “anyone who broke the law would no longer be a member of his administration” so if it does emerge that Rove broke the Law I think there’s no other way about it other than for Bush to let him go.
The Democrats should play this very carefully the last thing they need is to be seen to hound Rove and then for him to remain in place, Harry Reid (Democrat leader in the senate) knows this as does the majority of the party leadership though some on the liberal left of the party would favour going after Rove in a more aggressive and concerted way…
But with John Roberts looking like a pretty unobjectionable nominee for the supreme court, indeed his previous approach to constitutional matters could mark him out as a potentially excellent choice by Bush, the more aggressive liberal wing of the Democratic party will be looking to claim a scalp practically as Bush’s plans for social security have hit the rocks, Iraq continues to suck in men and resources and trust in the president has fallen considerably.
Expect the pressure from the Democrats to continue, if it is shown that Rove broke the law then I think he’ll have to go, but he might well try and stay which means things could get ugly, however if any investigation is (as is likely) kicked into the long grass then Rove will probably hand on, having already said that he won’t play a leading role in the 2008 campaign or any other republican administration most will see fit to leave him be if that happens.
Ben I am not sure I agree totally with your conclusion. It doesn’t look to me that the Bush PR team are handling it very well, basically trying to ignore questions over the issue. That strategy only works with the media if all the facts are basically disclosed and the case in point is not entirely interesting to the public.
When it is big interest like this, the process of dragging the whole story out can be hugely damaging. And someone will have to take the fall for Bush, and there appears to be only one candidate.
3. I doubt Rove could resist heavy involvement next time any more than Alistair Campbell could resist coming back for the 2005 election after he supposedly left.
AS for Roberts the Democrats wouldbe very fooolish to stake all on fighting him probably lose as he’s confirmed anyway, and then be severely weakened when the next vacancy pops up and Bush is able to propose a true Scalia type nominee. It seems Harry Reid realises this and will keep the powder dry for a Rehnquist or Stevens Retirement when Bush may well Go for a Scalia Type Nominee. The just SAY NO Strategy jas limits and can only be used sparingly and unusually to be truly effectivess.
3. I doubt Rove could resist heavy involvement next time any more than Alistair Campbell could resist coming back for the 2005 election after he supposedly left.
AS for Roberts the Democrats wouldbe very fooolish to stake all on fighting him probably lose as he’s confirmed anyway, and then be severely weakened when the next vacancy pops up and Bush is able to propose a true Scalia type nominee. It seems Harry Reid realises this and will keep the powder dry for a Rehnquist or Stevens Retirement when Bush may well Go for a Scalia Type Nominee. The just SAY NO Strategy has limits and can only be used sparingly and unusually to be truly effectivess.
I agree with both of you on Roberts. I think Ben was saying the same as you interest (unless I am reading it wrong).
American politics finally seem to be becoming interesting. After the seeming total victory of the GOP last November, the Democrats seem to be getting their act together, especially with Iraq leaving the Bush team looking like a dead duck so early on in the term. As I was posting the other night, there are a couple of state elections in Virginia and NJ in November. I think Virginia maybe the interesting one to watch. It is heavily GOP at the moment, but will its proximity to the Beltway show a slight crumbling of GOP fortunes and be a guide to next year Senate elections?
5/6 – Interest
I agree on Roberts, at any rate the “gang of 14” (a grouping of moderate Republican and Democratic senators) have signalled they will back Roberts, what is more some liberal democrats also look likely to back the choice, though naturally the left liberals will probably vote against… in the end though I’d expect Roberts to be confirmed by anywhere from 65-85 votes in the senate.
But your right about Reid playing a good game, no only is there no where near the support to oppose Roberts successfully, a fairly moderate conservative, there would be zero sympathy in the country at large allowing the GOP to paint the Democrats as still being sore losers from 2004 and wreckers concentrating on trivial issues that most Americans don’t care about… what is more Bill Frist (R Majority leader) would then have an excuse to eliminate the power of filibuster and no one whats that to happen.
If Scalia is moved to replace Rehnquist however Reid might decide to make an issue out of it and could expect some support from GOP moderates… but we’ll see, Rehnquist seems to be being heroically bloody minded and staying but on the bench despite advancing pulmonary cancer.
Agree on Roberts. Ben - I’m not sure that Scalia as Chief Justice would be anything like as large an issue as whoever replaces him as Associate Justice.
It may well be that he will go on as long as poosibele because he likes the Job but retire regardless of Health shorly before Bush’s Term Ends. It may well be the only one sometime this term assuming Rehnquist wants to be assured a Republican President will name his successor. Stevens by contrast even though he’s the oldest mayt very well go the distance and rather4 be carried out in a box than give Bush the chance to replace him, hoping a Democrat President in 2009 if he can hold on that long will be able to replace him. AS for Scalia to Chief Justice, again wrong fight, whatr matters are the numbers on the Court, the DemocrAts must save what little strength they may have currently to resist the numbers being tilted even further against thems.
10 - “AS for Scalia to Chief Justice, again wrong fight, whatr matters are the numbers on the Court, the DemocrAts must save what little strength they may have currently to resist the numbers being tilted even further against thems.”
Exactly.
7 - Paul Lloyd
RE: Virginian Gubernatorial Election.
Democrats look set to lose this particular contest I’m afraid, popular outgoing Democratic Governor Mark Warner (frequently mentioned as a possible presidential or senatorial candidate in 2008) is ineligible to run for re-election and so his Lieutenant Governor and fellow moderate democrat Tim Kaine is running as the Democratic candidate against the GOP’s nominee Jerry Kilgore (who IMHO is as slimy as they come) but Kilgore is leading by a solid margin in the polls at p[resent and has been for some time.
If Warner could run for re-election he’d win in a walk, he racks up big margins in the traditionally democratic suburbs of Washington DC. In the north of the state and the Richmond area, but critically he also boast huge support in the traditionally republican, socially conservative, rural west of the state in the Blue Ridge area… Kaine is trying to win these same supporters with his campaign, but seems to be struggling.
One ray of hope for Kaine could be that it still some time off from the actual election (November) and many people who voted for Warner last time but are more usually republican voters are polling as Kilgore supporters simply because he’s the GOP candidate… in the end as the election gets nearer and voters make up their minds these same rural voters who are at present backing “The republican candidate” might potentially begin to poll as “Kaine supporters”, it a while off yet though.
As for the 2006 midterms don’t expect any big changes, very few races are competitive, but there will be one or two exciting Senate races…
Pennsylvania offers what will be the tightest and most keenly fought battle, the poster-boy for the socially conservative right Senator Rick Santorum is facing a tough re-election contest against popular pro-life Democrat and State Treasurer Bob Casey jr, Casey is consistently beating Santorum in polling of the state by reputable firms such as Rasmussen but lags behind Santorum in terms of cash raised so far, but is likely to be the national Democratic Party’s top priority when it comes to the senate races.
Other contests that will be close include GOP challenges in Minnesota and Florida, while the divisive congresswoman Catherine Harris looks set to throw away GOP hopes of beating Florida Democrat Bill Nelson by winning the Republican nomination, in Minnesota things are still very much in play with the unpopular incumbent Democrat Mark Drayton standing down offering an open race with a popular likely nominee from the GOP.
The Democrats may have a good chance in Ohio, with an unpopular GOP governor and an incumbent senator facing general dissatisfaction and opposition from his conservative base. Longer shots for the Democrats include Tennessee where Harold Ford is running, Missouri and perhaps Montana… overall it will be nearly impossible for the Democrats to win back the Senate and a net gain of 2-3 Senate seats is probably the best they can hope for, personally I think they’ll win PA and OH but lose MN meaning a net gain of 1.
As for the Generational elections, Democrats have good chances in Alabama, Ohio, New York, California (but somehow I think Arnie might hang on) and Arkansas (the best GOP candidate has fallen out due to ill health). Meanwhile they will have to work hard to defend vulnerable seats in Tennessee and Iowa as well as less vulnerable incumbents in Kansas, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. As well as defending the states targeted by the Democrats and seeking to challenge in those other Democrat held states the GOP may also need to defend itself in MO and CO though it’s unlikely the DNC will target them as highly as places such as AL, OH, NY etc…
In the end I think that the Democrats stand to make modest gains in the house, win one or two senate seats (literally) but lose 1 and then make some significant gains in the gubernatorial races, indeed the gubernatorial races might have more of a bearing on the 2008 contest than the Senate races, if the Democrats ignore the pundits belief that Hillary is an inevitability and back as moderate such as Senator Evan Bayh or Governor Mark Warner (way too inexperienced IMHO)… but lets wait and see.
Sorry I meant to say ” Gubernatorial ” not “Generational”
Sadly I can’t visualise Santorum losing yet. He must be able to raise a huge amount of hard-right money if he seems to be in trouble.
In Ohio, the other side of the coin of the disappointment that DeWine has been to conservatives is that he will be able to pull moderate Democrat votes - pessimistic about that one too.
I have to say I think the Democrats’ chances of retaking the Senate this time are going to be negligible.
13 - and it’s Dayton not Drayton
Tw o interesting Governor’s Races- Arkansas where We Clark may run presumably with BUbba’s blessing, and ………..Texas!
Yes there is a faint glimmer according the Economist that if Perry continues to botch School reform but hangs onto the GOP Nomination, the Democrats may just have a long shot chance, but it is essential they pick the right Blue Dog Democrat Candidate. It is a LONG shot, but even that would have been unthinkable a sjort while ago.
Tw o interesting Governor’s Races- Arkansas where We Clark may run presumably with BUbba’s blessing, and ………..Texas!
Yes there is a faint glimmer according the Economist that if Perry continues to botch School reform but hangs onto the GOP Nomination, the Democrats may just have a long shot chance, but it is essential they pick the right Blue Dog Democrat Candidate. It is a LONG shot, but even that would have been unthinkable a short while ago.
17. Sorry that was of Course WES CLARK.
12. Everything for Arnie hinges on the Gamble of a Special Election He has called this November, gaining most if not all his momentum will be unstoppable, if not…………
Back on the question of Rove I don’t see it as at all likely that he will be going anywhere soon. Even if charged with something the trial won’t be any time soon so Bush won’t be sacking him. I don’t think he’ll resign of his own accord as it will be taken as a sign of guilt and a triumph by the dems.
I think many of us are familiar with what happens when somebody leaves (and not just outgoing Governments). Everything possible gets blamed on them. If Rove is gulity he’ll hang on as the best way of keeping a lid on things. If he went then all his former underlings would be much less restrained about settling old scores or ‘doing their duty’.
14 - book value
Like you I have real political dislike for Santorum and would like to see him lose, and while I think it will end up close I think there’s good reason to think that Casey will bump him off…
In the latest the latest Rasmussen Reports survey Casey was polling at 52% to Santorum’s 41%. What is more initial fears that the pro-life Casey might lose liberal votes seems to have been dispelled with 85% of self identified liberals polled saying they will back him in the election.
Even more surprising Casey leads Santorum amongst married voters (typically an area of GOP strength) 59% to 41%.
Finally the Favourable/ Unfavourable ratings are looking bleak for Santorum he’s polling at 40% or lower against Casey at the moment and his rating breaks 44/43% favourable/unfavourable while Casey stands at 49/29% favourable/unfavourable.
Santorum still has a big lead in cashed raised, but with so few competive seats and after being recruited for the race by the Democratic leadership Casey will likely pull in more and more big donations as the election draws closer, at the same time though your right that the right will pour in big bucks to help one of their favourite senators.
Santorum is in real trouble and so long as Casey brings in the cash and fights a good campaign he should be able to win. The fact that Bob Casey is son of former Governor Casey and the most popular politician in the state (largely through being his father’s son) will only help him further.
On the subject of Ohio, I disagree the Democrats have found a great credible candidate in the form of Congressman Tim Ryan to oppose the incumbent republican DeWine and at the same time have found another credible congressman Ted Strickland to oppose incumbent republican Bob Taft for Governor. Both Ryan and Strickland have to get through the primaries, which they stand good chances of doing. Both would have no problem keeping the Democratic base firmly behind them and as I argued DeWine has angered his conservative base while also having one of the lowest overall approval ratings in the country of an Senator, factor in a strong democratic challenger and DeWine is in for a bumpy ride indeed and after OH it’s the Democrats best bet IHMO.
Sorry about getting Dayton’s name wrong, he’s been an gone anyway
16/17 – Interest
I’m afraid that Chris Bell the Democrat, a conservative one as well, who’s in the running for TX Governor isn’t in with a cat in hells chance of late, he has next to no money and is being out raised by a third party candidate who’s already said that he doesn’t stand a chance of winning. I’d love to see Bell win but I don’t think its going to happen.
As for Arkansas your right, after Rockefeller dropped out the Democrats know have a good chance, if Clark wanted it he’d have to start campaigning now and he might well win, he certainly raise a lot of cash, but he seems more interested in a second foolish run for the Democratic nomination than anything else and so the Democrats best bet is the current frontrunner for the Democratic nomination the state’s attorney general Mike Beebe who as thins stand is very well placed to beat Asa Hutchinson the only credible candidate left in the GOP field… but as I say where Clark to enter Beebe would be far less of a sure thing, but I doubt he would.
Ben [21] - what is the pro-lifers’ strategy for criminalising abortion in the US, & how long do they think it will take them? What plans have they to pressure (e.g. by trade sanctions) other countries such as the UK and Canada into following suit?
21, Well if he wanted to run for President he would be well advised to take Arkansas first, Americans like Governors, a political base in the South, so priceless and rare for Democrats these days, and the momentum of a successful campaign would benefit him, it would also make him potentially highly attractive as a VP Candidate if he couldn’t obtain the nomination himself. I think some quite lobbying by Bill might make him see sense. Are you American?
Re Texas most serious Democrats are i think waiting to see just how much trouble Perry gets into before deciding if it’s worth a try. If the Schools don’t open on time in the Autumn i think you will see more serious Democrats step forward, maybe even the DA who is rapidly becoming a Legend for having the sheer b%%%s to take on the Hammer.
21. Isn’t there a Senate Race in Arkansas soon? Maybe Clark has his eye on that??
21. Isn’t there a Senate Race in Arkansas soon? Maybe Clark has his eye on that???
Hi there,
Betting exchanges were unable to forecast the resignations of CIA’s George Tenet and of Merrill Lynch’s CEO Purcell.
They will fail too with Karl Rove. I would buy!
Best regards,
Chris. F. Masse
24 - not till 2008, and I doubt there would be much mileage in fighting the Democratic primaries against Mark Pryor who is a young first-term incumbent. Likewise Blanche Lincoln in 2010.
27. I see both Arkansas Senate Seats are Democrat Helds?
Question: is there a webiste with all recent polls about the various races for the Senate and the Congress?
22 As it stands the Supreme Court has effecively ruled (Roe vs Wade and then Planned Parenthood vs Casey) that any restrictions whatsoever on abortion are unconstitutional and hence unlawful. Of the nine justices three (Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist) would be prepared to reverse Roe vs Wade. In addition Kennedy while supporting Roe would allow restriction on “partial birth abortion” . It is expected that Roberts if confirmed would also vote to reverse Roe vs Wade. (i.e. court would still be 5-4 pro Roe ). If another of the pro Roe justices retired and were replaced by a prolife justice, giving a 5-4 majority overturning Roe, the implication would be that states would then be free to enact legislation restricting abortion (e.g. the 24 week rule , parental consent for minors etc etc) if they wished. The expectation would be that only Louisiana, Utah and Guam might conceivably ban abortion outright except for rape incest and life of the mother). Other states (e.g. Pennsyvania) would likely pass parental consent laws and some states (e.g. New York, California, Massachusetts) would not enact any restrictions.
I don’t think there is any realistic prospect of making abortion illegal on a federal/national level in the US.
28 - yes.
29 - http://www.pollingreport.com/
There doesn’t seem to be much state-by-state data yet, however.
22 - The US Supreme Court has effectively ruled that any restriction on abortion is unconstitutional and hence unlawful. (Roe vs Wade, Planned Parenthood vs Casey) There are 3 justices (Scalia, Thomas, Rehnqvist) who would overturn Roe, and if Roberts is confirmed he would be a fourth. (Kennedy would allow restriction on partial birth abortion but supports Roe). If another pro Roe justice was replaced by a prolife justice to give a 5-4 majority for overturning Roe, the implication would be that states could then pass legislation restricting abortion (parental consent rules, 24 week limit etc).
Only Louisiana, Utah and maybe Guam would contemplate a broad ban, and New York, California and Massachusetts would probably not enact any restrictions. Pennsylvania, Virginia etc would probably keep it legal but with some restrictions.
There is no realistic prospect of abortion becoming illegal on a national/federal level
31. I think some States have already brought in Parental Consent,,, or at least prior informing of Parents for Teenagers into Law. I don’t know if the Supreme Court has yet ruled on their Constitutionality.
A key Supreme Court case on parental notification will be this autumn, on the constitutionality of a New Hampshire law which the federal circuit court struck down.
http://www.sedhe.net/blog/archives/000237.html
I believe all states but six have parental notification laws.
Rove - Seems like a storm in a teacup to me. The Democrats are obviously motivated by revenge and getting a pound of political flesh than any aggrieved sense of moral outrage. The more the facts come out indeed the less it appears that Rove can reasonably be charged with any sort of violation. My understanding is that several conditions have to be met, including aforeknowledge that the person in question was working for the CIA (the reports suggest that Rove was told this by reporters asking him questions, not his own knowledge), aforeknowledge that the person in question was working UNDERCOVER, and the person in question must have been deployed abroad in covert operations within the previous 5 years (which Ms Plame had not been) in order to trigger the statute. Rove is indispensible to the Bush administration anyway, and there is no way Bush is going to let him go anywhere unless he has absolutely no other choice.
The Supreme Court - John Roberts seems the perfect choice for Bush. ‘The unBorkable Conservative’, as the weekly standard are calling him. He seems to fit the conservative mould that Bush promised to draw his nominees from during the election without having the abrasive, combative histories and styles of past conservative nominees (Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas). I think it really has the effect of disarming the Democrats who will find it very difficult to oppose this man without appearing to be obstructionist for it’s own sake, but if too many of them vote for the man it will cause problems with the interest groups that form the hard left Democratic base. WRT future SC appointments, it seems clear to me that Rehnquist will go in the near future (6 months or so). I think the reason for his not leaving now is because he wants to prevent a malaise setting in with the departure of O’Connor and the arrival of her replacement, considering there hasn’t been a vacancy on the court in almost 12 years. Rehnquist is not a well man, very ill with thyroid cancer and he will surely want to go before the end of Bush’s term to ensure that a Republican President will name his successor. As others have said above, this could be the interesting battle. I suspect that Bush will elevate Scalia to be Chief Justice (which Democrats will find hard to stop as most of them recognise him as a keen intellect, though he’s their nemesis in philosophical matters) but this has little effect on the balance of powers on the court. The abortion issue, which the Republican base cares about more than any other, needs one more justice (counting Roberts as already being on the court) in order to overturn Roe v. Wade. Unfortunately, replacing Rehnquist with another pro-life Justice is a wash for them. One of the more liberal justices, most likely either John Paul Stevens or Ruth Bader Ginsburg due to their ages, will have to go in order for Bush to tilt the court to a firm anti-Rowe majority. It’s unlikely that either of them will go voluntarily during Bush’s term, but there is always the possibility that nature may intervene.
2006 Congressional Elections - far too early to make any intelligent, specific forecasts this far out, but based on the contests up, the voting histories in those states and incumbents not standing again, it is extremely likely that the Republicans will retain control of both Houses of Congress.
Some v.interesting posts. I am always amazed at how dynastical US politics is. I notice that in one of Ben’s posts the Taft family is still going strong in Ohio politics (with that background, a lose would be fairly shocking). Though the dynastical nature of US politics also points towards the need for more campaign finance reform. On the issue of Rove, I suspect he will stay (as Rumsfeld did), though in an ironic way Bush’s moderate SC appointment is no good for Rove who needs a big domestic story to take the heat off him. On the issue of Roe vs Wade from a legal point of view it does strike me as a judgement that is likely to be overturned in the future. It seems astonishing that the SC still continues to believe that the federal government should set all abortion laws over state governments. As for the filibuster issue, remember the filibuster traditionally has been used for v.bad purposes such as blocking attempted civil rights reforms in the 50s and 60s. Personally I would be happy to see it go.
34.A “Wash”? Many in the Rep base are worried that Robetrs might morph into a Souter like Justice, bacuse he lacks a clear Paper Trail. They will put Bush under very heavy pressure to choose a Scalia/Thomas type Justice next time. That’s when Bush will have a real dilemma, please his base and risk upsetting the moderates in the Republic hegemony he is seeking to build? Or alienate his base?
Course you’re right thanks to redistrciting Congress is no achieving North Korean Style 99% Re-Election rate, so they will retain tha, the Senate is more interesting but again a hold. In both Cases it wouldn’t Suprise me though to see the Democrats make small inroads, Bushs’s call to have a VP who is not running for President, means all of em will be thinking of that, and Party Unity will qquickly Start to Fray.
36 - Bush would never have chosen Roberts if he thought there was any prospect of him being another Souter. Almost all the Conservative interest groups like Focus on the Family, Progress for America and the Family Research Council have warmly endorsed the Robert’s nomination. Have a look at some of the articles linked below for your interest:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/
IIRC the Novak leak grand jury term expires in october, so that indictments (if any) have to be delivered by then. in my book that makes the tradesports markets (jul/aug/sept) a bad buy, but the moment they open an october market (probably early aug) that changes things.
innocent until proven guilty, of course, and bush is loyal to his friends, but to have someone like rove facing a criminal trial and keeping his job is surely inconceivable. even for this white house.
32,33 - The parental consent laws generally fall foul of Roe unless there is a “judicial bypass” option allowing the minor to go to a judge for approval that the minor is sufficently emotionally mature. This potentially creates a large loophole.
37. Visit the Andrew Sullivan WebBlog, there are links there to references of concern by senior conservatives. The fact they have endorsed him was to be expected,(it was shrewd to make people believe for a while Clement was the nominee, it mean’t enormous relief and goodwill when she wasn’t from his base), they aren’t sure. Any way the thing with Souter nominees is you can’t predict the appointment is for life. George HW Bush didn’t expect Souter to turn out like he did, nor going further back did Ike with his Supreme Court Picks, with his famous remark that he made two mistakes in his Presidency and Both were now Sitting On the supreme court. You’re probably right but you can never be Sure in politics, and he is no Scalia, of whom there was never any doubt 37.
40 - Roberts is more of a Rehnquist than a Scalia. I’ve read Andrew Sullivan’s weblog and I’ve never placed much stock in what Andrew Sullivan writes. People like James Dobson have never been shy about making their views known or challenging a President of their own party in the past and you can rest assured that the whole world would know if they were not satisfied with Roberts. Bush has to balance the conservatism of his nominee with the need to get him through the Senate without a filibuster. That doesn’t mean softening his principles, it simply means that it’s unlikely that he will choose the most bombastic and acerbic conservative he can find, when there is someone on offer who is just as conservative but less personally objectionable to the opposition. That is the lesson of the Bork nomination.
41. Yes it’s a shrewd Pick by Bush/Rove. I didn’t mean Bush had picked a guy unacceptable to people like Dobson even if he were personally inclined to do so which of course he ain’t it would have been political suicide. But i do get the feeling, that he was not shall we say have been the first or even the second or third choice of someone like Dobson. Roberts feels like the bare minimum in terms of conservativeness they could accept.
As for Sullivan i wasn’t interested so much in what he wrote, he can be wacky i admit but i think you still maybe overharsh, as in the links he provided to various conservative comments. The overwhelming feeliong was one of well, he’s Ok but Bush could have done better(from theirpoint of view).
42 - I take your point. No question that Roberts was two or three down the list of preferences for some of the most passionate social conservative activists. The important thing is that he was in fact on the list.
Keep in mind that Bush is virtually certain to have at least one more opportunity before his term expires to fill a vacancy on the court, and most probably the chance to appoint a new chief justice. It is entirely possible that Michael Luttig and Edith Jones will be reconsidered for this next vacancy and further that their Judicial Icon, Tony Scalia will become Chief Justice of the United States. The next vacancy will be pay day for the real red-meat social conservatives who form Bush’s political base.
Paul M [32] - thanks. I take it from your last sentence that you mean there is no momentum for a constitutional amendment. I could see the pro-lifers seeking measures to restrict abortion in “liberal” States to, say, women on the voters’ roll, for example - surely they’ll want a law to stop women just flying out of State for a termination. As usual, conservatives seem to be about procuring one law for the rich and another for the poor!
43. I agree but hear i think Rehnquist’s decision not to go similtaneously with O’connor will give Bush a headache, as i think he was expecting to be able to name two nominees at once, a Red Meat Conservative and Roberts. It would also have stretched any Democratic opposition, but now since since Reid shows every sign of not taking the bait by opposing Roberts they will have more time to prepare. I think the easiest thing for Bush to do will be to name Scalia Chief Justice, i think the Deomcrats are shrewd enough to know that it is the Numbers on the Court not the awarding of the Title of Chief Justice that is the really important point, and while i expect Rehnquist to go in Bush’s Term, if he hangs on say until after the mid terms or even closer to it Bush will find it progressively more difficult to name a Scalia Type Figure or evenm a Clarence Thomas Type Figure to the court as his political capital wanes.
43. I agree but hear i think Rehnquist’s decision not to go similtaneously with O’connor will give Bush a headache, as i think he was expecting to be able to name two nominees at once, a Red Meat Conservative and Roberts. It would also have stretched any Democratic opposition, but now since since Reid shows every sign of not taking the bait by opposing Roberts they will have more time to prepare. I think the easiest thing for Bush to do will be to name Scalia Chief Justice, i think the Deomcrats are shrewd enough to know that it is the Numbers on the Court not the awarding of the Title of Chief Justice that is the really important point, and while i expect Rehnquist to go in Bush’s Term, if he hangs on say until after the mid terms or even closer to it Bush will find it progressively more difficult to name a Scalia Type Figure or even a Clarence Thomas Type Figure to the court as his political capital wanes.
43. I agree but hear i think Rehnquist’s decision not to go similtaneously with O’connor will give Bush a headache, as i think he was expecting to be able to name two nominees at once, a Red Meat Conservative and Roberts. It would also have stretched any Democratic opposition, but now since since Reid shows every sign of not taking the bait by opposing Roberts they will have more time to prepare. I think the easiest thing for Bush to do will be to name Scalia Chief Justice, i think the Deomcrats are shrewd enough to know that it is the Numbers on the Court not the awarding of the Title of Chief Justice that is the really important point, and while i expect Rehnquist to go in Bush’s Term, if he hangs on say until after the mid terms or even closer to it Bush will find it progressively more difficult to name a Scalia Type Figure or even a Clarence Thomas Type Figure to the court as his political capital wanes.
45 - You’re right in that the longer Rehnquist waits, and the closer the end of Bush’s term gets, the more difficult it becomes from him to name a justice in the mold of Scalia because Democrats will take the view that Bush is a lame duck and they can just run out the clock on him. But, Rehnquist knows that as well as you or I do. He’s not going to leave it that long. He’ll be gone within a year and well in advance of the mid-term Congressional Elections. The last thing Rehnquist wants is a Democrat President appointing his successor.
48. I agree but Mid Terms are in November 2006. As of Jan 1st the Countdown will be in real earnest. I would say Rehnquist did Bush a real disservice by not going now as he deprived him of the Chance to please everyone, while he was at his Strongest. Even if he goes very early next year, by then Campaign Season will be under way, and Rehnquist will have made things needlessly much tougher for Bush than he could/should have done had he wanted to do the best possible thing for his President.
In other words Bush could be forced into naming another Roberts rather than a really pleasing Choice for himself and his base.
44 - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/28/AR2005042801943.html
Passed by the House but not yet debated by the Senate.
49 - On the contrary, I can think of no better motivator for the conservative base of the Republican Party in preparation for the 2006 Congressional Elections than a freshly named conservative Supreme Court appointee, in the mould of Scalia or Thomas. Of course it could also energise the Democratic base, but the Republicans won that game in the run up to November 2004. It could be very good political strategy on Rehnquist’s part.
52. I see your logic, but would argue that this may be as good as it gets for the Republicans in terms of Senate Control, i think at best it is likely to be a Score Draw, with the slim chance maybe of a one or two seat reduction, and every vote counts. I think most people judge the mid terms as marking the effective beginning of the rapid downward slope towards laame duckedness.
My feeling is ego or sheer love of his Job played a far greater role in Rehnquists’s Decision not to go now than Political Strategy. I think the moment could hardly have been more propitious for Bush and the Republicans to get a triple whammy,Chief Justice Antonin Scalia, a Ulra Raw Red Meat Conservative Justice to Replace Rehnquist himselfs and Roberts.
53 - Well, if that is the case, it is Rehnquist’s right. He’s been a reliable conservative vote all his years on the court and the appointment was for life. In a way, I can understand him not wanting to be stampeded off the bench. Perhaps some respect and discretion (on the part of those calling for him to go) is indicated here?
54. I’m not calling for him to go if that’s what you mean. As i’m not an American i have purely neutral interest in these affair.
54 - Of course not, I’m not an American either. I’m pointing out that similar calls on the other side of the Atlantic to the effect that the timing would have been better had he gone at the same time as O’Connor may be having a counter-productive effect.
53 - “My feeling is ego or sheer love of his Job played a far greater role in Rehnquists’s Decision not to go now than Political Strategy”
I think for someone who is that ill, holding on to one’s job becomes quite important in one’s determination to live.
57 - Quite right, BV.
AH- Extract from Today’s Sunday Times Re Roberts-
So far the biggest counterblast against Roberts’s nomination has come from the right, not the left. The firebrand conservative columnist Ann Coulter launched a fierce attack, comparing him to an alien.
“Let’s ponder the fact that Roberts has gone through 50 years on this planet without ever saying anything controversial. That’s just unnatural,” she wrote. “It is as if he is from some space alien sleeper cell.
“Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never,” she concluded. But most die-hard American rightwingers, who are being subjected to a White House charm offensive, are holding their breath and hoping for the best.
At issue are the judge’s little-known views on the landmark Supreme Court ruling, Roe v Wade, which permits legal abortion in America and is a litmus test for conservatives and liberSo far the biggest counterblast against Roberts’s nomination has come from the right, not the left. The firebrand conservative columnist Ann Coulter launched a fierce attack, comparing him to an alien.
“Let’s ponder the fact that Roberts has gone through 50 years on this planet without ever saying anything controversial. That’s just unnatural,” she wrote. “It is as if he is from some space alien sleeper cell.
“Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never,” she concluded. But most die-hard American rightwingers, who are being subjected to a White House charm offensive, are holding their breath and hoping for the best.
At issue are the judge’s little-known views on the landmark Supreme Court ruling, Roe v Wade, which permits legal abortion in America and is a litmus test for conservatives and liber
Interest - With all due respect, Ann Coulter is so far out of it I wouldn’t take anything she says as representative of mainline conservative opinion. All the real power-brokers, all the people that matter, in the conservative movement have endorsed the Roberts nomination.
I should have added that I have read Coulter’s books and I am of the same general philosophy that she is, but her real niche is entertainment value and not much else.
60&61.”Interest - With all due respect” Ouch damned with faint Praise. I wasn’t endorsing Ann Coulter as the Voice of Americaana Conservatism, but just thought the article might interest, and that others while not going as far as Coulter, and prepared to follow the White House’s Lead are it must be Said Doing So with a Distinct Lack Of Enthusiasm.
62 - There may be a lack of enthusiasm in some quarters, but not all quarters. Can’t please everyone. It should also be noted that the interest groups on the Liberal side are distinctly unenthusiastic as well, and I think, will become more hostile as the nomination proceeds to the next stage.
63. True enough, but i hope you understand that i wasn’t saying anything particular to represent Ann Coulter as the Prevailing Views of the Conservative mainstream, as you seemingly mistakenly thought iwass.
53 Re Liberal Interesyt Groupps. True some of the more hardline will weigh in, but i think it will be a largely token defence so it is not a complete free ride, with maybe a small scale fishing expedsition just in case anytthing dropped from the sky of John Robert’s past to derail his Nomination. Most will folow Harry Reid’s Lead and hold fire at least until the Next Supreme Court Nominaation.
53 Re Liberal Interest Groupps. True some of the more hardline will weigh in, but i think it will be a largely token defence so it is not a complete free ride, with maybe a small scale fishing expedsition just in case anyt thing dropped from the sky of John Robert’s past to derail his Nomination. Most will folow Harry Reid’s Lead and hold fire at least until the Next Supreme Court Nominaation.
53. Re Liberal Interest Groups. True some of the more hardline will weigh in, but i think it will be a largely token defence so it is not a complete free ride, with maybe a small scale fishing expedsition just in case anyt thing dropped from the sky of John Robert’s past to derail his Nomination. Most will folow Harry Reid’s Lead and hold fire at least until the Next Supreme Court Nominaation.
Sorry that should of course have been for 63.
64 - You misinterpret my comments entirely, my dear friend. I know you weren’t putting her views forth as the gospel of the US conservative movement, but I took the opportunity to point out that there is really no serious opposition to Roberts within that community and the only ones speaking out are cranks and people like Coulter who are really on the fringes - that’s why dissenting opinions amoong more established leaders of the movement are difficult to find. Rest assured, I was challenging your argument as put to me, not your own views.
67 - I agree that in the end the resistance from the Democratic side won’t amount to much, but that’s not because they wouldn’t like it to. It speaks to the brilliance of Bush’s choice in selecting someone with little paper trail to speak of and who’s legal credentials are beyond question. He has effectively disarmed the opposition.
It’s interesting to see some of the commentary here.
The latest court nominee is interesting in that a largely unknown candidate was rushed out to cover for a rash of unfavorable press stories regarding Rove, while the arguments in his defense have become increasingly untenable.
Just as interesting is that Attorney General Gonzales was passed over for consideration because of his involvement in the same scandal. He seems to have become the scandal’s first victim.
Regarding the thread topic, as has been pointed out above, the grand jury’s term expires in October, and any major indictments, as with this case, are usually handed down at the end of the term.
71 - That seems like a rather partisan Democratic take on the situation. My information suggests that it is more likely that the Attorney General was passed over for this particular appointment because social conservatives were not comfortable with his bona fides on issues of import to them, not because of any link to the Plame situation.
72: Gonzales, who was the first one notified by the Justice Department that they had opened the investigation at the request of the CIA, was told to tell the White House to “preserve all materials” related to the investigation. He instead waited 12 hours before notification, and, as he himself confirmed on television today, gave advance word to Andrew Card before giving out the general notification.
That would certainly have come out in the confirmation hearing, and would be an incident the White House would want to avoid publcizing widely in the form of a direct confrontation.
How can a puppet get rid of its own puppet master? There would be nobody to pull the strings. It just isn’t going to happen that Bush could cope without Rove.