Informed Speculation

John Fund, who made waves a few days ago when he suggested that six or seven surprises were in store in the coming days regarding the Miers nomination, has a new piece out that pillories the vetting process, or lack thereof, that led to the nomination.

I don’t think this is one of the surprises; it is, however, an interesting look at the behind-the-scenes manuevering that led to the nomination (if you’re looking for a villian, Miers-haters, Fund has one for you – Andy Card). I was struck by one phrase, however: “…President Bush is ultimately responsible for the increasingly untenable selection”. I don’t quibble with Bush’s responsibility, but I wonder: is the Miers nomination increasingly untenable? Peggy Noonan and Fund both mention the great Mickey Kaus, who has said:

How about appointing Miers to a federal appeals court? She’s qualified. Bush could say that while he knows Miers he understands others’ doubts–and he knows she will prove over a couple of years what a first-rate judge she is. Then he hopes to be able to promote her. Semi-humilating, but less humiliating than the alternatives. And not a bad job to get. … Miers could puncture the tension with one smiling crack about being sent to the minors. The collective sigh of national relief would drown out the rest of her comments. …

Well, it’s not a bad idea…but I think this is wishful thinking on the part of the doubters. If we know anything about George W. Bush by now, we know that he is stubbornly loyal.

Bush will not withdraw Miers, nor pressure her to withdraw. Only two things will kill this nomination; either Miers withdraws on her own volition, or she is rejected by the Senate…