Informed Speculation

Steve Schmidt is the leader of the effort to move the Alito nomination through Congress, and he was kind enough to speak with some bloggers today in another in a series of conference calls arranged by the great Patrick Ruffini, now with the RNC’s eCampaign efforts. So let’s get right to it (by the way, I really wanted to get a question in this time, but I’ve been ill with a cold and can barely speak, so, thus, my silence for the second straight call):

Patrick introduced Steve and mentioned that also present was Brian Jones, the RNC Communications Director. Matt David from the confirmation team was also participating.

Steve talked a few minutes about the great resume (“one of the most qualified nominees ever”) of Judge Alito. He informed us that most of this week has been spent meeting with many senators, and reminded us that Alito has been unanimously confirmed twice by the Senate. He also mentioned the large number of Democratic and liberal constitutional scholars who have praised the abilities of Judge Alito.

Mr. Schmidt also singled out two unfair attacks by name: the People For the American Way ad that is scheduled for release this weekend, and Newsday’s recent attack on the ethics of the Judge for not recusing himself in a case involving his brokerage, where, said Mr. Schmidt, there was no compelling reason or obligation for Alito to recuse himself, since the issue had no material impact on his own holdings. Schmidt said this would be akin to saying that you had to recuse yourself from cases involving your utility provider.

Question number one came from James Joyner of Outside the Beltway, whose account can be found here. Joyner asked why this nomination did not come first, rather than Harriet Miers, who was obviously unqualified. Mr. Schmidt replied that this call was concerning the first week of the Alito nomination, that he enjoyed working with Ms. Miers, and that she is fully involved and engaged in serving the President.

Question 2 was from Bulldog Pundit of Ankle Biting Pundits, who also has his account up. He mentioned the Gang of 14, and how two Democrats among them, Salazar and Pryor, have expressed disappointment that there was no consultation on this nomination. The question, then, was whether Alito’s name had come up in the consultations about Roberts and Miers, and if so, what the Democratic reaction had been.

Schmidt replied that he did not wish to remark on private conversations with the President, but mentioned an unprecedented level of consultations over the past 3 months regarding the various nominees, a figure he put at 155.

Question 3 was from Tim Chapman of Townhall.com (see his account here). Chapman said he had spoken with 2 judicial staffers today and they expressed confidence that there would be no filibuster. Did Schmidt agree, and who should conservative bloggers lean on that might be a little wobbly?

Schmidt said he thought that a significant signal of momentum was the actual setting of a floor vote date by Specter and Leahy on January 20, and he mentioned the 22 Democrats who voted against Roberts as unlikely to vote for the similarly excellent candidate Alito.

John Hawkins of Right Wing News got two questions in: first, would Bush support the ‘Constitutional’ option if it came to it? The reply was that, first of all, Schmidt was confident that a filibuster was not forthcoming, and second, that the Senate’s procedural issues were the responsiblity of the Senators.

Later, Hawkins asked how confident Schmidt was that there would be support from at least 50 Republicans? Unsurprisingly, Schmidt was very confident, indeed.

Flip Purdo(?? – not sure on this one) Flip Pidot asked how likely it was that the schedule laid out by Specter and Leahy would be adhered to. Schmidt said obviously the White House would have preferred hearings by the end of December, but that he had a tremendous amount of respect for the job Specter is doing in organizing the hearings, that Specter did a great job with the Roberts hearings, and that he expected no less this time.

Matt Margolis (his account is here) followed up on that point, saying that he had a hard time believing the White House was satisfied with the January 9th start date for the hearings, and that all recent nominees, Democrats or Republican, had moved much more quickly. Wasn’t Specter merely pandering to Democratic pressure?

Schmidt said that he did not believe that was the case, and he mentioned the upcoming holidays as a factor. He also said no one was concerned; scrutiny is important, but Alito can stand up to the scrutiny.