Leaking Like A Sieve

Yesterday afternoon Byron York posted a report on the morale of the White House Miers Support Team, and suffice it to say, "bleak" would have been akin to pants-wetting joy at this point:

Strategists working with the White House in support of the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers are becoming increasingly demoralized and pessimistic about the nomination's prospects on Capitol Hill in the wake of Miers's meetings with several Republican and Democratic senators. On a conference call held this morning, they even discussed whether Miers should simply stop visiting with lawmakers, lest any further damage be done — and so that time spent in such get-acquainted sessions will not cut into Miers's intensive preparation for her confirmation hearing....

None wanted to be identified, because they do not want to openly oppose the White House or defy loyalists like Leo who are trying hard to defend Miers. Nevertheless, they paint a grim portrait of morale among those close to the nomination.

"The number of participants is declining," says one knowledgeable source. "With Roberts, these calls occurred five or six or seven times a week. Pretty early on, the calls on Miers were scaled back to twice a week. That says something in and of itself."

"It's been a gradual descent into almost silence," says a second source of the calls. "The meetings with the senators are going terribly. On a scale of one to 100, they are in negative territory. The thought now is that they have to end....Obviously the smart thing to do would be to withdraw the nomination and have a do-over as soon as possible. But the White House is so irrational that who knows? As of this morning, there is a sort of pig-headed resolve to press forward, cancel the meetings with senators if necessary, and bone up for the hearings."

A little over two hours later York posted this update in the Corner:

At about 6:30 this evening, a White House source called to say that whatever strategy that was discussed in "The Miers Support Team: Gloomy and Demoralized" was the thinking of a third-party group, and not of the White House. "The White House has not discussed changing the plans," the source said. "It [the article] may represent what a third-party group thinks, but it is not representative of the mood or the strategic thinking of the White House. We were quite happy with the setting of a [hearing] date of November 7 yesterday, we feel like we're moving forward, and that's a very good thing."

Well, well, well. Let's take a look-see at this, shall we?

First, it seems that the White House feared the notion of "insiders" deviating from the designated "oblivious optimism" script getting out, and so immediately wanted to emphasize that the "gloomy and demoralized" angle was from a "third party." However, reading through York's initial report, he never said that his story came from "White House sources," but from participants in these dwindling, disspirited conference calls.

Second, it seems that the White House fears the notion of ANYBODY deviating from the designated "oblivious optimism" script and is reflexively peppering every discouraging word from any direction with "We feel good about this nomination's chances - WE FEEL GOOD, I SAID!!!" insistences.

Third, it would appear that these conference calls are going to dwindle by at least three more participants, either because they drop out or because the Bushies identify them and summarily expel them from the WHMST bunker.

Fourth, this nomination has to be in heap big trouble if this White House - ordinarily tighter than a bull's ass in fly season - is springing leaks, even indirect ones, of this magnitude.

Unsurprisingly, we wake up this morning to this news:

Harriet Miers - whose courtesy calls with senators in their Capitol Hill offices have been more chaotic than courteous - has finished the tour, the White House has told congressional aides.

Miss Miers will spend the next two weeks cramming for her Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Republican Senate staffers working on the nomination told the Washington Times yesterday.

The meetings have been fraught with misunderstandings and disagreements, giving ammunition to detractors, both liberal and conservative, that Miss Miers is in over her head.

And by "finished the tour," they meant "cut it short," as in "cutting their losses." Chief Justice Roberts met with over half of the Senate's 100 members; Miers is bailing out after only twenty-five. This is an astonishing admission of the Miers nomination's weakness, which isn't helped by the cover excuse that she has to "cram" for her hearings. She's supposed to know the material already, and as any college student knows, when you "cram" you forget most of it as soon as the exam is over. And in this case the "exam" is oral, administered by (in this case) eighteen hostile "professors" in front of the entire nation, and lasts for at least a full week.

Pressure and not having "boned up" aren't typically a real good formula for success.

But the President can't be convinced of that:

President Bush insisted Thursday that Harriet Miers would win over any skeptics and be seated on the U.S. Supreme Court, even as the embattled nominee worked on a "do-over" questionnaire for irritated senators overseeing the confirmation process.

"Harriet will answer all the questions asked," Bush said during a Rose Garden news conference to showcase his visit with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. "Out of this will come a clear picture of a competent, strong, capable woman who shares the same judicial philosophy that I share."

As though "insisting" will make it so.

Sounds irrational and pig-headed to me.

And you can quote me on that.

UPDATE: Pig-headed is an understatement, according to one GOP Senator:

The Republican said the President is absolutely convinced, without question, that Miers is the right choice, and that even if Miers herself wanted to withdraw, the President would not accept it. [my emphasis]

What the hell? What does he mean, Bush "wouldn't accept it"? If she came to her senses, even only for her "best president ever!!!!!!"'s sake, he couldn't force her to run the gauntlet anyway. So what does that mean? Coercion? Blackmail? "You're gonna go through with this even if we have to kill you and wrap your skinsack around Karl Rove"? Has this man lost his frakking mind?

It is starting to look like it.