Hillary Clinton On The Supreme Court?

James Miller, writing in the WaPo, suggests a way for Obama to appease Hillary (ooh, I know Obamites don't like that word "appease") without offering her the VP slot - promise that he will appoint her to the Supreme Court.

Either Mr. Miller or I have lost our marbles - is there any chance in the world that Republicans would ever allow this?  C'mon, if Robert Bork wasn't qualified, how could Hillary be?

Mr. Miller says this:

Senate confirmation would be all but certain, even putting aside the gains that Democrats are likely to make in November. Clinton could be confirmed in the current alignment. Democrats would want to support their new president, and those who like Clinton would vote for her. Members of either party who aren't fans might also be happy enough about her leaving the Senate to vote to confirm her.

Dare we even mention the Whitewater/Travel Office debacle?  I am a huge fan of "innocent until proven guilty", but that means we don't throw people in jail unless there is clear evidence of their guilt, not that we throw them onto the Supreme Court unless there is clear evidence of their guilt.  This is the Times editorial summary of the Ray Report on the Travel office:

The independent counsel Robert Ray has concluded that Hillary Rodham Clinton was ''factually false'' in sworn testimony about her role in the firing of seven members of the White House travel staff in 1993. At the same time he has concluded that he cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt in court that her statements were ''knowingly false,'' and therefore will not pursue criminal charges against her. Judging from the voluminous public record, Mr. Ray's decision to drop the case is legally sound. Judging from the same record, his characterization of Mrs. Clinton's account of her role in the matter also seems on the mark.

...As to Mrs. Clinton's truthfulness, the underlying issue is whether she had any ''input'' or played a ''role'' in the firings, which were themselves legally permissible. On at least two occasions, including sworn testimony to the independent counsel in 1995, she denied playing such a role -- a point made again this week by her lawyers, who said that while Mrs. Clinton had been concerned about financial improprieties in the travel office, she did not ''knowingly'' intend to influence the decision to fire the seven employees. Mr. Ray, although conceding that he could not prove a criminal case against Mrs. Clinton, clearly did not believe this account. He cited conversations and memorandums suggesting that the firings had occurred because White House aides understood that that was the outcome desired by a powerful and persistent first lady.

Or we could re-hash the whole Whitewater debacle (Times summary of final report) with the missing billing records and the phony Castle Grande option deal.  Ray did not think he could prove she was lying, but unlike with the missing FBI files, he did not assert her innocence either.

We can't prove she's a crook, so let's make her a judge?  I don't think so.

MORE:  Jack Balkin questions the political wisdom:

If Obama has something like this on his mind, however, he is unlikely to announce it publicly during the middle of a Presidential campaign. Telling the Republicans that he plans to nominate Hillary Clinton to the Supreme Court would be like waiving a red flag in front of a bull. It would make particularly concrete to the conservative base -- who are otherwise wary about John McCain but who are very concerned about controlling the judiciary-- why they needed to defeat Obama in the fall.

Indeed.

 

Comments

[Jane]

I dunno, it will be hard for Hill to extort anyone from the Court, and equally difficult for her to wield the kind of power the Clinton's are fond of. I can't imagine why she would want that job.

[danking70]

How about her work on Watergate?

[Tully]

SCOTUS?!?!?! LMAO. Uh uh.

My best guess at this point is a prominent job with "firt woman to" in front of it, one that enhances and advances her current political power and position. Senate Majority Leader, for example.

[danking70]

She won't be able to make nearly enough money on the Supreme Court than in Congress. What lobbyist lobbies the Supreme Court?

[LindaK]

Think Hillary would trust BO to make good on his promise? Not.

[clarice]

Stuff to fill empty space..a ridiculous suggestion.

OTOH, Rich Lowry does have a thoughtful piece--he argues Hill has won 3 of the 4 quarters of this race and is the Al Gore of 2008, not that the Dems seem to mind this time, but they oughta.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MjQ4NjU0OGYyMmZkYWNlMTgyYzQxZmRjOGJiNDg2ZDc=>Hilagore

[Rick Ballard]

Interesting fluff but I believe that history is clear concerning the Clinton's operating on a cash in advance basis when selling votes, pardons or influence. They wouldn't take a "the check's in the mail" promise from a notorious liar, 'takes one to know one' applies perfectly in this instance.

I don't doubt that she can be bought off but it's going to take a Soros, Bing, Lewis or Pritzker with cash in hand (donation to the Bubba Bling Memorial Library - tax deductible, dontcha know) to move her considerable butt out of the race.

Senate Majority Leader is a position that BHO cannot deliver.

[cathyf]

Ah, c'mon, you didn't mention my personal favorite the cattle futures!

(Boy, you slighted the whole finance industry... *sniff*)

[Jane]

Senate Majority Leader is a position that BHO cannot deliver.

But Harry Reid seems willing. I keep hearing he is offering it.

[jimmyk]

There's also her unscrupulous behavior when she was cousel on the Watergate committee.

To quote the site:

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old
Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

[Schornick]

If Hillary comes up for confirmation to the Supreme Court, conservatives might be happy that the gang of 14 struck that deal. After all, imagine being stuck with Hillary and a straight up or down vote and no filibuster.

Makes me shudder.

[Danube of Thought]

The Senate Democratic caucus could deliver on the majority leader offer, and might be inclined to do so.

Some of the recent disclosures amplifying what was known about her behavior during the Watergate investigation would not be helpful to her at all. Somehow, I am just not cynical enough to believe that even this low, dishonest bunch would be willing to put a person generally and accurately known to be a dishonest crook on the Supreme Court. It would sully that insitution for decades to come.

And I have serious doubts that she would want the job.

[clarice]

I believe the gang of 14 deal expires with this term.

[bgates]

I believe the gang of 14 deal expires at the convenience of the Democrats.

[Rick Ballard]

The gang has already been reduced to 12 (DeWine and Chafee having reaped their reward in '06). Warner's retirement will drop it to 11 and a Landrieu loss could drop it to 10. Dr. Buddy Witherspoon hopes to reduce it to 9 but unsaddling Lindsey Graham in the primary is probably too high a hill to climb.

Not that I don't applaud the effort.

[MikeS]

I think Obama should put Hillary in charge of his new program to have people in other countries decide what we eat and what the temperature should be inside of our homes.

[Danube of Thought]

The Gang deal is not enforceable against anyone anyway. And there is zero doubt in my jaded mind that the Dems will not hesitate one nanosecond to implement the GOP's "nuclear option" should they find it expedient to do so. What on earth would restrain them?

If McCain does not prevail, the federal judiciary, starting at its top, might well become much more fiendishly mischievous than anyone has heretofore dared dream.

[bgates]

Rick - now that you mention it, it seems like some kind of crime against nature that South Carolina is not yet represented in the Senate by a man named "Dr Buddy Witherspoon."

[RichatUF]

Going off topic for a moment this article across the pond already has the Obamessiah Year Zero penciled in.

Thought this was a it funny-

The atmosphere is akin to that of an internet start-up company - relaxed but with an earnest calm. Only a handful of senior staff have glass offices and there is none for Mr Obama himself, who drops in every time he returns to Chicago.

[Neo]

Hiliary must know this is one hell of a Pandora's box.

Every unanswered question for TravelGate, Whitewater, Filegate, etc. etc. would be open for questions.

The only problem, given the limit time to ask questions in committee, would be choosing which questions to fore go.

[Syl]

Speaking of Hillary, I have a modest proposal.

There seems to be a bunch of political re-aligning going on in America these days and much of the country is so hungry for 'change' that the wrong decision in November could drive us off the cliff.

The Democratic party is in the throes of a split with many Hillary supporters saying their party is leaving them.

The Republican party is in the dumps and kind of confused about what to do and how to re-brand. Hannity is finally realizing that something is going on, but he is still sticking to the same ol' same ol' and thinks Wright and Ayers will save the Republicans from disaster. Not good enough.

Although this will only garner ridicule from most folks here, the perception of Hillary has changed over the last couple of months from one of pure contempt to a grudging respect for her strength and toughness. Yes, she'll do anything to win but the way she's been connecting with certain demographics, found her voice, so to speak, is not all phony. She is smart and hard working and even Republicans who have worked with her admire that about her.

I don't agree at all with her domestic vision, nor her addiction to government. However she'd be far better than Obama--by miles and miles--in the foreign policy arena.

Obama scares me. Really scares me. I'm fine with McCain but am afraid the Democrats in their fervor and with the press's help will be successful in portraying him as an old Bush.

Ridiculous, I know, but it could and very well may happen. If Hillary goes whole hog to help the Democrats win it will be even worse because she may convince her supporters who have threatened to vote for McCain to give in and vote for Obama.

So I am worried about November.

My proposal is that McCain ask Hillary to be on his ticket as V.P.

Yes, many conservatives will go bananas. So will many liberals. The 'scary' left will vote Obama, the 'scary' right will stay home.

Moderates, many independents, sane Democrats, sane Republicans will vote McCain/Hillary.

(maybe...LOL)

If this country truly wants change, this would be CHANGE writ large. But it would have to happen fairly soon so we'd all get a chance to get used to the idea.

Okay, start the spitballs!

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Syl, the biggest objection I have to the idea is much the same one I think Obama has to HRC as VP: the need to hire a Presidential food taster and make sure that Hilary is aboard Air Force One any time it leaves the ground.

[centralcal]

LOL, Charlie. You got it right!

Speaking of VP's I see McCain is hosting, Romney, Crist, and Jindal this weekend to start the VP process. Supposedly Senators Graham and Lieberman will also be there (as advisors?). The guest list is "10 couples" per the report I saw, but these names only account for 5. Any guesses who the other 5 couples might be?

[Tully]

Senate Majority Leader is a position that BHO cannot deliver.

But it's well within the scope of the DNC and the Senate Democrats, who would like to see Clinton NOT take the party down this round. And Reid hasn't exactly been a barn-burning success.

It's not ALL about the nomination. It's also about control of the party and its agenda for the next four years. Clinton is not likely to get the nomination at this point, but she CAN make life rough for the party, and she WILL get a rpice for not so doing.

[RichatUF]

centralcal-

Any guesses who the other 5 couples might be?

These are only guesses:

Mark Sanford SC Governor
Tim Pawlenty MN Governor
Sarah Paulin AK Governor
Frank Keating former OK Governor

That would be my list: the Keating pick is a bit tounge-in-cheek but he could run well with Catholics and does have domestic security and executive credentials. He's a loose cannon and can shoot off his mouth. If I were to put money on it, I'd say Gov. Sanford. He's got solid conservative credentials, an extensive fundraising network in FL, CA, and NY, and is fairly young at 48.

[centralcal]

RichatUF: Good list. Pawlenty is a NO - he says he is attending a wedding that weekend.

Actually, I don't think ALL the invitees are potential VP candidates - some might be "evaluators" along the lines of Graham and Lieberman. I was curious who else McCain might include on the advisor list. Fred Thompson?

[centralcal]

Oh, btw - this is only one of what I am sure will be many meetings. Probably not anywhere near the elimination rounds yet.

[centralcal]

Oh, and I surely don't want to see Huckabee's name on this or any future list!

[Soylent Red]

Syl:

While I'm with you in spirit WRT to the catastrophe an unchecked Obamessiah administration would be, you might be taking things a bit far...

As for potential Veeps...

McCain should be interviewing potentials based on three criteria:

1. Age (should be young)
2. Conservative credibility (to augment his own with the base)
3. Size of demographic they bring to the table, or split from the opposition.

As you all know, I am a big advocate of JC Watts or Michael Steele, so I hope they'll be invited for a look. I like Jindal but he is probably more useful unsnarling the mess where he's at.

[Bob from Ohio]

Syl

I had the same idea the week of the Ohio primary.

Even have a slogan:

McCain/Clinton 2008--Yes, it did freeze over.

Seriously, it is a great idea. It would win 45+ states.

[Jane]

OT:

Let me tell you about politics in MA - I posted earlier that in 2001 the democrat legislature overturned the law that allowed the governor to appoint a replacement for the US house or senate if a member died. They managed to force the legislation thru in 3 days because we had a republican governor and Joe Moakley was on his death bed. The new rule was that a special election must take place.

Today the democrat legislature decided that they may pass new legislation that will allow Deval Patrick to decide our new senator if Ted Kennedy dies. Since it only takes 3 days, I'm sure they will wait until they are sure it is in Deval's shortlived political cycle. Can't risk a special election - not gonna do it.

[clarice]

Which Kennedy do you think it will be. Jane?Man.

[MikeS]

McCain/Clinton 2008--Yes, it did freeze over.
I don't think I could swallow that ticket. I do however think it would be a great idea to leak that there are Democrats, Women, and racial Minorities on the list, and try to encourage some conversation on the idea.

[hit and run]

Hell, just put the rumor out that Hillary has approached McCain about the Veep slot.

How does one slip something like that to Drudge?

[hit and run]

And then a few days later the rumor that Bill has approached McCain about a SCOTUS nomination in exchange for his support...

[Porchlight]

Chris Cox was talked about a few weeks ago.

I'd be very disappointed in Jindal if he was offered the VP slot and accepted. He has plenty of time to run for President later - Louisiana needs him right now. I don't think he's interested. I hope I'm right.

[Jane]

Which Kennedy do you think it will be. Jane?

Initial reports are his wife. Some talk of one of Joe's kids, and then some talk of Caroline.

[clarice]

One hates to seem unkind but the genetic trail has run very thin by now,Jane..not that it ever carried the deity DNA as was rumored.

[Elliott]

The last place I remember seeing Giuliani's name mentioned in the context of McCain's selection of a running mate was Dan McLaughlin's analysis at Red State posted three weeks ago. McLaughlin dismissed him on the grounds that McCain can't have a pro-choice running mate. I do recall a bit of speculation about a McCain-Giuliani ticket when Giuliani dropped out, but little since. Unlike Rice, his name hasn't been floated even as a trial balloon.

I am intrigued by the silence, especially since boris is not alone in suggesting that a running mate like Lieberman would be the best choice for McCain. Al Hunt suggested that McCain would like to choose Lieberman, but is worried about the reaction within the party. Doug Schoen has said that McCain would be well advised to pick a moderate.

It's true that a McCain-Giuliani ticket wouldn't be a unity ticket, that Giuliani's personal life has been far more sordid than Sen. Lieberman's*, and that Giuliani's favorability ratings are not anywhere near as strong as they were before his Presidential run. While Giuliani's credibility with voters on national security issues may be rivaled by Lieberman's**, if McCain is going to choose a pro-choice running mate, why not someone not only with more executive experience than either Democrat*** but also whose success in improving New York City must rank as the most impressive executive accomplishment in American politics since the end of the cold war?
________________
*The current and immediate past Governors of New York have been doing their best to make Giuliani's personal life look okay. Kerik still looms, however.
**Something I don't believe can be said for anyone else rumored to be under serious consideration.
***Barring the selection of Mario Cuomo.

[richard mcenroe]

Hillary, Justice, would do for the SC what the Borgias did for the Papacy...

[clarice]

He should make Giuliani Atty General. DoJ is out of hand and Rudy knows how to get a grip on it.
Lieberman will jump ship and the Reps will need him in the Senate. He will help a lot in NY and Fla. (If Obama gets the nomination--Ed Kock will also help in NY).

McCain needs someone will help him win states like Nevada, W Va, Ohio, Colorado. I love Michael Steele. I don't see him meeting this criteria. Do you?

[Ann]

I think Soylent has it just right. But I still like Mitt and he could win Michigan for the GOP.

[Ann]

Is American Idol ever going to name a winner? The family is in the other room with the speakers at full blast. Please make it be over soon. Anyone else's house rocking?

[clarice]

**Ed KocH****

[Jane]

Ann,

It was David Cooke. And he's good.

[centralcal]

I really, really like Michael Steele, but I am not sure that his time is now. I like Romney and he is one that would get ME enthusiastic, not necessarily everybody else. I agree too, that Jindal is a fantastic future choice for almost any office he chooses.

So, for me it is Mike or Mitt in the here and now. But, I am a realist and not at all sure they would be the choice of enough voters to make it a winning ticket.

[Ann]

Jane,

Wow, what an upset. I love David Cooke, but thought the youngster would get all the votes.

Centralcal,

I like both men and think either would spark some new HOPE in the GOP.

[centralcal]

Well, Ann, if everyone thought as we do, then our side would win by a landslide! grin.

[kathy]

Love Michael Steele.

[Danube of Thought]

When Teddy is gone the rest of the Kennedys are going to be a wonderful comedy show, a laff-a-minute riot of simpletons on parade. The very brightest among them, whoever it may be, is lurching along with a double-digit IQ, and of course a long trail of sexual stupidities.

My favorite was whichever one of them skied head-on into a tree at Aspen, and within minutes thereafter had assumed ambient temperature. Those of us who had seen Daffy Duck survive many such encounters with ease and grace knew right away that this was indeed a dumb bunch, and they have done nothing to disappoint us since then.

[MikeS]

I love Michael Steele. I don't see him meeting this criteria. Do you?

He doesn't meet that criteria, but Steele can attack Obama's reckless, irresponsible, naive, and radically liberal ideas without being accused of racism. The added benefit is that, like McCain, Steele doesn't seem reckless, irresponsible, etc. himself.

[Neo]

Frank Keating former OK Governor

Will this just bring up the "Keating 5" stuff or will it successfully confuse everybody making them believe the the "Keating 5" was his old R&B group ?

[Neo]

NYT has McCain talking with:

Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida
Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana
Mitt Romney

I think Jindal would be dynamite, but frankly Louisiana needs him more than America right now.

Mitt Romney has the look of "raw meat" to the press corp that loves Obama so much .. they would claim he wrote the "Salamander Letter" by the time November came around.

Charlie Crist is a blank slate to me, but seems to be doing well in Florida, a key state (think 2000).

[Ann]

Outch!!! DOT,

Clarice and Jane are right about them picking another Kennedy as a replacement. The question is which one?

Which one can you see making a Supreme Court candidate's wife cry? Remember Mrs. Alito during his confirmation? I will never forget it.

[Ralph L]

Ed Kock
Look, we all know he's gay--you don't have to spell it out for us. There are rumors about Crist, former Wafe Forest QB. Perhaps JM Hanes could research this in the demi-monde of Winston-Salem.

[Peggy McGilligan]

Nobody has vetted Hillary Clinton, except Hillary Clinton. And, she'd have to be investigated. Before the Clinton’s began their end-run around the 22-Amendment, both knew there was a fatal flaw. The Clintons knew their role in bringing about CSUMB (the Clinton College). They appointed the corrupt former Vermont Congressman and Lieutenant Governor who would run the government boondoggle, and even helped select who would graduate from it. The Clintons orchestrated the entire process. “Bill and Hillary Clinton have always believed that they’re very different than the rest of us … they’ve learned one important and consistent lesson: that rules don’t matter. Rules don’t apply to them. Rules are for other people,” writes Dick Morris. From CSUMB’s bad beginnings to present, chances are you’ve heard nothing of it. Which begs the question: why? http://theseedsof9-11.com

Ps. Excellent Hillary Clinton impersonation, That Hillary Show: www.rosemarywatson.com

[Charlie (Colorado)]

He doesn't meet that criteria, but Steele can attack Obama's reckless, irresponsible, naive, and radically liberal ideas without being accused of racism.

Wanna bet?

(Oh, and "criterion" btw.)

[Jack]

Hillary isn't going to take a promise unless she's going to get some collateral. Supreme Court Justice, Senate Majority Leader (Harry Reed will loooove that), or White House Tour Guide - it's simply premature to even start talking about this.

Hillary ought to be the nominee, because she's the only proven friend of Israel left in the race. I'm not saying what some of the wing-nuts are saying about Obama - he may well be just as good a friend - but Hillary has the record to stand on. She doesn't just have nice speeches on the subject - and heck, overall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUyce6224Mk

Fact of the matter is, that is what it's going to come down to.

[SlimGuy]

If some fool ever put together a McCain/Hillary ticket the slogan would be

We Broke Barak Mountain!

In other news I could support Jack Welch ex GE CEO for the VP job.

[Jane]

Not with GE's Iranian investments...

[clarice]

Charlie:"(Oh, and "criterion" btw.)"

Well, if you're going to get picky.

Jane, I don't know if Welch has anything to do with maintianing those investments after GE shouldn't but his personal life would be a problem. That's too bad, of course, because he's very competent and smart.

[Jane]

It would be fun to watch NBC/MSNBC's crisis of loyalty between Obama and Welch - and surely Obama would win.

OT: If either Clinton or Obama's health plan was in place, Ted Kennedy would be required under to the plan to be treated at Cape Cod hospital, not MA General for his tumor. Well except I'm sure either plan will have a "preferred" list of patients.

[clarice]

The GLobe says Ted wants Ms Vickie to get the Kennedy seat.

[kim]

The Globe thinks Ted Kennedy's vote is more important than all the little people's.
===============================

[Jane]

The GLobe says Ted wants Ms Vickie to get the Kennedy seat.

I think they should give it to Joan - just to get her out of the institution and off the public dole.

Okay, that was mean.

[MayBee]

Mean, but hilarious!

[cathyf]

And the senate isn't the dole?

[kim]

All Doles have been Senators, but not all Senators are Doles.

Too bad, too.
=========

[John Wilkins]

What is Mr. Miller thinking? Plus - this is the same exact suggestion raised by Mark Karlin in Buzz Flash more then 3 months ago. Obviously not original.

[Politics Poker]

Hillary, If that would happen in Poker...

Its too funny what politicians do all the time not admitting that they have lost at a given situation. Hillary being just the perfect model how policitians act when they have to

face a situation where they have lost or were wrong on a topic. They try to ignore it and still play "I am a winner" no matter what the facts and the given reality around them

indicates.

I wonder if thats the reason why policitians don't play poker tournaments - at least not that I know of many who do. Because in the end if lose or win. You can just say "Wow, it

was a fantastic poker game, I was coming in place 38 out of 500". You either win the tournament or you dont. Great if you finish in a range of places where you are getting paid

a few dollars, but if you really want to win in poker games you need to be at the very top of the winners or else.

Nothing would help you that in the world of politics is always going on: "re-arranging facts", "changing the rules at the end to adjust reality", "playing dumb", "not admitting

any mistakes, and just saying NOTHING", "blame it on misunderstandings", "I didnt mean what i said, actually everybody did misunderstood me", and so on.

The good thing about poker is that you either win or your dont. The most obvious of your skills in playing poker is the ability to win. And the "politicians" under the losing

poker players will always say "I had a bad run, I just had back luck" and try to reduce the game of poker to the game of being lucky and being dealt the right cards. It is not.

:-)

Anyway Hillary, I would love to see you at www.actionpoker.com and www.tigergaming.com some day and would like to see how you try to explain your bad poker performance when we

do beat you in the first poker tournment offered just for struggling politicians.

Kevin, Poker Tournament Fan
current favorite poker site:
www.actionpoker.com

[ron cheek]

we think that mrs cliton would be a great v p and that no one could beat them thank you

[battery]

we think that mrs cliton would be a great v p and that no one could beat them thank you

[sophy]

I will thank for my friends bringing me in this world. I am not regret to buy flyff penya .