The Los Angeles Times writes up the battle over Miers' White House documents, but Notes that the President "cited only confidentiality, not the formal doctrine of executive privilege, in backing his position that White House materials are off-limits." LINK
"One reason might be that the White House is hoping to avoid a confrontation over executive privilege, which has been upheld by the Supreme Court when sought by outside groups but may not be absolute when applied to Congress."
David Jackson of the Dallas Morning News reminds his readers of the Krauthammer conspiracy toward the end of his NOD piece. LINK
The New York Times also focused on President Bush's repeated refusal to turn over documents related to Miers' work in the White House, saying the "red line" of executive privilege is not one he is willing to cross. LINK
Be sure to Note the story's final graphs reporting that conservative groups will begin running ads against Miers' confirmation.
And this gem of a blind quote previewing the hearings: "'It's something of a gamble, because she's an unknown quantity on these issues on television,' a Republican close to the West Wing, said. 'But I think they're going to take it. They're not going to pre-emptively fold.'"
In a piece looking at Web sites and ad campaigns seeking Miers's withdrawal, the Washington Post's Fletcher and Babington report that the Family Research Council is "close to coming out formally against her." Mark Smith, the vice president of the New York chapter of the Federalist Society, says Miers does not even deserve hearings. LINK
"Two longtime leaders of the conservative movement yesterday called for the withdrawl of Harriet Miers' nomination to the Supreme Court," Ralph Hallow of the Washington Times reports. LINK
In a piece looking at the intensifying efforts of conservatives to force the withdrawal of Miers, the Wall Street Journal's Jeanne Cummings has Richard Viguerie, a Republican direct-mail expert and a leader of the anti-Miers campaign, saying, "If President Bush continues with this nomination, he is in serious danger of permanently losing the majority of support from the conservative movement. Once he loses his conservative base, it will doom his second term."
Bloomberg's James Rowley has both Democrats and Republicans saying that Bush's refusal to hand over documents may doom Miers's chances. LINK
Sounding an awful lot like Charles Krauthammer, Manuel Miranda, executive director of the Third Branch Conference, says the refusal to hand over documents is "actually a magic bullet" because it allows the President to say "I have to defend the integrity of the White House."
Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe with news of day. LINK
Per Roll Call's Paul Kane: "Conservative activists including James Dobson and Gary Bauer are facing questions from a bipartisan team of Senate Judiciary Committee investigators in advance of the high-stakes confirmation hearing."
Thomas Oliphant of the Boston Globe writes in his op-ed that the "snag" in Harriet Miers nomination is the "absence of advocates, not the presence of opponents." LINK
Banker Ben Bernanke:
The Los Angeles Times plays up the politics of the Bernanke nomination, saying that "the president's mounting problems were a factor in both the choice of Bernanke and the timing of the announcement," which wasn't expected until November. LINK