So explain this to me about Harriet Miers….

The positive trait that appeared most often in early press accounts about Harriet Miers was her meticulous attention to every detail. Say what you will about Miers, all the i’s were dotted and all the t’s were crossed on her watch. One could quibble about whether this is the most useful trait in a Supreme Court Justice, but it is certainly a positive trait in its own right — one that many Americans wish they had in greater stock. And, at this stage of the game, I suspect the Bush administration will take whatever positive memes about Miers it can get. Which makes this Knight-Ridder story by James Kuhnhenn all the more disturbing:

Senate Republicans and Democrats said Wednesday that Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers’ written answers to Senate questions were incomplete and inadequate and demanded that she and the White House provide more details, particularly about her work as White House counsel. Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and the committee’s top Democrat, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, took the unusual step of asking Miers by letter to amplify her responses. Specter described Miers’ nomination process as “chaotic.” “We do not have much paperwork. We do not have much of a record,” Specter said. “I don’t know of anybody who would tell you in that committee that they were satisfied with the responses,” Leahy said…. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Miers intended to respond soon. “From the first day when she was nominated, Ms. Miers told Sen. Specter that she had years of files to go through and that she would work to complete the questionnaire as quickly as possible, but that it was likely she would have to send follow-ups to provide additional information,” Perino said.

To be fair to Miers, a lot of the incomplete answers are likely due to Bush’s reluctance to do anything that event hints at a waiver of executive privilege. Still, there’s this very odd end of the story:

Specter, whose handling of Roberts’ confirmation was praised by both Democrats and Republicans, voiced bewilderment at how Miers’ nomination has unfolded, and he alluded to his 100-minute encounter with Miers on Monday, where she ended up disputing his account of their meeting to the press. Specter initially said Miers had expressed the view that the Constitution contains a right to privacy, a key element in the Roe v. Wade case that established a woman’s right to an abortion. Miers, however, said Specter misunderstood her, and Specter said he accepted her statement. But on Wednesday, he said: “I’ve never walked out of a room and had a disagreement as to what was said.”

UPDATE: Patrick Belton points out that Miers has given an embarrassing answer to an embarrassing question. In NRO, Byron York notes that her supporters have admitted that, “The meetings with the senators are going terribly. On a scale of one to 100, they are in negative territory.” Orin Kerr thinks the tipping point on Miers has been reached.