While most of the main stream media has been reporting that a recess appointment this week is likely -- and they may be right -- there are new signs TODAY that this probably will not occur next week.

Senator Frist has sent signals that he wants to bring back a Bolton cloture vote "some time" next month -- along with a UN Reform package in the Senate.

This is huge news and it means that the Bolton story will keep on giving for at least another month.

I will post more later on what TWN has learned -- but do not expect a recess appointment this week. Either Bolton said NO to that track -- or the White House is simply sacrificing the position at the U.N. in order to compel Democrats to fight against a "probably" pernicious U.N. reform package.

Bolton's confirmation vote will not be "formally" connected to the potential UN reform legislation -- but they will be symbolically linked.

I'm eager for the battle. This is "new" news -- and could be mistaken. But most on the deep inside are no longer expecting a recess appointment -- at least not until August recess.

The White House is miscalculating again -- thinking that the public is tired of this subject and trying to wear down the opposition. But our team trains for marathons -- and is only now just picking up the pace.

-- Steve Clemons

Robert Kuttner hits the bull's eye in a compelling survey of the "Bolton Endgame" in the Boston Globe today.

Here is an excerpt:

With the Senate having twice refused to break a filibuster over Bolton, President Bush may use his power to make a recess appointment during Congress's Fourth of July break. Bolton would then serve without Senate confirmation until the next Congress ends, in late 2006.

Or Bush could withdraw Bolton's name.

Bolton's views on the UN are hostile. He is known as a short-tempered martinet. He got poor reviews for his last job as undersecretary of state for arms control. For instance, Bolton was a skeptic of a US joint program to keep Russian nuclear fuel from reaching terrorists. The effort was tied up in legal minutiae during Bolton's tenure, but soon after Bolton's departure early in 2005, the logjam was broken and agreement with Russia reached.

The Washington Post reported that our allies so distrust Bolton on the sensitive negotiations over Iran's nuclear program that they made sure to exclude him from high-level meetings in Washington last January.

More ominously, Bolton is suspected of using ultra-secret National Security Agency wiretaps to snoop on rivals in the intelligence and defense community. Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee led by Senator Joe Biden of Delaware demanded to know the names of people on whom Bolton requested wiretapped information. For anything but legitimate national security purposes, this use would violate US law. But the White House has stonewalled this request, intensifying Democrats' opposition.

As the Senate debated Bolton, Senator Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican, declared that a recess appointment "would weaken not only Mr. Bolton but also the United States," but he soon recanted, very likely after some prodding. His first impulse was right. This recess appointment would insult both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate, and the institution itself.

A Bolton recess appointment sends a signal to other nations to whom America is preaching democracy that minority rights can be trampled. A Bolton appointment would make a mockery of the President's own statement last night:

After a constitution is written, the Iraqi people will have a chance to vote on it. If approved, Iraqis will go to the polls again, to elect a new government under their new, permanent constitution. By taking these critical steps and meeting their deadlines, Iraqis will bind their multiethnic society together in a democracy that respects the will of the majority and protects minority rights.

TWN has not heard a word out of the White House on its next steps. Frustration abounds in Karl Rove's world that he was not able to just huff and puff and blow down those standing for principle both on Bolton and the Senate's rights to request documentary evidence from the Executive Branch.

The options remain the same. Release the documents, and an up-or-down vote is possible after recess. Make a recess appointment. Or, lastly, withdraw John Bolton's name from consideration.

The White House has lost much of its gruffness on Bolton, and is no longer issuing proclamations of its confidence in "Bolton."

It was fairly remarkable that Bolton's name was not mentioned by the President last night -- not even in taking a pot shot at the Democrats and single Republican who have stalled the nomination process in the demand for documents.

Bolton is probably thinking this through. The White House wants him to take a recess appointment -- and he allegedly doesn't want it under these conditions. There are other things he can do. AEI is probably warming a chair right now.

In the end, while the White House did not get its way in the Senate, it will probably prevail in nudging Bolton to accept the job any way he gets it. Principle will be lost, and Bolton knows it.

No more illusions -- and no weight at all on U.N. reform or on the coming Security Council efforts on North Korea and Iran.

TWN hopes that Mr. Bolton realizes that he needs to withdraw and take a role in the Vice President's office. The nation's interests will be better served -- and those Boltonian skills the President allegedly wants can still be close at hand.

-- Steve Clemons

If President Bush sends John Bolton to the U.N. with a recess appointment, he is sending two signals that are really quite dramatically bad:

1. Bolton will hold one of America's highest profile diplomatic portfolios without the validation of American citizens behind him. He will not have the Senate stamp of legitimacy on his Ambassadorship and thus will be perceived at home and abroad as without "weight."

2. During this era of preaching "democracy" throughout the world -- which means not just "electocracies" or "ballot box democracies" but rather a system of checks and balances, respect for minority rights, and rule of law -- sending John Bolton to the U.N. is a lesson that legislatures can be ignored and minority rights in government trampled by the demands of the Executive Branch.

America is undermining its message to the world with this highly visible post -- but, of course, that has been the problem with John Bolton since the beginning.

-- Steve Clemons

Well, it's fairly official.

John Bolton's nomination will not be brought up this week. This morning, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist went through an extensive list of what he hoped the Senate would consider this week before going into July 4th recess.

Frist also mentioned a number of pending nominations that he hoped the Senate would move through. Not on that roster was John Bolton.

To bring up a Bolton cloture vote again this week, Frist would need to file a NEW cloture petition -- which would have to sit and "ripen" or be considered by the Senate (theoretically) for at least two and usually three days. There is just no time for that to happen.

So, either the recess appointment will be made the following week (or Friday evening) -- or the Battle over Bolton will continue after the recess period, which most people doubt.

There is no word now that Bolton will not accept a recess appointment. This seems to be part of the story that has changed -- and whether Mr. Bolton wants the appointment under these circumstances or not, the White House may be using what leverage it has left on him at this point to insist he accept the President's decision.

So, this is really just news that Frist made it official that Bolton will not be brought up during the balance of the week.

More to do.

-- Steve Clemons

I have been offline much of the day as I'm working to see what Karl Rove's machine is planning to do on John Bolton.

The White House does not want to lose this battle over Bolton and is increasingly turning towards a recess appointment. But that deal is not done. However, Senator Pat Roberts and others have basically conceded that the battle for confirmation is over for now -- and that a recess appointment or withdrawal are the only options left.

There's no time for a deal on the documents this week -- so the only option if Bolton is to make it to the U.N. is either to appoint him during next week's recess -- or to continue the battle for confirmation after recess.

Most give that a very unlikely chance of happening -- but it's in the realm of possibilities.

On the two other fronts I am working, I need more time. Let me just say that many of those who lump John Negroponte and John Bolton into the same camp seem to be mistaken. Negroponte was Colin Powell's deputy on Reagan's NSC staff -- and is very close to Powell, which I simply did not know.

There are some who speculate that besides names like Armitage, John Wolf, William Burns and others in the NSA intercepts -- John Negroponte's name is one of those on the list. I must repeat that this is speculation, and I will have a longer comment on this tomorrow.

But this will do for now.

More soon.

-- Steve Clemons

Just to clarify, there is no doubt that John Bolton became vigorously attached to undoing the "Zionism is Racism" resolution at the U.N.

What I am looking into is the position Bolton took on the resolution before the administration at that time had become committed to the course it took. Some have suggested that Bolton's enthusiasm for this effort was wanting.

More soon.

-- Steve Clemons

Today has been intense.

First of all, I had an incredible afternoon at CNN's Washington Bureau -- meeting many of the producers and anchors in the bureau. Wolf Blitzer chatted with me a bit and told me he was going to check out the blog. His team has already been reading it regularly.

Next, I had a great time with Al Franken on his show on Air America Radio.

But two stories -- both of which are stem-winders -- have come my way, and I have to do more due diligence on them.

One deals with John Bolton's supposed "herculean efforts" against the "Zionism is Racism" resolution.

The other deals with the surprising contours of John Negroponte's relationship with John Bolton.

I can't write more -- particularly if these stories don't hold up.

But stay tuned.

-- Steve Clemons

Reuters reports a comment by Senator Biden that indicates the Senator's assessment that the Bolton confirmation battle is quickly coming to a close.

Joanne Kenan writes:

"If they don't have (the documents) by the end of the day, it's finished," the Delaware Democrat said of the bitter dispute over President Bush's choice to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

TWN has done some digging into whether this was Biden drawing a firm line and what drove this comment yesterday evening.

Biden's declaration that all document requests must be satisfied by close of business today -- or all deals are off -- is more the Senator's "assessment that the window for confirming Bolton is closing fast," according to an official familiar with Biden's stance.

But TWN has learned that Biden's comment fits in a context of interactions with Senator Frist these past several days about potential deals on the document requests.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist approached Biden on Tuesday asking that if Frist could, in fact, secure access for the Senators to the requested NSA documents and names of U.S. officials redacted from these documents, what mechanisms could Biden's side propose that would be satisfactory to the Democrats given the sensitivity of the material.

There was no indication whether the White House was supporting Frist's initiative or whether Frist was on his own -- attempting to demonstrate to the administration and to Bolton supporters that he was doing all he could to try and secure an up-or-down vote on Bolton.

Nonetheless, Biden's side took Frist's proposal seriously.

Frist wanted to know how the NSA materials would be handled. What mechanism would be proposed regarding access to the documents? Which Senators would need to see the documents? Would digests of the NSA intercepts be enough? Or, what form of the NSA intercepts would be acceptable to Biden and Dodd?

Frist sounded Biden out on all of these questions, and serious discussions were had.

However, according to reports from those close to this negotiation process, Frist backed off from all of his offers and chose not to pursue the matter further. It's not clear whether Frist was trying to demonstrate some illusion of progress or whether the White House -- when it learned what Frist was negotiating with Biden -- told Frist to back off and stop trying to "successfully" negotiate a deal on the NSA intercepts and the Syria testimony -- two of the three pending document requests made by Senators.

TWN has learned that Senator Biden made clear in these discussions with Senator Frist that while he, Senator Dodd, and other Senators were not going to request more documents if the pending requests were satisfied, they would need some time to assess the significance of the evidence.

In other words, a day or two would be needed after getting access to the materials to connect the dots. Biden had no sense that anyone -- including Senator Frist -- objected to this if they were going to actually provide the documents.

Then, indicating either White House intransigence on the issue of not conceding to the requests by Democrats or that Bill Frist may have been unable to deliver on the deal he was cutting, there was no follow-up to this discussion.

During this period of discussions, Biden's team gave some serious thought to the questions posed by Senator Frist and prepared some very detailed mechanisms to assure responsible management of the NSA materials and still satisfy the need of the Senators to interpret and communicate any problems (or not) discovered in the Bolton material.

One part of this story that has not been reported in the press is that the Democrats offered that JUST ONE Senator seeing the "unedited" NSA intercepts would be enough to satisfy that element of the document requests.

The three Senators that the White House could choose from would be Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Joe Biden, Ranking Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence John D. Rockefeller IV, or Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid. Senator Dodd agreed to defer to either of these three Senators as interpreters of the NSA material with the expectation that the chosen Senator would report back on findings.

Biden's staff had begun to work out a plan to highlight the "topical areas of concern" and roster of "connect the dot scenarios" for whichever Senator was given access as Biden had been closer to the micro-detail of the Bolton investigation than either Senator Rockefeller or Senator Reid.

This suggestion of a "single Senator" was an attempt by Biden's team to be flexible about modalities of gaining access to this material. Biden has repeatedly made it clear that he and the other Senators requesting access to the NSA material and the Syria documentation are aware of the sensitivity about the materials, even though the NSAS has made clear that there are no "sources and methods" issues involved.

Biden's comment last night is that the clock is ticking. As one staffer told TWN, "time is awasting. . ."

Today is Friday -- and if the materials are not received today, or at the latest on Monday, there will be no time for Senators to be able to interpret and assess the materials so that a vote can be held next week.

Karl Rove is known for Friday "close-of-business document dumps," so there remains a possibility that the White House will provide something this evening. We just have to wait and see -- though there is no evidence of movement by the White House -- and no one on the Democratic side reports that a deal is anywhere near being reached.

The other procedural reality is that a NEW cloture petition on the Bolton nomination will have to be made. What that means is that Frist will have to announce his intention to call for another cloture vote -- but that petition will have to "ripen" for 2-3 days.

That means that if Frist calls for a new vote today (Friday), then Senators can consider a vote on Tuesday or Wednesday. But if the Senate puts the cloture petition on the schedule next Monday, the Bolton debate and vote really mucks up the mountain of other business Senators want to get through before close of business Thursday when Senators want to go into recess for the July 4th break.

Stay tuned.

-- Steve Clemons

Senators Trent Lott, Susan Collins, Lincoln Chafee, John McCain, George Voinovich and Lamar Alexander have all stated that they believe that the White House should release ALL requested documents on Bolton.

These are:

1. NSA Intercepts and names of U.S. officials redacted in them and requested by Bolton

2. All preparatory and deliberative material and communications on Syria WMD testimony that was to have been presented in 2003

3. The client list of Matthew C. Freedman who continued to work as a lobbyist while he worked as a six-figure "special assistant" in John Bolton's office and being listed in the State Department staff directory

With so many Republicans now joining the Democrats and conceding the point of principle to Senators Biden, Dodd, and Boxer on these document requests, the White House is in a tough position.

If it continues to stubbornly resist giving in to the Democratic leadership on the documents, the White House is stiffing its own team. The costs to the White House are rising precipitously on the stalled Bolton nomination.

TWN has no idea whether the White House will yield. It made sense for them to yield long ago. That would have been the rational calculation -- so rational assessments about what the White House might do now are not necessarily productive indicators.

There is basically one working week to go before the 4th of July Senate recess -- so time is also tricky.

If the White House does provide a package of documents and provides access to Senate Democrats on the NSA intercepts, there must be time to investigate the materials, connect whatever dots need to be connected, and then make a public statement on the relevance of these materials to the larger questions about John Bolton's "fitness" to be America's UN Ambassador.

For about half of the Senate, Bolton's record -- as is -- is already problematic enough that they will vote against John Bolton on an up or down vote.

If further "concerns" emerge after reviewing the blocked documents, then Bolton's nomination in a full floor vote is quite doubtful. Senators know that this debate on Bolton has reached a sufficiently high level of public awareness that they can't easily turn a blind eye to the pattern of national security recklessness and professional and personal abuse in Bolton's record.

The vote will be too consequential for some. Watch Lisa Murkowski. I think that she's had it with this Bolton mess and is irritated with the White House for shoving such an inappropriate and flawed candidate down the gullet of the Senate.

Word is that John Bolton may not accept a recess appointment. The bottom line there is that any U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. not confirmed by the Senate will not be perceived as legitimate. Without legitimacy, the person in this position can accomplish little of real value as he or she would have no perceived "weight" of the American public behind him or her.

That may not stop the White House from trying to compel Bolton from accepting a recess appointment. However, all of this depends on how Bush, Cheney and Rove react to the reality that an increasingly large number of Republicans are calling for the same documents Democrats are requesting to be released.

This was never a fully partisan battle -- as much of the media described it. The effort against Bolton would have been futile without the brave testimony by a number of leading Republicans like Lawrence Wilkerson, Carl Ford, and others. Other Republicans worked feverishly behind the scenes to try and convince various Republican Senators why Bolton was such a poor choice.

Now, Republicans have joined Dems in the document requests.

The White House -- particularly Karl Rove -- is digging in and arguing that Dems keep moving the "goal posts." Well the Republican Senators who have spoken know where the goal posts are. They are clear.

Give up the documents. Look at the materials. Connect the dots.

My bet right now is that what we learn will end this matter. Bolton will be voted down, and the White House will quickly try and distract the nation with other news.

More soon.

-- Steve Clemons

Greetings folks. Sorry if I seemed AWOL today. I organized a very large-scale conference on U.S. economic policy today that went quite well -- but I have not lost focus of our effort to encourage President Bush to reconsider John Bolton.

Today's conference, however, was excellent -- and is actually part of the work I do in my real job.

Here was the lineup:

NATIONAL POLICY FORUM on AMERICA'S ECONOMIC FUTURE

New America Foundation

Wednesday, 22 June 2005

Hyatt Regency Capitol Hill, Washington, DC

9:00 am

Welcoming Remarks

Steven Clemons
Director, American Strategy Program, New America Foundation

9:05 a.m.

The State of the U.S. Economy: No-Nonsense Realities and Some Thoughts on Prescriptions

The Honorable Douglas Holtz-Eakin

Director, Congressional Budget Office

9:30 am

Beyond Ideology: What is Going on in the American Economy? A Discussion about Deficits, Jobs, Innovation, and Offshoring

The Honorable Edward Rendell

Governor, State of Pennsylvania

Paul Magnusson

Washington White House & International Economics Correspondent,

Business Week

The Honorable Richard Durbin

Deputy Democratic Leader, U.S. Senate

Sherle Schwenninger

Director, Global Middle Class Program, New America Foundation and Founding Editor, World Policy Journal

moderator

Edward "Ted" Alden

Washington Bureau Chief, Financial Times

11:00 am

Beyond Stockholder Value: Corporate Accountability and Responsibility Today

The Hon. Michael Oxley (OH-4-R)

Chairman, House Committee on Financial Services

U.S. House of Representatives

Sidney Harman

Chairman & CEO

Harman Industries

James V. DeLong

Senior Fellow & Director, Center for the Study of Digital Property

Progress & Freedom Foundation

Phillip H. Rudolph

Partner, Foley Hoag LLP

and former Vice President & International General Counsel, McDonald’s Corporation

moderator

The Honorable Tom Daschle

former U.S. Senate Majority Leader

12:30 pm

America's Eroding Economic System: Comments from an Iconoclastic CEO

Leo Hindery, Jr.

Managing Partner, InterMedia Partners

Former CEO of TCI, AT&T Broadband and Yankee Entertainment and Sports Network

What Should America's Future Economic Road Map Be?

The Honorable Byron Dorgan (D-ND)

U.S. Senator

2:00 pm

Is America's Middle Class Making It?? What Needs to Happen to Keep the Middle Class Foundation of America's Economy Thriving?

The Hon. Gene Sperling

Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress

and former National Economic Advisor to President Clinton

Alfred Checchi

former Chairman, Northwest Airlines and former Gubernatorial Candidate, State of California

Peter Gosselin

National Economics Correspondent, Los Angeles Times

Maya MacGuineas

President, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

William A. Niskanen

Chairman, Cato Institute

moderator

Jodie Allen

Senior Editor, Pew Research Center

and former Managing Editor, U.S. News & World Report

3:15 Adjournment

However, while we were presenting this conference today, I was working the Bolton issue behind the scenes. I will have a post on the latest on Bolton in a few hours.

Sorry to scare some of you folks with the slow posting today.

More soon.

-- Steve Clemons

Bill Frist said today that the legislative effort to confirm John Bolton as Ambassador to the United Nations had been "exhausted" and that there were no more votes on the matter planned.

After lunch with the President today, however, Senator Frist changed course:

Reversing field after a meeting with President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said he will continue pushing for a floor vote on John R. Bolton for U.N. ambassador. Frist switched his position after initially saying Tuesday that negotiations with Democrats to get a vote on Bolton had been exhausted.

Talking to reporters in the White House driveway after he joined other GOP lawmakers for a luncheon with Bush, Frist said: "The president made it very clear that he expects an up or down vote."

Just about two hours hour earlier, Frist said he wouldn't schedule another vote on Bolton's nomination and said that Bush must decide the next move. Frist, R-Tenn., had said there was nothing further he could do to break a Democratic stalemate with the Bush White House over Bolton, an outspoken conservative who, opponents argue, would undermine U.S. interests at the world body.

But he changed his tune after talking to Bush.

What does this all mean?

The marathon battle continues.

Unless the White House concedes on document requests, the Bolton nomination will remain in permanent limbo. Because the administration has yielded on nothing regarding these requests, the media and others watching this process will not settle for much less than full disclosure and provision of the requested documents -- viewing anything held back as material that demonstrates problems in Bolton's record.

So many people are surprised by the White House's intransigence on the documents that they believe that something seriously damaging must be in them. At this point, the White House has to make everything available -- or nothing will be acceptable.

That is not likely to happen.

That means that the White House maintains a stance on Bolton that pushes a vote. The Dems "lock down" as Frist has said. And nothing changes.

That then gives the White House some excuse to make a recess appointment -- but that would be yet another sad commentary on the White House's refusal to take advice from the Senate that this person is wrong for the job and a flawed representative of American interests to the United Nations.

-- Steve Clemons

I have just written a selection this morning posted at TPM Cafe on the choices that the White House faces on Bolton. I hope you find it of interest.

And here is a piece I wrote about the evening I spent watching "Seven Days in May" with Senator Lindsey Graham and Margaret Carlson about a week ago. It was a strange night -- and it would be interesting to hear what many of you think about Graham's expressed concerns about modern demogoguery.

The White House has not indicated how long it is willing to keep bleeding bad news over its hard-headed advocacy for John Bolton, but TWN will report what I learn shortly.

A BIG thank you to all of you who have emailed and otherwise contributed to this effort. You know who you are. It's been an incredible ride so far -- but there is still a bit farther to go.

-- Steve Clemons

The Senate spoke loud and clear today.

John Bolton is NOT getting the approval of the United States Senate unless the White House fully concedes on the document requests that Senators have requested since April that might help better inform them as to controversial and important parts of John Bolton's record.

Tonight, ABC's Nightline is going to look at today's Bolton vote and consider what the loss of the White House and Senate Majority Leader Frist means.

More later on my own perspective. I need to share a bottle of wine with some of our team who have helped make the principled case against John Bolton's nomination.

-- Steve Clemons

BOLTON VOTE CLOTURE RESULTS

CLOTURE ON BOLTON VOTE BLOCKED BECAUSE OF WHITE HOUSE OBSTRUCTIONISM ON DOCUMENTS

John Bolton is the wrong person for the job. It was high-handed enough of the White House to appoint him, but even more high-handed for them to not yield on legitimate document requests from the Senate.

It will be even more high-handed if the Cheney-Bolton wing of the White House now pushes John Bolton into the U.N. with a recess appointment.

-- Steve Clemons

We just gained George Voinovich, who favored cloture last time.

We also kept Senator Joseph Lieberman whom the White House was furiously courting.

The White House is losing more ground than expected.

But it does seem that Senator Mark Pryor did stay with the White House despite his many signals that he would defect if the White House failed to yield to the reasonable requests put forward by the Dems.

Arlen Specter voted for cloture, which is an unknown from last time.

Senator Feinstein remained opposed to cloture. She, along with Senator Lieberman, was among those the White House hoped to sway -- but failed.

-- Steve Clemons

It is fascinating that Senator Frist had Senator John McCain join him in a pro-Bolton press conference the other day, and I have no doubt that John McCain will vote in favor of cloture on Bolton and would probably support John Bolton.

However, McCain worked hard to get the White House to do a deal on the Senate-requested documents. The White House stiffed him.

McCain was notably absent in the floor debate on Bolton today.

-- Steve Clemons

There are two reasons why this cloture vote on Bolton is taking place today.

First, Frist wants to try and paint Democrats opposing John Bolton as obstructionists, but the media covering the Bolton nomination are clearly not letting Frist have his way on that claim. The major media do get the reality that the White House has FAILED TO BUDGE on any of the three outstanding, legitimate document requests made by Senators of the Executive Branch.

The second reason is "grand theatre". Frist wants to demonstrate that all steps were taken to try and get Bolton through, so "going through the motions" even the White House (and Frist) will again lose -- is an important part of the political process. This failure that TWN thinks will occur in the next 30 or so minutes gives the White House the excuse to either make a recess appointment -- or better yet, to withdraw John Bolton from consideration for this Ambassadorship at the United Nations.

-- Steve Clemons

Debate began at 5 p.m. on the Bolton cloture vote, and a vote is scheduled at 6 p.m. but may come as early as 5:30 p.m. if the entire debate time is not used.

-- Steve Clemons

Stay tuned. . .

-- Steve Clemons