RSS
Using PayPal
Tectonic Plates Moving on Bolton Nomination: Republicans Lining Up to Call for Document Release
Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Thursday, Jun 23 2005, 9:12AM
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 Bolton2. 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
« Previous Article - Beyond Bolton: A Discussion About the U.S. Economy» Next Article - Biden Says If NO DEAL by Close of Business Today, Then "It's Over"
" ........... the White House will quickly try and distract the nation with other news."
Which will most likely be, the nomination of a new Supreme Court justice that follows closely after the impending resignation of Rehnquist. They'll time it just right to cover a Bolton defeat.
"This was never a fully partisan battle -- as much of the media described it." Well, the media used to be described as getting it 80% right 80% of the time--a .640 average. I suspect they're well below .500 now.
Scott Ritter's confirmation that the war on Iran has already begun!?
I can't believe that Bolton would turn down a recess appointment. He's just posturing, imo, trying to look 'principled' -- which must be a real effort for him. Why would he care if he was viewed as 'legitimate'? He's going to the UN to kick ass and take names ... he'll make his own legitimacy. His legitimacy comes from the President anyway.
I also don't think Bush worries much about whether he's dissing GOP senators along with the Dems. I haven't seen much that suggests to me that this Administration cares much for the views and concerns of the Congressmen whether they are Dem or Rep. Congress exists to rubberstamp W's agenda.
This shows how the White House talk of a recess appointment has backfired. Republican senators have clearly balked at this. Where is Hagel? Where is Chafee?
Steve, you should also add that Sens. Roberts and Allen have both been very lukewarm to the idea of a recess appointment. The more Republican distaste is evident, the less this is a partisan battle. Every Republican senator who has been critical of the White House position or of the recess appointment idea should be getting lots of play.
The Democrats have consistently tried to frame this as an institutional -- not partisan -- struggle, and now powerful GOP senators are confirming the truth of that position.
W + John Bolton = Jeb + Terry Schaivo
mbowdoin,
That's the rub really. Congress does not exist to rubber stamp the decisions of this executive or any other. Congress must actively concede its authority to permit such things. That's the principle at stake here. It's in every senator's interest to be a member of a powerful chamber, not a subservient one.
The truth of the matter is that Team Bush listens less to its own government supporters than effective opposition who force it to change direction. Bush government supporters are yes men and women, not authorities in their own right. This is the weakness of the whole Bush infrastructure. Why as a Senator would you ever make yourself a sacrificial pawn to another authority, when you already are your own king? When a Senator publically bends over to the president any president, it shows that senators unfitness to lead. What kind of leader takes orders from someone else? And how lousy do you have to be as an executive to run an organization that is all pawns? Real leaders are kings of kings, not kings of pawns.
Bolton as a recess appointment will serve as a symbol of everything wrong with the Administration's style of governance. He will live under a microscope, and every miss step by Bolton, every over step, will be brought back to the white house door. Team Bush's problems get worse after having forced a temporary Bolton appointment. Bolton's M.O. is to be Team Bush's emforcement thug. He's gift wrapped in a Yale background, but his real strength is his willingness to be his sugar daddy's enforcer. This type of M.O. will create endless feed for the critics, and force uncle karl and company to spend large amounts of time and effort covering for Bolton.
It's one thing to be a diplomat for the US, its another to be a thug loyal to a specific administration, playing a diplomat on the world stage. This whole Bolton fiasco is nothing more than a lose, lose for Team Bush.
The lesson here is take out the pawns. Team Bush can't cover its field of supporters, and to get to be a supporter you have to have done enough dirt for Team Bush to be low hanging fruit for any sustained amount of investigation. How much has Bush paid already to get Bolton to where he's at? I wonder how much of the president's "capital" that he felt he'd earned after the last election did he think he would use
covering for his underlings?
I find Lott's name on th elist verrry interesting. Perhaps he is reminding Frist what a lapdog loser he is?
PS I am friends with one of Bush's advance team members. I am informed that Bush thinks very little of Frist, so the "Bush supports Frist in 08" idea seems unlikely if not impossible. Stick a fork in Frist.
Bolton documents, coupled with Feith papers that Levin is pursuing, continue to reveal the big lie. Could be U.S. version of Downing Street Memo. Exposing this massive deception needs to be BIPARTISAN (non-partisan) effort to get mainstream media coverage. Maybe this will finally trigger the public outrage this constitutional catastrophe deserves. ALL Americans are affected by this fiasco --- not just Democrats.
Senator demands documents on Feith, Iraq
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/22/AR2005062201989_pf.html
No recess appointment, no UN ambassador... So? What makes anybody think the administration (this administration, not a putative sane one) gives a rat's ass?
When demonizing an enemy, breaking off diplomatic relations is a helpful and crowd-pleasing step.
I, too, am struck by Lott's presence here. It suggests there are several different reasons why a GOPer might want to force Bush to cough up with docs. McCain because he's a maverick. Voiny presumably because he knows they'll demonstrate to his colleagues what he has been trying to prove to them--and because he's concerned about the damage Bolton will do. Chafee because he wants a way out of confirming this guy and just might want to understand what damage Bolton will do. Collins? Is she tardily standing for the principle of executive accountability??
But Lott? I can only think he's pushing for the independence of the Senate and, probably, for a little bit of revenge.
At this point, second guessing the administration's motives is very difficult at best. One thing is for sure: they are seeking the reinforcement of their political machine ... and taking a great risk in doing so with respect to the ongoing support of Bolton at this stage of the game. It's an interesting situation, as the allure and promise of retention of the current political office and the slight possibility (1/100+) of being supported for president seems to be a powerful motivating force. If the walls come tumbling down via some unknown relevant peice of information, so too could those who've blindly supported the apparatus.
eric
Do you think Bush and his thugs would allow Bolton to refuse a recess appointment? Come on!
Can someone explain to me why the Republicans who aren't up in arms arn't? This is a play by one of the other branches of government to usurp the power and influene of another. I always thought the Sentate was rather jealous of its perogatives. I guess the current incarnation of the GOP and this administration has changed the balance of power more than most who should know, know.
HOW REPUBLICAN WALTER JONES GREW A CONSCIENCE.
http://www.alternet.org/story/22281/
Hopefully Jones's "soul-searching" gets contagious in Congress (on both sides of the aisle), with right-wing media pundits, and throughout America.
"THE FIX" is at the root of destroying our democracy.
Thank you for acknowledging the political heat that the Repub mavericks are taking on this one. The left has a tendency to rub any Repug's nose in it when they buck the official WH line. I say go easy on these few and recognize them as the valuable allies they are.
An administration that disses Republicans in Congress is an administration that is vulnerable to impeachment proceedings if serious charges reach a critical mass.
I think of Lott doing paybay for Frist as his replacement.
Lott also seems more of institution guy.
Looks like certain Republican Sens. are deciding to put their interests above Bush. Shock self inerest rules. It could be genuine political differences with Bush and/or they are using this good government, principles for co-equal etc as cover.
Wonder if Iraq disaster and White House all is good attitude providing some backbone. Senators have to show concern that their contituents are dying and for what? Runsfield arrogance toward Senate may play into anti-Iraq. Senators may fear an Iran or N.Korea nightmare with Bolton as front man/international instigator.
Lott realizes he's never going to be on the Prez side of the fence; Frist thinks it's a possibility so he's more sympathetic with the Senate deferring to the Exec.
I'm saying it again - will the real Karl Rove please stand up?
Rove's totally losing it. I can't remember a single news cycle over the last two or three weeks that had any semblance of a Rovian spin on it.
Instead, their getting savagely beaten up - increasingly even by Democrats. As Nancy Pelosi puts it today - "The president is on the ropes."
Now it's Rove's turn to play the "apologize or else" game over ridiculous remarks that sound incredibly petty. Like Rove lost his favourite toy. What a delicious take-down of the chief spin-meister.
They've got the foot on the accelerator as they are slamming into the wall.
AmericaBlog says that if a recess appt over the 4th is the issue the Dems should refuse to recess.
It sounds like hardball but is that at all realistic?
I would very much appreciate any links to document Lott's actual words on this issue (and those of the other Republican senators listed). If this is real, it's truly a tectonic plate shift, because it removes the opportunity for Bush to hammer on the "Democrats = obstructionists" theme while making a recess appointment.
It's difficult for me to believe that Lott is part of an effort that would so obstruct the WH plan on this.
Here are Lott's comments from a new Washington Post article:
Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) said Bush should provide the disputed documents, calling his refusal to do so "a very thin-reed principle." Lott said it would be hard for Bush to cut a separate deal with centrist Democrats because "there's no incentive for them" to buck their party's leaders to seat a highly contentious nominee to the United Nations.
The Democrats, in my opinion, should absolutely recess next weekend. Think about it: if they don't, the "obstructionist" label the administration has been trying to pin on them will finally stick!
If we show Bolton the door, the compelling reasons for producing the documents is gone. If he's Ambassador, the reasons remain as long as he does.
Tony,
The key to a lose lose is to let the loser decide. Don't suggest a solution for the opposition, let them figure out how to impale themselves. Kudos to Lott and company, for retaining the power of their authority.
My bet is that they pay off Bolton to accept the recess appointment, release all documents maybe the day before the recess then appoint him. Then they can say they released the documents and appoint him anyway.
Maybe they docs will be heavily redacted if they are sensitive maybe not.
I don't know, just my gut reaction.
tony reminds me of why the name "Vichy Democrat" stuck.
Oh, no, the GOP will say bad things about us.
The refusal of the Administration's to release the documents related to Bolton, and its ability to maintain (with a straight face) that an up-or-down vote is due, has been astonishing. Only slightly less astonishing has been the failure of the anti-Boltonites to put these behavior into terms that are understandable to regular folks.
Doing so would not be difficult.
Say there John Bolton was a used car, with Bush as the salesman and the Senate as the buyer. In this scenario, the NSA intercepts and other documents are the equivalent of the Carfax report; they are the important evidence of the history of the car. The buyer can see the report in the hand of the salesman. But the salesman, who everyone knows has sold a fair number of lemons, refuses to reveal the details. He insists that the buyer make a decision based on the information he chose to provide.
Is there a Nascar dad or soccer mom who would buy the car without reading the report?
My reason isn't "oh no, they won't like us", it's that the momentum on this issue is clearly with the democrats right now. If the "obstructionist" label sticks, the momentum (or perceived higher ground), in my opinion, shifts to the other side.
What solution did I suggest? Showing him the door and letting the docs fade into obscurity? Or the sticking of the "obstructionist" label?They are both statements of the obvious.
The pseudo-mind of the administration is hardly going to be influenced by my comments.
patience, you have made a number of insightful observations.
One thing that I had noticed is that they don't seem to have a very deep bench when it comes to anyone with actual experience -- they keep recycling the same people. It certainly seems that, no matter what the job, the only credentials that matter is being a yes-man (or woman) and major contributor.
I hadn't thought directly about the implications of the Bush supporters and their "baggage" if one were to investigate any of them. But the more I think about it, the more I think there's something to it. For one thing, if you're playing very loosely with laws and rules, and there's someone on your team who insists on following the rules when it's easier to ignore them (and everyone else is doing so), would you trust them as part of your inner circle? I don't think so. I have a feeling that's why Colin Powell and Christine Todd Whitman weren't trusted.
Not that there aren't good, honest people who are Bush supporters -- I know there are. But I don't think we'll find those folks in the administration "in crowd." Which raises some interesting questions about who we should be looking into.
I'd rather be an obstructionist on a winning streak than a loser on a losing streak.
I have a different definition of winning. We don't win by keeping Bolton out, we win by seeing all the documents.
If there is no recess appointment, I think the nomination dies and with it all hope of seeing the docs.
Thanks, immanentize. So that other readers won't have to do the search I did, the Post article containing the information in Steve's post is here.
Actually, i, the article in my link is from yesterday's Post, and doesn't include the excerpt you quote. Would you mind providing a link to the new article you're referring to?
tony, why will Bush give the docs once Bolton is in at the UN?
If Bolton withdraws, I see no hope of seeing the docs. The issue leaves with him.
If he gets this post, attention will remain focused on him. I'm not saying the Whitehouse will voluntarilty give up the docs (they never will), I'm saying that Bolton under a microscope at the UN has the best chance of compelling them to give up the docs. I'm assuming he'll be a disaster there, but I think that's reasonable. This strikes me as the most likely path to the info.
Stalemate in the Senate strikes me as less likely to manifest the info.
LET'S GET ALL THE DOCS!!!!!!!!!!!
To connect all the DOTS. Bolton docs only tell part of the story. How about:
* Cheney Energy Policy docs
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/15/scotus.cheney.ap/
* Office of Special Plans (OSP) docs
http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.phtml?title=Office_of_Special_Plans
* Douglas Feith docs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/22/AR2005062201989_pf.html
tony, so your strategy relies on wishful thinking, right?
I'll take a win over the hope that someone in the Bush administration has a crisis of conscience.
Seeing that 6 Republican senators are requesting the info now as well, there is clearly some hope in the stalemate path. I guess it comes down to where the most hope lies.
If he is not given a recess appointment, how do you see the docs finally coming to light?
tony, if the docs are damaging the Bush administration the only way their are gonna become public is if Deep Throat II leaks 'em.
This government is in to it deep...more deeply than any of us are capable of imagining...the NSA, the FBI, the CIA, the Media...past history is a refresher course for further controversy, inflammation, and yes, anarchy. We, who speak on platforms such as this, are good people, wishing beyond belief that government will turn more toward our "seal loving" frame of referance, and less toward the "kill them for blubber and leave them" mentality of the "right hand path". I imagine there are few, if any, lefties in this group of Administration clowns, and if there are, they left those beliefs where they left their last hymnal...Steve, you have done a marvelous job, beyond mine or anyone's imagination to bring these Administrative "Shiavo's" to light...
If Bolton gets (and accepts) a recess appointment, attention follows him, away from the documents. If the WH is refusing to disclose them for content, we'll never see them, and putting Bolton in during a recess is a good way to keep attention diverted.
If the WH is refusing to refusing to share the documents on principle, we'll also never see them. They won't want to back down, as it would mean that the executive is NOT superior to Congress. It ISN'T, but an imperial president might not be able to accept that.
If we don't get a July 4th recess appointment, the WH will continue to defy the Senators. The Democrats are "obviously" all obstructionists (to the WH view), and any Republicans who fail to follow the WH lead will have proven themselves unworthy of the trust and support of the WH/Rove machine. "Oh, I guess you don't want any help come election time..."
I suspect that the WH can't accept that they're getting such defiance from the Senate. "Frist must just not be working the senators hard enough" to get Bolton to the floor for a vote. Solution: apply more pressure.
I'm betting on a recess appointment. The only question is when. Mind, that would mean that the WH accepts that it won't get Bolton any other way, or that it just views the Senate as too bogged down with trifles and procedures to actually DO ANYTHING that the WH wants done. "Time's a-wastin'! Git a move on! Git your sorry tails in gear! ... Yer too damn slow. Yew took too long, and I hadda git my boy John to the UN..."
Now that Rove's comments have incensed the Democrats (even Lieberman is calling for him to retract), I seriously doubt you'll see any hint of compromise on the Dems part on this.
Carl: The real question is does Israel want us to see the docs? Hmmmm.
Just kidding. Personally, I don't think we'll ever see the the docs...even if we see the docs.
About a week ago, Steve mentioned a cheesy Financial Times article about positive international developments since the UN post is vacant.
Now the the Washington Post reports about progress in other issues since Bolton left his job at the State Department:
"Policy Shifts Felt After Bolton's Departure From State Dept."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/19/AR2005061900697.html
One quote:
"Now with Bolton no longer in the job, U.S. negotiators report a breakthrough with the Russians and predict a resolution will be sealed by President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin at an international summit in Scotland next month, clearing the way to eliminate enough plutonium to fuel 8,000 nuclear bombs."
The article goes on about policy changes/progress on Iran, IAEA, North Korea.
It is more like the White House and Frist to release the requested documents on the condition that vote is taken 10 seconds later. Don't count on any time being provided to study any such documents, even if they should be released. That is not how the GOP plays its games.
The motion to recess will be made today...
Any idea if a group of dems will dissent?
Ya know...I'm stupid and can't read a calendar...
Please forgive my last comment...
tsb
LET'S GET ALL THE DOCS!!!!!!!!!!!
To connect all the DOTS. Bolton docs only tell part of the story. How about:
* Cheney Energy Policy docs
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/15/scotus.cheney.ap/
* Office of Special Plans (OSP) docs
http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.phtml?title=Office_of_Special_Plans
* Douglas Feith docs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/22/AR2005062201989_pf.html
Posted by EasyE at June 23, 2005 06:49 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Response to above:
I like the idea put forward by EasyE. We should ask for ALL documents that the Senate is entitled to. Including the ones requested by Susan Collins regarding Military Base closings.
With all the corrution and dishonesty going on in this Republican dominated Government, we should be asking for documents, every day, for the next three years and before America is finally "freed" from theis group of Neo-Con War Criminals.
All of these documents will just keep revealing how Bush is deceiving and destroying America for Corporate and Christian interests..
Turn up the heat! Get some spine!
If it's made clear that Bolton was a key figure in the Bush game of "wrong-footing" Sadam, the jig's up for Bush and Company.
Reader Comments (55) - post a comment