Dems get tough on Bolton confirmation vote

[RightIsWrong]

And it is about time. Maybe they should demand that the WH actually do what it is required under the Constitution a little more.....COOPERATE with Congress and quit refusing documents and sources that are going to show the country what a sham we have been under the past 5+ years.

Link

Reid: No documents, no Bolton

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Senate Democrats will not allow a vote on President Bush's choice for U.N. ambassador unless the White House hands over records of communications intercepts Bolton sought from the secretive National Security Agency, Minority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday.

"You can't ignore the Senate. We've told them what we've wanted. The ball is in his court," Reid, D-Nevada, told CNN. "If they want John Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations, give us this information. If they don't, there will be no Bolton."

The Senate fell four votes shy of the 60 needed to cut off debate on Bolton's nomination in May after two Democrats on the Foreign Relations Committee urged their colleagues to hold the issue open. (Full story)

Sens. Joseph Biden, the ranking Democrat on the committee, and Christopher Dodd have demanded the Bush administration produce documents 10 National Security Agency communications intercepts that Bolton, the State Department's undersecretary for arms control, had requested since 2001.

White House Communications Director Nicole Devenish called Reid's stance "another effort to distract from the work that the people want to see done here in Washington."

"This request for additional information is clearly a stalling tactic, and one that I think the American people are growing weary of," she said.

But Reid said Bush is responsible for breaking the impasse -- not Democrats.

"The president is obstructing a vote on John Bolton," he said. "We've asked for simple information that Congresses over many decades that we have been in existence have been given by the White House."

The Senate confirmed Bolton for four previous government jobs dating back to the 1980s. But his nomination to the U.N. post has been more controversial, since he has been an outspoken critic of the world body in the past.

During a Federalist Society forum in 1994, Bolton said: "If the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference."

The White House says Bolton's blunt style and skepticism about the United Nations is needed to promote reform within the organization. But opponents also have criticized his handling of the diplomatic standoffs over the nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea during the past four years.

The Foreign Relations Committee, in a rare move, sent his nomination to the full Senate without a recommendation, and Ohio Republican Sen. George Voinovich has urged colleagues to vote against Bolton's confirmation.

Bush criticized the delay last week, telling reporters that the information Democrats want was given to Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas and ranking committee Democrat John Rockefeller, D-West Virginia.

But Democrats have tried to argue that lawmakers have a right to that information in order to make an informed decision on Bolton, who has been accused of threatening intelligence analysts whose conclusions did not match his. (Full story)

"We know very categorically that John Bolton tried to have fired two intelligence analysts because he didn't like the conclusions they reached about America's intelligence," Dodd told CNN's "Inside Politics" Wednesday.

"That, to me, is going way beyond the prerogatives of a policymaker here. Did he go further than that? I need to know the answers to those questions. I have a right to know it as a senator -- not me personally, but the Senate does."

 

[Shuxclams]

Cloture Failed agian just now.... Republikans managed only 54 votes to get an "Up or Down" vote.













SHUX

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Shuxclams
Cloture Failed agian just now.... Republikans managed only 54 votes to get an "Up or Down" vote.

SHUX

sweet!

 

[EagleKeeper]

And why will the Dems not sub-pena the documents?

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
And why will the Dems not sub-pena the documents?

do they have that authority for just a confirmation vote?

really gotta wonder by Bush never ponied up with the documents. IMO, this does more harm to him politically than it does to the democrats.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
And why will the Dems not sub-pena the documents?

do they have that authority for just a confirmation vote?

really gotta wonder by Bush never ponied up with the documents. IMO, this does more harm to him politically than it does to the democrats.

there was a good article in the Post about how Bush practices Brinksmanship. He won't back down till he absolutely has to. I can't find the article, but maybe someone else can search better than me.

 

[totalcommand]

?The American people know why I nominated him [Bolton] ? because the United Nations needs reform, and I thought it made sense to send a reformer to the United Nations,? Mr. Bush said in a brief appearance at the White House.

Wow, is it just me or does Bush sound like a weakling there? "I thought it made sense"? I think of a million stronger ways to say that. Nice job dems, you've cut off his jewels.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
And why will the Dems not sub-pena the documents?

do they have that authority for just a confirmation vote?

really gotta wonder by Bush never ponied up with the documents. IMO, this does more harm to him politically than it does to the democrats.

At this point, Bush does not care about political capital. He has the numbers needed for what he needs to push through Congress on both sides of the aisle.

Congress has the authority to issue sub-penas. If there is a conflict in authority regarding the information requested, then either the proper branches of goverments (Executive/Legaslative) have to sit down and solve the problem or they can force the issue by going to the USSC.

This happened to Nixon and he lost, other times Congress has lost.

Because the Dems have not tried to force the issue, implies that they do not feel that they have solid ground to stand on and are trying to make political hay.

Reid has a habit of spouting off against Bush then having to backpedal.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
And why will the Dems not sub-pena the documents?

do they have that authority for just a confirmation vote?

really gotta wonder by Bush never ponied up with the documents. IMO, this does more harm to him politically than it does to the democrats.

At this point, Bush does not care about political capital. He has the numbers needed for what he needs to push through Congress on both sides of the aisle.

Congress has the authority to issue sub-penas. If there is a conflict in authority regarding the information requested, then either the proper branches of goverments (Executive/Legaslative) have to sit down and solve the problem or they can force the issue by going to the USSC.

This happened to Nixon and he lost, other times Congress has lost.

Because the Dems have not tried to force the issue, implies that they do not feel that they have solid ground to stand on and are trying to make political hay.

Reid has a habit of spouting off against Bush then having to backpedal.

I'm pretty sure that subpoenas must be approved the majority of the members of the Committee that is making the request. Democrats obviously do not have enough members.

 

[Ozoned]

"Finally showing that they have a set!" (of sharp crayons) Heh.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
And why will the Dems not sub-pena the documents?

do they have that authority for just a confirmation vote?

really gotta wonder by Bush never ponied up with the documents. IMO, this does more harm to him politically than it does to the democrats.

At this point, Bush does not care about political capital. He has the numbers needed for what he needs to push through Congress on both sides of the aisle.

Congress has the authority to issue sub-penas. If there is a conflict in authority regarding the information requested, then either the proper branches of goverments (Executive/Legaslative) have to sit down and solve the problem or they can force the issue by going to the USSC.

This happened to Nixon and he lost, other times Congress has lost.

Because the Dems have not tried to force the issue, implies that they do not feel that they have solid ground to stand on and are trying to make political hay.

Reid has a habit of spouting off against Bush then having to backpedal.

I'm pretty sure that subpoenas must be approved the majority of the members of the Committee that is making the request. Democrats obviously do not have enough members.

Evidence to back up my words:

rule 7--subpoenas

(a) Authorization.--The Chairman or any other member of the
Committee, when authorized by a majority vote of the
Committee at a meeting or by proxies, shall have authority to
subpoena the attendance of witnesses or the production of
memoranda, documents, records, or any other materials. At the
request of any Member of the Committee, the Committee shall
authorize the issuance of a subpoena only at a meeting of the
Committee. When the Committee authorizes a subpoena, it may
be issued upon the signature of the Chairman or any other
member designated by the Committee.
(b) Return.--A subpoena, or a request to an agency, for
documents may be issued whose return shall occur at a time
and place other than that of a scheduled Committee meeting. A
return on such a subpoena or request which is incomplete or
accompanied by an objection constitutes good cause for a
hearing on shortened notice. Upon such a return, the Chairman
or any other member designated by him may convene a hearing
by giving 2 hours notice by telephone to all other members.
One member shall constitute a quorum for such a hearing. The
sole purpose of such a hearing shall be to elucidate further
information about the return and to rule on the objection.
(c) Depositions.--At the direction of the Committee, staff
is authorized to take depositions from witnesses.

http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/srules11.html

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
And why will the Dems not sub-pena the documents?

do they have that authority for just a confirmation vote?

really gotta wonder by Bush never ponied up with the documents. IMO, this does more harm to him politically than it does to the democrats.

there was a good article in the Post about how Bush practices Brinksmanship. He won't back down till he absolutely has to. I can't find the article, but maybe someone else can search better than me.

read something like that a while ago, in relation to nixon. Bush and his admin want a secret government, they dont want another Nixon fiasco, and that fits perfectly since from day one when he started to stop the freedom of information act (or whatever it was called).

Not smart, i think people want an open government.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
And why will the Dems not sub-pena the documents?

do they have that authority for just a confirmation vote?

really gotta wonder by Bush never ponied up with the documents. IMO, this does more harm to him politically than it does to the democrats.

there was a good article in the Post about how Bush practices Brinksmanship. He won't back down till he absolutely has to. I can't find the article, but maybe someone else can search better than me.

read something like that a while ago, in relation to nixon. Bush and his admin want a secret government, they dont want another Nixon fiasco, and that fits perfectly since from day one when he started to stop the freedom of information act (or whatever it was called).

Not smart, i think people want an open government.

The people may want open government, but how does that matter when they're deluded by propaganda into thinking that it is open?

I think this game of Bush's is pretty smart. It's worked for 4 years now to great effect against the weakling Democrats.

But, now, Bush has met his match in Harry Reid. I couldn't be more proud to have Reid leading the Dems in the Senate.