They just do what the hell they want.

John Bolton appears before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Capitol Hill Monday, April 11, 2005, on his nomination to be ambassador to the United Nations. President Bush intends to announce next week that he is going around Congress to install embattled nominee John Bolton as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, senior administration officials said Friday, July 29, 2005. (AP Photo/Dennis Cook)

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a...n_ambassador_16
Officials: Bush Plans to Install Bolton
By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer
41 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Administration officials say President Bush is preparing to use constitutional powers rarely employed for major appointments to bypass the Senate and install — if only temporarily — John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations

Bush intends to use a recess appointment to put the controversial conservative in the post before leaving Washington on Tuesday to spend August at his Texas ranch, said two officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because Bush has not made the announcement.

Recess appointments, allowed only while Congress is on breaks, let presidents get around the required Senate confirmation of nominees. The House and Senate recessed on Friday until Sept. 6.

Under the Constitution, a recess appointment during the lawmakers' August break would last until the next Congress, which begins in January 2007.

In Bolton's case, a recess appointment would culminate a bitter, five-month battle between the White House and Democrats that had left his nomination stalled in the Republican-run Senate.

Among the most contentious nominations Bush has made as president, Bolton was criticized for bad-mouthing the very world body where he would be the nation's chief diplomat. Democrats also accused him of mistreating subordinates and intimidating intelligence analysts who didn't support his hawkish ideology.

Investigations ended with no proof of improper actions. The White House argued that Bolton, the former undersecretary of state for arms control and long one of Bush's most conservative foreign policy advisers, is exactly the man to whip into shape a United Nations badly in need of reform.

Democrats objected strenuously to the president's plans.

"It's the wrong thing to do. John Bolton is the wrong person for the job," said Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., a member of Foreign Relations Committee. "The president is entitled to take that action, but I don't think it will serve American foreign policy well."

Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said a recess appointment of this "badly flawed, ill-suited candidate" would be an abuse of power.

Bush counselor Dan Bartlett said the president had not made a final decision on whether to make a recess appointment.

"He retains that right to do, but he will continue to work with the Senate as long as he can," Bartlett said. "But he has not made a decision."

Earlier Friday, though, White House press secretary Scott McClellan gave the strongest indication yet that Bush planned to make a recess appointment of Bolton, saying the vacancy needs to be filled before the U.N. General Assembly's annual meeting in mid-September. Former Sen. John Danforth left the post in January.

"It's important that we get our permanent representative in place," McClellan said. "This is a critical time and it's important to continue moving forward on comprehensive reform."

A recess appointment would risk annoying Democrats at a time when his nomination of John Roberts to serve on the Supreme Court is under Senate consideration. And it could hamper Bolton at the United Nations, sending him there as a short-timer without the Senate's backing.

In the face of objections from most Democrats and at least one Republican, Bush has steadfastly refused to withdraw Bolton's nomination — even after the Foreign Relations Committee sent it to the full Senate without the customary recommendation to approve it.

Though the debate over Bolton had largely faded from the headlines, critics raised fresh concerns this week when it surfaced that Bolton had neglected to tell Congress that he had been interviewed in 2003 in a government investigation into faulty prewar intelligence on Iraq.

Thirty-five Democratic senators and one independent, Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont, urged Bush against a recess appointment in a letter released Friday.

"There's just too much unanswered about Bolton, and I think the president would make a truly serious mistake if he makes a recess appointment," Sen. Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record) of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview.




John Bolton, nominee for the United States Representative to the United Nations, adjusts his glasses as he testifies at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on his nomination in Washington in this April 11, 2005 file photo. The White House gave its strongest signal yet on July 29, 2005 that U.S. President George W. Bush will soon bypass the Senate and appoint Bolton to become the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Photo taken April 11, 2005. REUTERS/Jason Reed/Files

nytimes.com
Bolton Not Truthful, 36 Senators Charge in Opposing Appointment

By STEVEN R. WEISMAN
Published: July 30, 2005
WASHINGTON, July 29 - Charging that John R. Bolton was "not truthful" in answering questions about his record, 36 senators urged President Bush on Friday not to make a recess appointment of Mr. Bolton as United Nations ambassador after the Senate's failure to confirm him for that job.

But one Republican official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the president has not announced his decision, said Mr. Bush would probably appoint Mr. Bolton next week.

In a letter to Mr. Bush, the senators cited the disclosure on Thursday that Mr. Bolton had been interviewed by the State Department's inspector general in an investigation of intelligence failures related to Iraq, even though he told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in March that he had not been involved in any such inquiry.

Mr. Bolton "did not recall this interview" when he assured the committee that he had not been questioned by any investigators, according to a letter sent Friday from the State Department to Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the ranking Democrat on the foreign relations panel.

The letter from the senators, all Democrats except for the Senate's sole independent, who usually votes with them, was the latest escalation of the battle over Mr. Bolton.

He has run into heavy opposition in the Senate because of his history of criticizing the United Nations and over charges that he tried to influence intelligence assessments to conform with his own views.

Mr. Bolton's nomination has the support of the majority of senators, but fewer than the 60 needed to head off a filibuster that Democrats say they would mount until specific questions about Mr. Bolton's activities were answered, particularly his use of classified intelligence about conversations involving administration colleagues.

The State Department has admitted that, as Mr. Biden charged, Mr. Bolton had been interviewed in a previous inquiry into one particular intelligence failure on Iraq, the finding that Iraq had tried to buy raw uranium from Niger for a nuclear arms program. That finding turned out to be based on forged documents.

Administration officials appeared shaken by the disclosure, and some worried openly that it might hurt Mr. Bolton's chances of a recess appointment, a tactic that a president is permitted use once Congress is in recess in August. The appointment would expire at the end of next year, however.

In a final gesture of opposition, Democratic senators indicated that they would use a parliamentary maneuver to formally send Mr. Bolton's name back to the White House once the Senate adjourns, rather than have it remain pending at the Senate.

That move was seen as symbolic, but one reflecting the growing bitterness of Democrats and their hopes that by standing firm they would make it more politically awkward for Mr. Bush to give Mr. Bolton the interim appointment.

Republicans, on the other hand, said Mr. Bush would likely go ahead and make the appointment as early as next week.

The question then becomes, soppose Bush DOES hire the ass hole without a vote?

He cannot remain in the position more than a few months. Can he still be appointed?
If he cannot, how much can he do, or WILL he do to damage the UN in 6 months?
Will Bush's NEXT appointment attempt be a Bolton Clone?
Is there ANYWAY the senate can block this recess appointment?

Or, is the opposition party essentially non-existant?

Our hands are tied by the rules. It seems all the Senators (35 Democrats and Jeffords) can do is protest...hopefully, LOUDLY. The White House simply refused to turn over Bolton's papers requested by Biden. WH plan: Lie, refuse; lie, refuse; repeat. If Lieboy wants to appoint Bolton, he has the power. Recess appointments are in effect until the next congress of Jan. 2007.
They make Nixon's Stonewalling look amateurish....but it's not over yet.
Nobody wants this appointment but neocons and their tools.
And psssssssst, Bolton was involved in Traitorgate.
But the Republicans are in charge in our one-party state so we'll see if enough people give a shit and can tear themselves away from the latest reality show.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050729/...appointment.php
Bolton's Abscess Appointment
Don Kraus and Sam Stein
July 29, 2005

Don Kraus is executive vice president and Sam Stein is Edward Rawson Fellow at Citizens for Global Solutions , a grassroots membership organization dedicated to bringing nations together and strengthening democratic global institutions.
As Congress prepares for its upcoming August break, signals have emerged from the White House that President Bush will give John R. Bolton a recess appointment to the post of U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. For a while now, it has been clear that such a move would be damaging to both Bolton and the United States. Now, however, the appointment seems likely to have harmful ramifications for President Bush as well.

The reason is straightforward. According to reports from MSNBC, John Bolton has testified to the grand jury investigating the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame. Not only is it possible that Bolton may have lied about this testimony in a questionnaire he filled out for his confirmation hearing, but the linkage to the Plame affair places Bolton, yet again, into a scenario in which intelligence was doctored for the sake of political gain. In fact, according to an investigation by the State Department Inspector General, Bolton’s office was responsible for the placement of the Niger uranium claims in the State Department’s December 2002 “fact sheet” on Iraq’s WMD program; claims that have since been exposed as baseless. ...

In addition to Bolton’s potential involvement in fixing the facts to the policy in the run-up to war, objections to Bolton are as pertinent today as they were when the nomination was announced on March 7. Simply put: The Senate has recoiled at the prospect of sending an abrasive individual with a history of politicizing intelligence to be America’s chief diplomat at the United Nations. Of course, Bolton and the United Nations were not a harmonious pairing in the first place. Bolton has questioned the United Nations' existence, disparaged international cooperation and scoffed at paying U.N. dues. But for the most part, principled members of Congress worried that Bolton’s lack of credibility, patience and diplomatic experience (not necessarily his anti-U.N. ideology) would make him a liability at the world body.
...

The dangers of a recess appointment are clear. The additional damage that such a course of action would cause to Bolton’s credibility will handicap him at the United Nations and damage the United States’ negotiating capacity at a time when the future of the United Nations is at stake. Emerging stories of Bolton’s less-then-honest recounting of grand jury testimony and association with the Plame investigation simply add to the problem. America needs an ambassador who can help fix what’s wrong with the United Nations without abandoning what’s right; an ambassador who can champion American policy without damaging America’s reputation, an ambassador who has the ability to build alliances without resorting to doctoring intelligence. Bolton was not that ambassador to begin with. A recess appointment only makes him worse.


http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/1044
Did John Bolton Commit Perjury?

According to Title 18, Section 1621 of the US Code, anyone who “in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true” has committed perjury.

On July 18 of 2003, 12 days after Joe Wilson accused the Bush administration in a New York Times op-ed article of twisting intelligence and four days after columnist Bob Novak blew the cover of Wilson’s wife, CIA proliferation operative Valerie Plame, then-Undersecretary of State John Bolton was interviewed by the State Department’s inspector general in connection with an investigation into how the incident Wilson wrote about, the bogus intelligence on an alleged attempt by Iraq to purchase uranium from Niger, developed.

But he doesn’t remember it. When Bolton submitted his Senate Foreign Relations Committee Disclosure Form to the committee in advance of hearings on his nomination to the post of US ambassador to the UN, he answered “No” to this question: “Have you been interviewed or asked to supply any information in connection with any administrative (including an inspector general), Congressional or grand jury investigation within the past 5 years, except routine Congressional testimony? If so, provide details.”
The 35 Senators who wrote to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urging her not to support a recess appointment of Bolton — something that now appears certain — describe the disclosure form as “a document so important that it requires a sworn affidavit.”
...

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/050730/w073008.html
Officials: White House intends end run around Congress for Bolton nomination
01:06 PM EDT Jul 30
JENNIFER LOVEN

WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. President George W. Bush intends to announce next week that he is going around Congress to install embattled nominee John Bolton as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, senior administration officials said Friday.

Bush has the power to fill vacancies without Senate approval while Congress is in recess. Under the Constitution, a recess appointment during the legislators' August break would last until the next session of Congress, which begins in January 2007.

An end run around the Senate confirmation process would certainly annoy senators - particularly Democrats - at a time when Bush's nomination of John Roberts to serve on the Supreme Court hangs in the balance. It also could hamper Bolton at the UN, by sending him there as a short-timer without the Senate's backing.

"There's just too much unanswered about Bolton and I think the president would make a truly serious mistake if he makes a recess appointment," said Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee.

Two officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because the president had not made the announcement and Congress wasn't yet in recess, said Bush planned to exercise that authority before he leaves Washington on Tuesday for his ranch. The House recessed on Thursday and the Senate's break was scheduled to begin later Friday.

Earlier in the day, White House press secretary Scott McClellan gave the strongest indication yet that Bush planned to do so, noting that the UN General Assembly has its annual meeting in mid-September.

"It's important that we get our permanent representative in place," he said. "This is a critical time and it's important to continue moving forward on comprehensive reform."

Bush counsellor Dan Bartlett said the president had not made a decision on whether to make a recess appointment.

"He retains that right to do, but he will continue to work with the Senate as long as he can," Barlett said. "But he has not made a decision."

Bolton's nomination, announced in March by the president, was controversial from the start and has been stalled in the Senate by Democrats.

Critics say Bolton, who has been accused of mistreating subordinates and has been openly skeptical about the UN, would be ill-suited to the sensitive diplomatic task at the world body. The White House says the former undersecretary of state for arms control, who has long been one of Bush's most conservative foreign policy advisers, is exactly the man to whip the UN into shape.

This week, critics raised a fresh concern, saying Bolton had neglected to tell Congress he had been interviewed in a government investigation into faulty prewar intelligence on Iraq.

The State Department said Thursday that Bolton was interviewed in 2003 by the department inspector general. The office was conducting a joint investigation with the CIA into allegations that Iraq attempted to buy nuclear materials from Niger. Bolton had earlier submitted a questionnaire to the Senate in which he had said he had not testified to a grand jury or been interviewed by investigators in any inquiry over the past five years.

Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee said he would vote against Bolton - if given the chance - and would oppose a recess appointment if it is accurate that Bolton's form was originally incorrect. "Any intimidation of the facts, or suppression of information getting to the public which led us to the war, absolutely should preclude him from a recess appointment," said Chafee, of Rhode Island.

Also Friday, 35 Democratic senators and one independent, Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont, sent a letter to Bush urging against a recess appointment. "Sending someone to the United Nations who has not been confirmed by the United States Senate and now who has admitted to not being truthful on a document so important that it requires a sworn affidavit is going to set our efforts back in many ways," the letter said.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/5534211.html
Senators urge Bush to hold off on Bolton
July 30, 2005
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Charging that John Bolton was "not truthful" in answering questions about his record, 36 senators urged President Bush on Friday not to make a recess appointment of Bolton as U.N. ambassador following the Senate's failure to confirm him for that job.

In a letter, the senators cited the disclosure Thursday that Bolton had been interviewed by the State Department's inspector general in an investigation of intelligence failures related to Iraq, even though Bolton told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in March that he had not been involved in any such inquiry.

Bolton "did not recall this interview" when he assured the committee he had not been questioned by any investigators, according to a letter sent Friday from the State Department to Sen. Joseph Biden, the top Democrat on the panel.

The letter from the senators, all Democrats except for the Senate's sole independent, was the latest escalation of the battle over Bolton. He has run into opposition in the Senate because of his history of criticizing the United Nations and over charges that he tried to influence intelligence assessments to conform with his own views.

His nomination has the support of most senators, but fewer than the 60 needed to head off a filibuster that Democrats say they would mount until specific questions about Bolton's activities were answered.

I would suggest, that even as much as it would hurt people like me, who don't have the money, we need oil and subsequently gas prices to simply skyrocket!

The average American has to HURT before he'll become activated!
The "average American" will have to pay $150 to fill his SUV before he'll be angry enough to protest Bush policy! When even trip to the grocery store costs $10 in Gas, people will get a bit uppity! Or better yet, cut off supply! Recall the first and second oil embargo's. Imagine how pissed average America will be if they have to sit in line to buy their ration, 10 gallons, and it costs $50!!!!

You know, it's just like having a kid!
Just yesterday evening he asked me, "Why are you always yelling at me?"
I replied,

Well, you didn't hear me when I asked you nicely,
you didn't hear me when I asked nicely but a little louder,
you only hear me when I finally get pissed and I say it as loud as I can!
It's as if the first two were like an alarm clock with snooze!

I suggested, if you don't like my yelling at you, hear me when I ask nicely!
I still have to yell to get things done!

Unfortunately. Blind sheep.
That's what it might take. Total economic hardship for most.



Kids?

I hate it when that happens.
My sons are mostly finished with ignoring me. It doesn't pay.
Thank ghod, it was taxing.
Just giving reminders ...they see it as nagging.
Whispering works better to catch their attention.
It was easier when they were small. Hahaha.
They hadn't yet driven me insane.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=994514
UN nominee derided by Democrats as 'damaged goods'
Jul 31, 2005 — By Adam Entous

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Top Senate Democrats on Sunday derided President Bush's embattled nominee for U.N. ambassador, John Bolton, as "damaged goods" and warned that his expected appointment without Senate confirmation cast doubt on U.S. credibility.

But a member of the Senate Republican leadership, Mitch McConnell (asshole) of Kentucky, countered that Bolton, a favorite of conservatives and known for his blunt, sometimes abrasive style, was "exactly what the U.N. needs at this point."

"We've finally got somebody who will go up there and challenge the establishment up there at the U.N., bring about the kind of reform that is needed," he said on "Fox News Sunday."

Bush is expected to go around the Senate and give Bolton a "recess appointment" as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations as early as Monday. Bolton would be able to serve until January 2007, when a new Congress is sworn in.

"I would hope the president would think a little longer about this," Sen. Christopher Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, told Fox. "He's damaged goods. This is a person who lacks credibility."
"This would be the first U.N. ambassador since 1948 we've ever sent there under a recess appointment. That's not what you want to send up, a person that doesn't have the confidence of the Congress," Dodd added.

A vote on the nomination of the outspoken conservative has been held up for months over accusations he tried to manipulate intelligence and intimidated intelligence analysts to support his hawkish views in his post as the top U.S. diplomat for arms control.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada called Bolton a "flawed candidate" who may be trying to hide damaging information about his conduct.

"John Bolton is a person who, in his personal relationship with government employees, has been abominable, mean, unreasonable and bizarre. His not producing the papers we have requested only underscores the importance of why we need those papers. There must be something he's trying to hide," Reid told BuzzFlash.com, a news and commentary Web site.

~~~~~~~~

In the meantime, the arrogant Chimp goes about the PR functions of pretending to give a shit about anybody but himself. Hey, where's Pickles? The twins? Nobody else goes to church with him...Rover? For all we know, he went into an empty building.


U.S. President George W. Bush waves as he arrives for Sunday Services at St. Johns Church in Washington D.C. July 31, 2005. Bush will address the 2005 National Scout Jamboree later in the day where four scout leaders were electrocuted while setting up a tent. REUTERS/Chris Kleponis


President Bush waves as he walks out after attending Sunday services at St. John's Church in Washington Sunday, July 31 2005 in Washington. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

(Is this an odd caption, or is it just me?)

United States President George W. Bush waves as he departs from Sunday Services at St. Johns Church in Washington D.C. July 31, 2005. Two months ago, President Bush faced accusations that he was out of touch with Americans, had lost his touch with Congress and was looking at a cold, lonely second term. Photo by Chris Kleponis/Reuters

(Not a very "spiritual" look. )



Gee, for an article that is supposed to be about criticism of Bush, McConnell gets more than his fair share of space in support of those thugs.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/31/...ain712937.shtml
Bush Bolton Maneuver Criticized



WASHINGTON, July 31, 2005
AP) Anticipating that President George W. Bush soon will appoint John Bolton as U.N. ambassador, a leading Democrat said Sunday that Bolton would go without the confidence of Congress.

"He's damaged goods. This is a person who lacks credibility," said Sen. Christopher Dodd, a senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He said Bush should think again before using a recess appointment to place Bolton at the United Nations while the Senate is on its traditional August break.

"That's not what you want to send up, a person who doesn't have the confidence of the Congress and so many people who've urged that he not be sent up to do that job," said Dodd on Fox television.

As Bush left church on Sunday, a reporter shouted a question, asking whether the president would be appointing Bolton. Bush smiled and refrained from answering.

Two administration officials said on Friday that the president would appoint Bolton before leaving on Tuesday to spend August at his Texas ranch. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because Bush had yet to make the announcement.

Under the Constitution, the president may issue an appointment and bypass Senate confirmation when it is in recess. Such an appointment ends when the next session of Congress begins--January 2007, in this case.

Senate Democrats have led the effort to hold up a confirmation vote for Bolton, citing what they have described as undiplomatic behavior by the former State Department official.

"If the president recess appoints John Bolton, I can understand why because he's been waiting a long time to get the person that he believes is the best to represent his administration at the U.N," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, a Republican.

McConnell said he doubted that a recess appointment would have a strongly negative impact on the atmosphere in the Senate. If Bush withdrew the nomination, no ambassador would be in place when the U.N. begins taking up important issues in the fall, he said.

"Bolton's been sort of twisting in the wind since March," McConnell said. "Bolton's exactly what the U.N. needs at this point. The president's right on the mark in picking him."

The administration has promoted Bolton for a hard-nosed style that officials believe will help push reform in the United Nations.

Opponents say his criticism of the world organization and reports that he has abused underlings and sought to punish those who disagreed with him render him unfit for the position.

~~~~~

Opponents? How about people who believe in decency and playing fair?! HE IS UNFIT FOR THE POSITION!!! We don't NEED Neocon "reforms" at the UN!

Question?


Why do the ass holes always make their comments on FAUX?


CNN or MSNBC won't air their crap?


I get so tired of seeing, said on Faux this and said on Faux that.

It's just one of their many spin bases.
You can be sure McConnell's spiel will be repeated on CRNC and MSRNC by other tools.
The "it has been said" style of lying gnus.