Biden says not enough votes to stop Bolton. My question is why?

[saracat]

And how will you feel about Dems who vote for Bolton? There can absolutely be NO reason for a Dem to vote for Bolton.

[TayTay]

1. Biden was guessing

And I don't think he wanted to tip his hand to the Rethugs. This might be a close vote.

If Bolton gets confirmed, he is damaged goods. (This is not a lifetime appointment.) In a Senate where the good guys DO NOT HAVE THE VOTES, this might be the best we can do. (I just hope to Gawd we get no or almost no Dem leakage.)

[saracat]

2. I so hope Biden is wrong. I think Bolton can be blocked especially

after this weekends leak. But I will rip apart any Dem that votes for him! There could be no excuse for that!

[paulk]

3. I think Biden was trying to send a message to those republicans

that he knows are on the fence - that, like tay tay says - Bolton is already damaged goods - so vote your conscious - do the right thing and vote "no".

The one Dem who really bothers me is Nelson from Nebraska - I'm afraid he might vote yes 'cause the state is so red and he's up for reelection in 2006.

[whometense]

4. And Landrieu??

She always seems to be teetering on that fence too.

[paulk]

6. she might, too

come to think of it.

sigh...

[Mass]

8. She said she would vote against him, but not against cloture.

Lieberman is the one we should worry about. He still thinks Bolton is a good guy,

[paulk]

11. yeah, that's right, I remember now

she definitely said she would vote against him.

it's hard to imagine Lieberman would buck Ried on this. That would be the absolute final straw.

[ginnyinWI]

5. but there are some repub votes, right?

Like Voinovich, and who else? Warner?

[whometense]

7. Maybe Chafee has fallen

over to the good side. And I know Snowe and Collins (Maine) have been getting a lot of home state pressure to vote against.

Specter?

[ginnyinWI]

9. then it could be really close--yikes!

Like maybe 50-50? Then stupid Cheney would come in and break the tie. :(

[whometense]

10. Could be.

I have no idea. It's like a giant chess match, and everyone's got their game plan locked away in a secret vault. I haven't even thought about vote counting because there are too many variables.

I just don't know.

I've even thought that if * looked too lame duck-ish a bunch of moderate repubs might defect. But you also can't afford to underestimate the fear factor.

[JohnKleeb]

12. Warner supports Bolton sadly

[saracat]

13. Warner is senile. He is a great friend of my Dad's best law school chum.

he always sends me Warner pix at Xmas! Yuck! The friend is senile too!

[JohnKleeb]

14. Hes smarter than Allen I have to tell you

Though thats not saying much.

[saracat]

15. Now THAT is scary!

:freak: :crazy:

[whometense]

16. Steve Clemons take on the Biden statement

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000699.html

Joe Biden is on the Right Side of this Bolton Battle

This weekend, Senator Joseph Biden was quoted as saying that the Dems probably did not have enough votes to block John Bolton's nomination -- but he also said that they were going to keep insisting that the White House turn over requested documents.

Much has been made of Biden's commentary; some have argued that he was conceding defeat.

This is absolutely false. Biden, through the entire failed cloture vote and since, has worked to communicate with both the Republican and Democratic leadership in the Senate that the current battle is not over blocking John Bolton. The issue is compelling the White House to hand over requested documentation that it should not be able to arbitrarily block.

Biden has been attempting to seem reasonable and flexible. While clearly the votes ARE BUILDING AGAINST Bolton -- given the conversions of John Thune, Mary Landrieu, and Mark Pryor, and perhaps even Joseph Lieberman -- Biden wanted to assure those engaged in this battle that an up-down vote on Bolton is possible if the White House provides the documents -- and they are investigated.

TWN has been offline for a day as we have been investigating a major scoop about the NSA intercepts. I will be posting what we know shortly.

Yes, I wish that Biden had articulated his views differently -- but the momentum is still clearly against Bolton. And I have been assured that there has been no weakness in resolve about demanding the requested docuyments. If there are no deals or arrangements made regarding document access, another cloture vote will fail again.

More soon.

[TayTay]

17. Thanks for posting this.

I checked Washington Note this morning, but this wasn't up yet. I agree with Steve Clemons. I don't think the Dems are going to press for a vote on this this week. I think more info is on the way.

[whometense]

18. It had JUST gone up when I checked.

I'm not Biden's biggest fan, but I really wish people - and by that I mean DEMS - would just back off and give the senators on our own side some wiggle room. Biden's been on the right side of the Bolton debate from day 1. There's no reason to jump all over him for one statement. I wish we would leave the attacking to the rethugs and spend our energy instead backing up our own guys.

That said, if Holy Joe thinks he's going to get away with voting for Bolton he'd better think again. Biden gets a pass because he's clearly on board. Anyone who isn't is a different matter.

I can't wait to see what Clemons digs up.

[whometense]

19. Oh my god, THAT was fast!!!

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000700.html

MAJOR SCOOP: Under Secretary of State Nick Burns & Libya the Subjects of One Bolton NSA Intercept Request
John Bolton so irritated British negotiators who were working on a resolution to Libya's WMD programs that they asked the American team on Libya to remove John Bolton from the case. Bolton was dropped.

TWN has now learned from a highly placed intelligence source, "with direct knowledge," that one of the 10 intercept requests made by John Bolton was about Libya. The identity of the U.S. official requested by Bolton was R. Nicholas "Nick" Burns, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs.

This shows a couple of things about Bolton that further underscore his vanity and irresponsibility when it comes to national security issues.

First, Bolton was NOT on a need-to-know basis in the Libya case. He had been removed from that portfolio.

Second, this shows that Bolton was in fact spying on his colleagues and their work. In this case, Nick Burns was his target.

The Bolton Battle is getting ready to rev up again -- and this news on Bolton, Burns and Libya may turn a number of other U.S. Senators against his nomination.

-- Steve Clemons

Butter up that popcorn, TayTay!

[TayTay]

20. This is unbelievable

The *ies are the nastiest bunch of back-bitting and reprehensible group of jerks that have ever been in the US government. This is just beyond the pale. Can you even imagine this? Using the highest intelligence capabilities of the US governmental structure to keep track of the people you don't trust in your own appointments?

This has got to make a difference. (But we are talking about guys like Allen and Coleman. They don't have any sense of honor or duty to country.)

[ginnyinWI]

21. What a piece of work this guy is.

But it fits what * has been doing. Favor loyalty above all else. :(

I'm sure the repubs in the Senate are monitoring public opinion very carefully, and trying to decide whether it's worth it to ride down the tubes with * or to somehow distance themselves. Some are in way to deep already.

[whometense]

22. It's unbelievable.

It just gets worse and worse. It doesn't seem that there is an ethical bottom line for these people. They will literally do anything, say anything to get what they want.

Bolton should be in jail. And so should * and Cheney. I would dance in the street if that ever happened.