Posted on 12/07/2006 3:57:40 PM PST by Jean S
Well, they finally got him. John Bolton is out as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
National Review, The Wall Street Journal editorial page, and other conservative commentators have already listed some of the people who count this a victory: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Il, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.).
But they didn’t cause Bolton’s demise. No, this unhappy moment can be traced entirely to Republicans, who did not confirm Bolton when they had 55 votes in the Senate.
And why didn’t they? At this point it’s hard to remember the sheer silliness of some of the issues that in 2005 effectively killed the Bolton nomination. Now, in light of what has happened, it’s worth a look back.
There were two main charges against Bolton. The first was that he punished State Department analysts who wouldn’t manipulate intelligence to achieve goals he wanted. And the second was that he was, in general, a bully.
The first would have been a serious issue, if true. But a close look at the evidence showed that the charges just didn’t stand up to scrutiny.
For example, Bolton was said to have tried to fire a man named Christian Westermann after a dispute about the wording of a speech. It’s true the two men had a disagreement, but the “tried to fire” accusation — the key charge — fell apart under scrutiny.
“Did Mr. Bolton at any time threaten your employment?” Senate committee lawyers asked Westermann.
“No,” Westermann answered.
In fact, Westermann wasn’t fired, wasn’t disciplined, and wasn’t reassigned. Still, committee lawyers tried to find out whether he was punished in some other way. “What was your rank in 2001?” they asked him.
“I was a GS-14,” Westermann answered. That’s the second-highest step on the federal pay scale.”
“You’re still a 14,” the questioner said. “Did you go up every step you were supposed to?”
“Yes, I received ‘outstandings’ on my performance reports.”
“Have you received any awards?”
“I’ve received numerous awards.”
Well, so much for that allegation.
As for the bully stuff, the key accusation came from a woman named Melody Townsel, who claimed she had a run-in with Bolton in Moscow in 1994, when she was a contract employee for the Agency for International Development and Bolton was a lawyer in private practice.
In a letter to the committee, Townsel claimed Bolton chased her down the halls of a hotel, threw things at her, slipped threatening letters under her door, and “behav[ed] like a madman.”
It turns out that allegation didn’t stand up, either. A key official who was in Moscow wrote the committee that Townsel’s story was “impossible to square with fact.”
“I certainly did not hear, contemporaneously, from any other employee in Moscow that anything occurred between Mr. Bolton and Ms. Townsel in Moscow,” the official said.
Even by Washington standards, those were pretty flimsy allegations. Nevertheless, on the basis of that impressively unimpressive evidence, Republican Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) announced he would oppose Bolton. Because of that, the committee sent the nomination to the full Senate with no endorsement. Once there, Democrats blocked Bolton’s confirmation. President Bush had to resort to a recess appointment to send Bolton to the U.N.
Once Bolton was in the job, the allegations that had seemed so critical during his non-confirmation process seemed completely unimportant.
Bolton did a good job representing U.S. interests on issues of enormous import: Iran, North Korea, the Middle East.
He did so well that by last summer Voinovich had changed his mind.
“I believe Bolton has been tempered and focused on speaking for the administration,” Voinovich wrote in an op-ed in The Washington Post. “He has stood many times side by side with his colleagues from Japan, Britain, Canada and other countries, showing a commitment to cooperation within the United Nations.”
If Bush re-nominated Bolton, Voinovich wrote, “I cannot imagine a worse message to send to the terrorists — and to other nations deciding whether to engage in this effort — than to drag out a possible re-nomination process or even replace the person our president has entrusted to lead our nation at the United Nations at a time when we are working on these historic objectives.”
Well, Bush did re-nominate Bolton, and for a moment, it seemed he would finally make it. But then soon-to-be-former Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) stepped in to stop Bolton.
That was the final straw. This week, Bolton gave up — and the message Voinovich feared would be sent to terrorists was indeed sent.
It is difficult to believe that an official as effective as Bolton could be felled by such baseless opposition, but it has happened.
And don’t blame Democrats. They were wrong to oppose the nomination, but they’re the opposition party. They opposed.
The truth is, the Bolton matter was an entirely Republican-made fiasco.
It could be the last one for a while, because starting next month, Republicans won’t have much power over the confirmation process.
They should have done the right thing when they had the chance.
York is a White House correspondent for National Review. His column appears in The Hill each week.
E-mail: byork@nationalreview.com
Chafee can rot in Hell.
He will and he'll have plenty of company.
Voinovich should be voted out of office on the first upcoming opportunity. The people of Ohio should be disgusted by this man -- this former governor who helped put the state on the path that is has been on. But his worst offense was in his weepy rejection of this great patriot's nomination to the stupid UN post. We needed a Bolton -- now who knows what kind of idiot we'll get as a replacement thanks to Senator Voinovich and weeny Lincoln Chafee. SHAME on your both. Neither of you could carry John Bolton's jock-strap, just to borrow an old phrase that seems very appropriate in this case.
Yep...yet another reason the pubbies are losers.
SO why didn't Bush press to have Bolton confirmed this month? The GOP still has 55 seats. Chafee no longer has anything to lose. I don't get it. What's the holdup?
Why didn't Joe (memtum) help out to offset Linc?
The article was right on target. The other point is the Dem's party discipline. Other way around, (a) there would have been no defectors, and (b) about half the losers would have been there for who the heck ever the Dems nominated.
Total melt-down of the GOP. Time for some fresh faces.
He can take voinovich and dewine with him. Useless, worthless and mindless.
There is another Republican that goes un named here and it should be named.
Bill Frist....worse leader of the Senate I have ever seen....no guts billy boy....when is he leaving? Or has he already gone?
But then soon-to-be-former Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) stepped in to stop Bolton.
No matter how my day is going, I break out into a smile every time I remember he's going.
This is the fault of the "symbolic majority" we HAD.
RINOS got Conservatives nowhere.
How do you suppose the 'Rats will use their Majority?
I'm guessing with more spine than the alleged Republicans did.
ANWR? Off-Shore Drilling? Permanent tax cuts? Marriage defined? Immigration Reform?
Don't fear, the "rat Majority will be short lived.
We just have to run CONSERVATIVES again!
Uh huh, guess who backed Linc. over a more Conservative challenger?
Yep, same guy who backed Specter.
Sometimes you get what you asked for.
Bush did push to have Bolton confirmed, but Chafee's on the committee and announced he would vote no. Therefore, the committee was deadlocked at 9-9, and Bolton was not voted out to the Senate floor. Nomination - DOA.
I expect Chafee to announce he's switching to the democrat party very soon, and he'll try to get the Dim nomination. If he can get that, he's a shoe-in to get his Senate seat back. Blocking Bolton is groundwork for this.
That famous Bush loyalty seems to be missing when it comes to people like Ashcroft, Bolton, and Rumsfeld.
Chafee said that before the election. There did not seem to be any major push since then.
We need a new republican party. Or a new conservative party. Or something.
I agree. He dumped people who where very dedicated to him and I am angry about it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.