Bush Holds Up More Than 84 Nominees Over Torture Advocate: ‘It’s Bradbury, Or Nobody’
Bush Holds Up More Than 84 Nominees Over Torture Advocate: ‘It’s Bradbury, Or Nobody’
The White House has repeatedly blamed Congress for the large number of executive vacancies, even though President Bush continues to nominate controversial figures who generate bipartisan opposition. Last month, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino charged:
And in addition to that, we have many outstanding nominations that need to be confirmed, both judicial and also throughout the government. And it really is unfortunate that Congress has not moved forward on its obligation to have hearings and to hold votes, because the president has nominated very good people.
One of the most controversial figures is Steven Bradbury, Bush’s nominee to the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel. In 2005, Bradbury authored two secret memos authorizing the CIA to use harsh interrogation techniques against detainees.
Yesterday on the Senate floor, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) revealed that much of the blame for these stalled nominees lies with the President’s insistence that the torture advocate receive a recess appointment.
According to Reid, in December, he met with the White House and agreed to allow more than 84 of the President’s nominees to go through. Bush, however, insisted that unless the Senate agreed to Bradbury’s recess appointment, “he wouldn’t make a deal.” “It’s Brabury, or nobody,” Bush reportedly told Reid. Watch it:
Today, Bush plans to meet with some of these pending nominees, “reigniting a fight over their appointments.” It’s likely that Bradbury will receive the seat of honor.
UPDATE: Reid’s full floor remarks are here. More here on the status of Bush’s nominees from Durbin, Schumer, and Leahy.
Transcript:
REID: I say that because of all the nominees the President will profess to care about at this breakfast, Steven Bradbury stands head and shoulders above all the others in the President’s esteem. I’m not guessing; I was told so by the White House.
Mr. President, right before the Christmas recess, I called the President’s chief of staff, Mr. Bolton — wonderful man, I like him, easy to talk to, easy to deal with. And I said, I’ll tell you what, Josh. We’re going to go into recess, and why don’t we have an agreement on who the President wants to have recess appoints, and in fact, I’ll give you some suggestions. You can have a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governments, a member of the Federal Aviation Agency, you can have the couple of other Chemical Safety Board members. And I said not only that, there are 84 other Republican nominees we’ll approve. There are 8 Democrats, 84 Republicans — pretty good deal. He said, “Let me check.”
He called me back and he said, “Well, what we want is to have a recess appointment of Steven Bradbury.” I said, “Josh, I don’t know who he is. Let me check.” I checked with Chairman Leahy, I checked with Senator Durbin, who’s a member of that committee, I checked with Senator Schumer, who’s on that committee. And they and others said, “You got to be kidding.” This is a man who’s written memos approving torture, and that’s only the beginning. Senator Durbin, if he has time today, will lay that out in more detail.
So I called Josh back and I said, “Josh, that man will never get approved, he just has not credibility.” He said, “We’ll look with the President.” He called me back and said, “It’s Bradbury or nobody.” I said, “You mean you’re willing to not allow 84 of your people get approved because of this guy?” He said, “Yeah, that’s what the President wants.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
51 Responses to “Bush Holds Up More Than 84 Nominees Over Torture Advocate: ‘It’s Bradbury, Or Nobody’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Then tell the war criminal it's "nobody". Moving on . . .
February 7th, 2008 at 10:51 amThen it's NOBODY, you AWOL coward TRAITOR coxucker PUNK.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:56 amBush needs to lose one here. He's lame duck, out of line, and has had his way with Congress for 7+ years.
If he's that hung up on Bradbury, hang 'em both out to dry.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:56 amI see. It's the Democrats' fault when Bush's face turns blue. Got it.
Why won't the just let him have his way? Everything would be so much easier then, right George?
February 7th, 2008 at 10:57 amUm, what part of the Constitution doesn't the President understand?
February 7th, 2008 at 10:59 amUm, what part of the Constitution doesn’t the President understand?
Comment by raynman — February 7, 2008 @ 10:59 am
Everything except:
"Article. II.
Section. 1.
The ... Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."
February 7th, 2008 at 11:07 amBRADBURY OR BUST?? Let's opt for "Bust" and smoke out this charlatan among us.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:10 amPatLibChristian: Would that be the power of nomination to which you refer? That's the only power he has unless Congress is in recess. Little fact check for ya.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:11 am84 other pending appointees, along with a bunch of US Attorneys openings, are held up so Bush can get his way?
Why are we still letting him pout & rant like a 9 yr. old who's supposed to be the leader of this great Country?
February 7th, 2008 at 11:16 amBradbury should get a seat in a cell at the Hague.... or a seat at the place where the USA tries and punishes war criminals... that seat would be a gallows, because the USA executes war criminals, dont they.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:18 amThen tell the war criminal it’s “nobodyâ€. Moving on . . .
Comment by scytherius — February 7, 2008 @ 10:51 am
Or it could be "BITE ME"!! Among other two-word phrases....
February 7th, 2008 at 11:18 amYa know, I'm thinking right now that Harry Reid is a pretty reasonable kind of guy and our lack of luster President has always been a jerk and this time is no different from all the others.
The problem is what do we do when this sorry excuse decides that he needs extra time with in the box? You know that it will happen, when he or some one else will say the world and America needs you, so screw the Congress, the Constitution and the people.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:18 amCan we please go buy a new table and place the articles of impeachment on it.
This continues to be a criminal regime that exists to defile the foundations of the greatest democracy in the history of man. They have defecated on the honor of those that gave the last full measure of devotion, and have done so for their own personal enrichment.
We must now hold our collective breathe and hope that the calculations of Mr Conyers don't bite us. Make no mistake about it, there will be other wars, and at least one of them is coming to Warziristan this year.
God rot George W Bush. May heaven have mercy on the soul of his fallen servant Richard Cheney.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:18 amThis Miserable Failure has not nominated 1 qualified person to any post. All that needs to be done is to read off a list (what's become a very long list) of his unqualified, incompetent, purely political nominations to counter any claims of obstructionism.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:18 amBush, the petulant little coward, is always quick with the thumb in the eye. He is a miserable failure of a human being.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:24 amI vote 'nobody'. Can I get a second?
February 7th, 2008 at 11:24 amComment by whatevah — February 7, 2008 @ 11:11 am
I'm not sure what your comment to me is.
I'm not sure you understood my post, so I'll explain. I believe, on the basis of 7 years of observation, that George Bush and his cohorts are power-hungry and have developed their own "constitution" which consists of only one "article". That one article is "The President of the United States has all the power" and is also known as the "Unitary Executive" principle.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:26 amDr. Matt: I second.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:26 amI second Ralph's second. (Sloppy seconds?)
February 7th, 2008 at 11:28 am'I [Reid] said, “You mean you’re willing to not allow 84 of your people get approved because of this guy?†He [Josh] said, “Yeah, that’s what the President wants.â€'
I actually find the President's proposal acceptable. Harry, don't give him any of his 84 nominees. There, now everybody is happy!
The president is acting like a spoiled seven year old with a temper tantrum, and mommy and daddy congress don't know how to handle him. That's the problem with giving him everything he has asked for (demanded) for the past seven years.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:28 amwhy is this even a consideration for the Democratic leadership? W and Cheney insist that yet another law breaker be installed in government to further pad a pathetic resume or no one else should be confirmed. Then the answer from Reid should be direct and to the point: "Then the nation picks nobody, now lets move on to what we can all agree is business more important that allowing additional incompetents run or make policy for various federal agencies." Why even negotiate? This should be a take it or leave it from the D side of the aisle.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:29 am"Nobody" works for me.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:29 amBush is incapable of compromise. He's so used to getting his way, that he refuses to listen to reasonable people and proposals.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:34 amYesterday, I posted this:
"All their political lives, our representatives in the House and Senate have learned to compromise and negotiate to “get things doneâ€.
But this administration is a different animal.
It doesn’t compromise, doesn’t negotiate, just demands capitulation on every facet of every issue.
Faced with this dilemma, the congresscritters just wander aimlessly about the halls, fearful of some imaginary backlash that would threaten their seat in the game should they attempt to fight back."
And here's proof positive that BushitCo has no interest whatsoever in attempting to negotiate, compromise or govern except by fiat.
Reid had better not back down.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:34 amNobody would do a better job.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:35 amHas he held his breath until his face turned blue yet ?
To paraphrase Colbert at the ?Annual Press dinner? (chaning reporters to Congress): Efficient government will be realized when congress realizes that their job is to listen to the Chimpster and do what he says. No need to hold hearings - just a straight "UP" vote (there is no "DOWN" vote). If he needs money, the House is a cash register and gives it to him. (After all, the bank doesn't get to ask me what I want to do with my money. They just store it and give it to me).
Once congress realizes this, they can hold shorter sessions, spend time with their family, .......
February 7th, 2008 at 11:38 am. . . then, the HIGHWAY!
February 7th, 2008 at 11:39 amThe amazing thing is that conservatives will say it's the Dems that are holding up the appointments.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:39 amThe president is acting like a spoiled seven year old with a temper tantrum, and mommy and daddy congress don’t know how to handle him.
Comment by Tired of being lied to — February 7, 2008 @ 11:28 am
Are you suggesting maybe this is a job for SuperNanny?
February 7th, 2008 at 11:42 amThis traitor's nomination has been shot down four times! Apparently Il Douche the Presnit is still trying to shove a square peg into a round hole thinking it'll work this time. Does anyone out there know if there exists a limit on how many times or for what duration of time that someone can be nominated without being confirmed? Also, aren't there legal limits as to how long he can serve in an "acting" capacity? Am I correct that that limit is somewhere around 250 days? And this guy has been there for two years! If Bush can keep him there as long as he wants why is he so adament about confirming him? Does he think that if hell freezes over and this loser gets confirmed that it will somehow justify and add legitimacy to all the crap he's done in an "acting" role?
February 7th, 2008 at 11:42 amSee, the president is more than willing to play brinkmanship with the proper functioning of the government in order to shove aside the consent power of the senate on his appointments. Reid should do exactly what the constitution permits. He should say: "Fine, we will start scheduling hearings on all of your appointments and a subsequent vote under the consent power. However, be advised that Bradbury will not be amongst those approved."
What would the president do? Revoke the appointments of the others? Go on television and accuse the Congress of shirking their duty?
The president can do it now because the Senate has failed to go forward with the process. Reid should hold a press conference to state that the President was offered a deal to clear up the nomination process in which he would simply appoint 84 nominees under the recess appointment power and thus save the Senate, the nominees and the Senate untold hours of effort. Reid made this offer since the president has a tendency to nominate some persons who are (at the very least) controversial as opposed to seeking nominees that would be more acceptable to the senate. We will therefore go through the process of holding hearings on and either accepting or rejecting each one of these nominees. We are sorry that the President has chosen this course, but the Senate will not be forced into accepting the appointment of Mr. Bradbury. The Senate will certainly not sit back and be accused of having stalled the process. It is evident that such accommodations will neither be possible or sought in the future given the President's failure to negotiate in good faith."
February 7th, 2008 at 11:44 amBush's stubbornness is exactly what he should do, given the sucess of his intransigence in the past. A dog barks and gets fed. Now he knows that barking gets him what he wants, why would he try something else?
Bush has shit on the Constitution and the country, has operated in total secrecy, and has held his breath until he gets his way. And he does. So why should he do anything different?
The chimp needs to be fitted with a shock collar and everytime he acts like a petulant brat, taser the bastard.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:49 am“Yeah, that’s what the President wants.â€
That and retroactive immunity for the Telcos that broke the law for him.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:08 pmComment by nanlichi — February 7, 2008 @ 11:49 am
Awesome! Taze him, BRO!
February 7th, 2008 at 12:09 pmAnybody that GW666 wants is most likely not qualified for the position, cronyism, corruption, criminals.
Just tell GW666 to go "Cheney himself".
Buck Fush
February 7th, 2008 at 12:17 pmSo? We are obviously getting by without those 84 nominees for whatever now so there is no hurry to fill those positions until Bush is GONE.
Reid is a useless Quisling to Bush (as is Pelosi) but he could at least, on this occasion, pretend to be independent and somewhat the master of his domain.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:23 pmThe chimp needs to be fitted with a shock collar and everytime he acts like a petulant brat, taser the bastard.
Comment by nanlichi — February 7, 2008 @ 11:49 am
I like the concept, however I envision an electronic collar that gauges whether any actions taken by the wearer violates the constitution or any laws then automatically notifies Congress and sends emails to anyone who signs up to a didtribution list. Where do I apply for a no-bid earmarked contract to develope this idea into a working product?
February 7th, 2008 at 12:26 pmLet me send the poor stupid a$$ Shrub a copy of my college U.S. Government textbook.
He has no clue how to work "within" government. Typical frat-boy "give me what I want or else" syndrome at work...
February 7th, 2008 at 12:41 pmI'm so glad the man who selected John Bolton and Alberto Gonzales gets to keep at it, those were such good picks.
It's very progressive to hire someone with a chemical imbalance and someone with severe memory loss.
Now this Bradbury fellow, he sounds like a landmark hire for those Americans born without compassion.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:44 pmRomney out?
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/02/7150_romney_out_what.html
February 7th, 2008 at 12:55 pmComment by DieNowForPeace — February 7, 2008 @ 12:41 pm
Ding! Ding! Ding!
I wish I could recommend your comment more than once.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:56 pmi wonder how long the Dems will take to cave in and confirm Bradbury...
February 7th, 2008 at 1:29 pmComment by Dave C — February 7, 2008 @ 11:39 am
and the media will swallow that line without question.
February 7th, 2008 at 1:33 pmChimpy just gave his petulant speech at the White House.
February 7th, 2008 at 1:45 pmHe verbally stomped his feet, declaring he wants what he wants and he wants it now.
He needs a time out.
F* him. If the leader of the most powerful country in the world is going to be that petulant, let's call him on it.
More bread and circus for everyone.
February 7th, 2008 at 2:22 pmHarry, how come they can make you look bad without really trying? Isn't it time for the Democrats to control the legislative agenda. Lets talk IMPEACHMENT. Afraid, Harry?
February 7th, 2008 at 2:22 pmF* him. If the leader of the most powerful country in the world is going to be that petulant, let’s call him on it.
More bread and circus for everyone.
Comment by Anonymouse — February 7, 2008 @ 2:22 pm
Well, Mr Bush is trying hard to ensure that this country wont be the most powerful one! Give him some time!!
Headline News
February 7th, 2008 at 2:30 pmhttp://www.faceoftruth.com
Recess appointments are not a free for all Harry. Why are you giving up the Congressional requirement to confirm these positions by saying that BushCo can have 80+ recess appointments as long as torture freak Bradbury isn't one of them?
Recess appointments are there simply for uses where business would be held up in the event an important vacancy needed to be while Congress was not in session. But as with eveything in Bush World, he has taken this to the extreme and used it without any pushback from Congress. Hell in most cases when the temporary appointment period of these recess appointees has run out Bush has simply re-recess appointed them.
The Neo-Cons have studied hard and found every gray area that they could use to build their empire and ruin this country. Another case in point are the signing statements that Bush loves to scribble in crayon. The Founding Fathers never realized that an out and out criminal would hold the office of president. It's time to hold a Constitutional Convention to plug all these holes that the Neo-Cons found or else this country will permanently sink to 3rd world status.
Harry, quit working with these punks and do the job you were elected to do. Read over the oath of office you swore to and protect this country for once.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:09 pmThe thing I haven't been able to figure out and why everyone thinks that the Dems are complicint; is that the Dems have never figured out that they have the support of the majority of this country to shut Bush down. They want to see him shut down on Iraq, torture, the scandals, the lies, and the crimes.
Each and every time though the Dems give up for fear the Bush will blame them for something or worse say that weak on terror . Nancy and Harry, if you're on Bush's side just say so and we'll stop being so frustrated by your actions. If not, then realize the pulse of the nation and stand up for good government and tell Bush to shove it.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:19 pmIn typical fashion, Harry Ried will bend over and take another shot from bush, giving shrub whatever he wants.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:38 pmWhat would the president do? Revoke the appointments of the others? Go on television and accuse the Congress of shirking their duty?
The president can do it now because the Senate has failed to go forward with the process. Reid should hold a press conference to state that the President was offered a deal to clear up the nomination process in which he would simply appoint 84 nominees under the recess appointment power and thus save the Senate, the nominees and the Senate untold hours of effort. Reid made this offer since the president has a tendency to nominate some persons who are (at the very least) controversial as opposed to seeking nominees that would be more acceptable to the senate. We will therefore go through the acer squ-401 battery,acer travelmate 2300 battery process of holding hearings on and either accepting or rejecting each one of these nominees. We are sorry that the President has chosen this course, but the Senate will not be forced into accepting the appointment of Mr. Bradbury.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:14 am