[Posted 04/22 02:49 PM]

Here's Dick Cheney on John Bolton from a meeting of the Republican National Lawyers Assn:

"I'm an enthusiastic backer of John. I've known him for many years, both personally and in a professional capacity. I think he's done a superb job throughout a distinguished career in public service, and I think he'd make a great ambassador the U.N. I think he's very much in the mold of Jeanne Kirkpatrick and Pat Moynihan -- representatives that -- ambassadors, if you will, to the United Nations who went to New York and never forgot where they came from and who they represented. And I think in this time and place it is extraordinarily important for us to have a good, tough advocate at the United Nations, and I think John's that advocate. If I were to give advice to somebody in terms of how you might help, I'd contact, I guess, the senators and express your hope that they will see fit to approve John's nomination. I really do think it's important. I have looked at all of the charges that have been made. I don't think any of them stand up to scrutiny. And if being occasionally tough and aggressive and abrasive were a problem, there a lot of members of the United States Senate who wouldn't qualify."

[Posted 04/22 01:05 PM]

Yesterday, John Negroponte was confirmed by the Senate to serve as the nation’s first Director of National Intelligence by a vote of 98-2. For the most part, it was a fine example of the Senate taking part in necessary debate and discussion while honoring the service of a great American.

The two senators voting “no” were Oregon Democrat Ron Wyden and Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin. Wyden was caustic and vocal in his opposition to Negroponte during his committee hearings, seemingly favoring the actions of fascist communist leaders over democratic liberation. As for Harkin, his vote seemed aimed more at securing liberal support for a possible White House run in 2008. Which is particularly pathetic when you consider the “yes” votes of other 2008 Democratic contenders including Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Evan Bayh and Joe Biden. Even Barbara Boxer supported Negroponte.

[Posted 04/22 01:00 PM]

Some highlights from President Bush’s announcement of Peter Pace as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

“When confirmed by the Senate, General Pete Pace will be the first Marine in history to hold this vital position. He knows the job well. For the past three-and-a-half years, he has served under our superb Secretary of Defense, Don Rumsfeld. He has been the Deputy to one of the most outstanding Chairmen our nation has ever had, General Richard Myers.”

“I'm confident that the great work that General Dick Myers set in motion at the Pentagon will continue under the leadership of General Pete Pace. The first thing America needs to know about Pete Pace is that he is a Marine. To the American people, "Marine" is shorthand for "can do." And I'm counting on Pete Pace to bring the Marine spirit to these new responsibilities.”

[Posted 04/22 10:54 AM]

The New York Times reports that although Arlen Specter urged restraint and quick vote, since everyone involved knew Owen and Brown would be confirmed on party lines, “that did not discourage committee members from brushing aside Mr. Specter's plea for brevity and plunging into prolonged and angry debate about the two nominees.”

The Times also does a fair job of presenting the number of judicial nominees blocked by Democrats. While Democrats have attempted to skew the numbers to claim they have approved over 90 percent of Bush’s nominees, the Times notes they have actually tried to filibuster close to 25 percent of White House federal appeals court nominees.

[Posted 04/22 10:45 AM]

The Washington Post looks at the nominations of Janice Brown and Priscilla Owen, who both passed through the Judicial Committee yesterday on 10-8 votes, along party lines. As the Democrats have already promised to filibuster both nominations, the presentation of two women, one African-American, will set up a potentially explosive precursor to a vote to end judicial filibusters.

[Posted 04/22 09:51 AM]

Hotline editor Vaughn Ververs has a weekly column posted at National Journal that is always a great read. Today, he looks at how the media covered the selection of a new Pope and their impatience with the traditions of organized religion.

But the real gem of the piece comes in Ververs’ assessment of Washington Post staff writer Dana Milbank. Ververs notes:

“Speaking of commentary, it's high time the Washington Post moved ‘reporter’ Dana Milbank off the news pages and into the opinion section. A talented writer, Milbank remains incapable of keeping his opinions out of his news stories.”

And Ververs is not just another conservative critic like yours truly. Anyone familiar with his column work knows the balance and insight he brings to each topic.

[Posted 04/22 09:40 AM]

From John McCain’s endorsement of John Bolton on the Senate floor:

“I’d like to say that I strongly support Mr. Bolton’s nomination. He has been confirmed by the United States Senate four times in the past. He is a smart, experienced, hard-working and talented and he knows the U.N.”

“If temper and unorthodox management style were a disqualifier for government service, I would bet a lot of people in Washington would be out of jobs. It’s worth wondering not whether he is a mild, a genteel diplomat, we know he is not. But rather whether it is a representative we need at the United Nations. We need an ambassador who truly knows the U.N. We need an ambassador who is willing to shake up an organization that requires serious reform.”

[Posted 04/22 09:17 AM]

John McCain has been generally supportive of Bolton over the past month. Today, he is finally getting solid media coverage of his comments supporting Bolton. No doubt media outlets approached McCain hoping the moderate Republican would seize the opportunity to blast Bolton. Instead, McCain offered, “I believe John Bolton could provide the medicine the United Nations needs.”

[Posted 04/22 08:57 AM]

USA Today makes an important point today, noting Bolton is far from the only high-profile boss in Washington with a reputation for possessing less than stellar office communications skills. It’s just that once in a while, the media or government decides to make an “example” out of someone.

[Posted 04/22 08:44 AM]

The New York Times has its own story on Powell’s maneuvering today. The Times notes in his conversations that Powell also praised some of Bolton’s past accomplishments, but “stopped well short” of offering the level of endorsements made publicly by President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice this week.

A question worth asking is how the Times and Post acquired their Powell stories. Did either Hagel or Chafee’s office pass along the scoop? And if so, what was their motivation? Was it to add Powell’s public credibility to the debate, therefore making a “no” vote from either of these senators more palatable? Or, did it come from Powell’s office, with the former secretary of state desiring a role in the Bolton debate while still appearing to be an honest broker?

[Posted 04/22 08:33 AM]

The Washington Post reports this morning that Colin Powell has consulted with Chuck Hagel and Lincoln Chafee on John Bolton’s nomination as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

According to the Post, Chafee had put calls into Powell’s office. Powell contacted Hagel, asking if he should return Chafee’s call. Hagel recommend Powell do so and give a “frank” assessment of Bolton. The Post reports Powell has told Hagel and Chafee that Bolton is “smart,” but “challenging to work with.”

Powell declined to advise either senator on how they should vote.

[Posted 04/21 05:38 PM]

The Hill reported yesterday that Loretta Sanchez was too busy to discuss ideas for Social Security reform. From the article:

"Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.) managed to stir up some trouble last week at the Joint Economic Committee hearing chaired by Rep. Jim Saxton (R-N.J.). Testifying before the committee was Harvey Rosen, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. Sanchez was evidently fed up with the contents of the hearing. 'I've more important things to ask about than this silly Social Security thing,' she said."

[Posted 04/21 12:47 PM]

I have a little more info on Melody Townsel. When asked to explain why she did not bring allegations against Bolton during any of his previous confirmation hearings, Townsel claims she was “too busy” raising her children and had stepped out of politics.

However, during the time Townsel claims she devoted to raising her children, she was in fact working for the very large public relations firm Ogilvy. She was so committed to her work that she became a senior VP and collected more than 1.5 billion "impressions" for the company. In addition, Townsel worked on “whistleblower” issues for the Androvett Legal Media and Marketing firm and ran her own firm, Townsel Communications.

Hat tip to the Classical Values blog.

[Posted 04/21 12:04 PM]

As I reported earlier, International Business and Technical Consultants President Jayant Kalotra wrote a letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee defending Bolton’s actions in Moscow concerning “Mothers Opposing Bush” volunteer Melody Townsel.

Now, before anyone tries to imply Kalotra is just another conservative Bolton supporter, consider these facts:

In the past five years, Kalotra has donated over $16,000 to political candidates, all Democrats, according to FEC records. That includes more than $3,000 to New Jersey Democratic congressman Frank Pallone, $3,000 to Dick Gephardt, $500 to Al Gore, $5,000 to the DNC, $1,000 to Maryland congressman Albert Wynn and $1,000 to New York’s Gary Ackerman.

[Posted 04/21 10:42 AM]

At noon today, Senators Dick Durbin, Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Joe Lieberman and other “special guests” will be speaking at Georgetown Law School to oppose judicial filibuster reform.

Meanwhile, MoveOn has sent a letter to supporters asking for $400,000 this week in contributions to air a new ad attacking Republicans who want to curb judicial filibusters.

[Posted 04/21 10:27 AM]

Harry Reid is currently on the floor declaring an end to judicial filibusters unconstitutional. The same rule changes he is attacking are ones previously supported by Robert Byrd, Charles Schumer, Ken Salazar, Walter Mondale, George McGovern and other Senate Democrats.

[Posted 04/21 10:23 AM]

The New York Times reports the Senate Judiciary committee is expected to approval judges Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers this week.

Their Senate floor appearances are expected to draw filibusters, which “is fine with those Republicans and their conservative allies who are pressing for a change in Senate rules to prevent filibusters on judicial nominees,” as they believe the records of these two women will play well in the media and advance the cause of ending judicial filibusters.

[Posted 04/21 09:53 AM]

Self-described liberal Democrat Tim Noah makes a case for ending all Senate filibusters.

[Posted 04/21 09:19 AM]

Townsel gave an interview to USA Today, detailing her accusations against Bolton: that he once threw a file folder and tape dispenser at her, “disparaged” her weight and alleged she was gay.

Townsel said, "The fact that I didn't immediately do what he wanted me to do put a real burr in his saddle. He threw a folder across the desk at me; he threw a plastic tape dispenser at me. When he didn't get his way, he was going to smear me.”

However, in a letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, IBTCI President Javant Kalotra denied Bolton had been asked to contact Townsel in Moscow, “It is difficult to understand how Ms. Townsel could make such accusations with any veracity.”

[Posted 04/21 09:05 AM]

Uno Ramat, who worked with Melody Townsel on an Agency for International Development project in Kyrgyzstan more than ten years ago, corroborated Townsel’s accusations against Bolton. Ramat says Bolton, who was then a lawyer for Townsel and Ramat’s employer, flew to Moscow to investigate Townsel’s complaints that the company was “slow in providing cash to pay suppliers.”

Ramat said of Bolton, “He was very intimidating and nasty. He terrorized the office, he really did.”

Ramat also confirmed he had received a series of phone calls from Townsel complaining about Bolton’s behavior.

[Posted 04/21 08:52 AM]

The Washington Post leads with news that Chafee spokesman Stephen Hourahan says the senator is “less likely right now” to support Bolton’s confirmation. However, Hourahan adds Chafee “wants to get to the bottom” of new allegations against Bolton.

This is almost exactly what Hourahan told me yesterday, but put in more stark terms by the Washington Post. As I was told yesterday and reported, the “less likely” aspect concerned if a vote was held without this new information being vetted. Chafee’s office was quite forward in telling me that should the allegations be properly addressed, he would still be on board to support Bolton.

I know it’s tempting to criticize Chafee for his moderate voting record and the disappointment he has caused conservatives in the past. But on the Bolton issue, he has been steadfast in supporting the president up to this point, even with intense pressure from the media and liberal interest groups. He, at the very least, deserves credit for this.

[Posted 04/20 05:05 PM]

Head on over to the Corner, where Rich Lowry has posted a letter from the head of the firm IBTCI, which was involved in the Bolton/Moscow incident. This is the incident where “Mothers Opposing Bush” member Melody Townsel alleges Bolton harassed her. The full letter and excerpts are available.

[Posted 04/20 04:01 PM]

Many more thoughtful reader emails on the Bolton nomination. Here’s one from reader James that touches on another issue:

“Eric: I don’t know which Republican party nomination messers Hagel and McCain and other ‘mavericks’ are running for, but the Republican Party that I’ve belonged to all of my life doesn’t give much countenance to “mavericks” who stab the party in the back. A “no” vote on Bolton in the committee would pretty much snuff out their chances of winning a national primary in the Republican Party.”

Just how often do we have to hear moderate Republicans described as mavericks? McCain, Hagel, Chafee, Snowe, Voinovich, Smith, etc. How often do you see prominent Democrats described in the same fashion?

A Nexis search reveals the numbers favor “maverick Republicans” by about five to one. A google search tallies about 3,500 GOP mentions and 1,000 for Democrats, with a lot going to the late Pay Moynihan or those who are “mavericks” by striking positions to the left of the Democratic Party.

Is it that there really are that many more Republicans who have moderate viewpoints, or that the media prefers to label anyone out of step with the Republican Party’s leadership a maverick?

[Posted 04/20 03:44 PM]

Dennis Hastert is appearing on the Sean Hannity show right now. Right off the bat, Hannity asked Hastert about Tom DeLay and the Ethics committee. Hastert was quick to note that DeLay isn’t hiding from an ethics investigation, “Tom is ready to talk to people and clear himself … Tom’s ready to go before the Ethics committee.”

[Posted 04/20 12:23 PM]

Here’s an email from reader William that pretty accurately reflects the sentiment of emails I have been receiving all day on Bolton, Voinovich and the Senate GOP leadership:

“I can't imagine Republicans across the country could be any more disheartened or embarrassed by the performance of their elected Senators. And I hope Frist has resigned himself to never being President. The complete lack of leadership in the Senate is
unbelievable. For all their lack of a majority the Senate Democrats are clearly running things and largely having their way. Frist and company can't even get a UN appointment made. For that matter they can't even make the Dems honor their promise to get a vote on Bolton. What impotence.”

[Posted 04/20 11:30 AM]

The AP confirms that Jeffords will not seek re-election. But remember, you heard it here first! From the AP:

Montpelier, Vt. (AP) --

U.S. Sen. James Jeffords, whose declaration of independence from the GOP four years ago briefly gave Democrats control of the Senate, will not seek re-election next year, The Associated Press learned Wednesday.

Jeffords will make the announcement Wednesday afternoon in Burlington, three sources close to the senator said. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity.

No calls to Jeffords' press secretary or staff were returned Wednesday morning.
Jeffords, 70, has been adamant in saying he will seek re-election, but there have been increasing concerns voiced about his health in recent weeks.

Jeffords was elected as a Republican to the U.S. House in 1974 and to the U.S. Senate in 1988, but he abandoned the party in 2001 because of disagreements with the Bush administration.

[Posted 04/20 11:28 AM]

For what it’s worth, I put a call into Senator Jeffords’ office this morning. No one there is answering the phones and there is a generic message on voicemail.

[Posted 04/20 11:16 AM]

Earlier, I spoke with Senator Lincoln Chafee’s office to gauge their support for Bolton. The response I received was more receptive towards Bolton than expected.

“Some of the allegations could be vetted by committee. Witnesses could corroborate the allegations against Bolton or we could hear from those who disagree. Either way, it’s better than reading about it in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, or any other paper.”

“This way, we can put it all down in front of the staffers, they can examine the evidence and call Bolton back if necessary. If this works out the right way, vetting the allegations against Bolton could restore his credibility that has been damaged by all these media stories coming out one piece at a time.”

The Chafee staffer added that the senator has not closed the door on supporting Bolton.

[Posted 04/20 10:44 AM]

A little more info from Senator Voinovich’s office: They tell me that the Senator met personally with Bolton and Voinovich was briefed by staff regarding Bolton's nomination.

[Posted 04/20 10:16 AM]

A very reliable source tells me that Jim Jeffords will make an announcement at 1pm today that he is retiring from the U.S. Senate.

[Posted 04/20 09:50 AM]

I just spoke with Senator Voinovich’s office about his promise of a “no” vote at yesterday’s Bolton hearing. I asked if Voinovich’s move yesterday signaled that he has ruled out voting against Bolton, “This is not a ‘no’ vote,” I was told.

“The senator went into yesterday’s hearing prepared to vote for Bolton. This is more of a process thing. It needs to be discussed at the committee level rather than on a floor vote. That’s what the committee is for.”

[Posted 04/20 09:29 AM]

Democrat Pennsylvania State Treasurer Bob Casey has increased his lead over Rick Santorum, according to a new Quinnipiac poll. 49 percent favored Casey, a 14-point lead over Santorum, who registered just 35 percent, with 13 percent undecided.

February’s Quinnipiac poll had Casey leading Santorum 46 to 41 percent.

Quinnipiac’s Clay Richards explained the findings, “Santorum has become a more controversial public figure in the past two months and Bob Casey, without doing much of anything to attract headlines, is the beneficiary,"

1,395 respondents took part in the poll.

[Posted 04/20 08:40 AM]

After the hearing, Chafee was quoted as saying on Bolton’s nomination, “The dynamic has changed. A lot of reservations surfaced today. It's a new day.”

Voinovich, who didn’t attend either of the previous Bolton hearings, added, “My conscience got me. I wanted more information about this individual, and I didn't feel comfortable voting for him.”

In their write-up the New York Times actually does a fair job of placing accusations alongside reality noting:

Bolton accuser Melody Townsel actively campaigned against President Bush, none of the accusations have been corroborated, and only Carl Ford has actually testified against Bolton.

[Posted 04/20 08:29 AM]

The angry reader emails are pouring in fast regarding George Voinovich and yesterday’s Foreign Relations Committee hearing. Most of them are not fit for pint in a family-friendly publication.

There are two likely scenarios that will unfold over the next two weeks. One is that the accusations against Bolton will be weighed against material evidence and Bolton’s rebuttal. GOP senators will again align and Bolton will pass through the committee 10-8.

However, the more likely scenario is that in the following weeks these charges will be aired out, Bolton’s name will be cleared, but the air of accusation will stick. Because of increased pressure at home, Lincoln Chafee will have an easy way out, Hagel will be tempted to play the role of “maverick” in conjunction with his 2008 White House aspirations and Voinovich will stick with his “no” vote. There will never be a vote on Bolton’s nomination.

[Posted 04/20 08:20 AM]

The Washington Post leads its story on the Bolton hearings with the following passage:

“John R. Bolton's nomination to be ambassador to the United Nations suffered a setback yesterday when the Senate Foreign Relations Committee unexpectedly decided to spend three more weeks investigating allegations that he mistreated subordinates, threatened a female government contractor and misled the committee about his handling of classified materials.”

It’s a fair assessment of the Democrat charges against Bolton and why the left wanted his vote postponed. But anyone watching the proceedings on C-SPAN knows it wasn’t the Democrats who most likely sunk Bolton’s nomination. A more accurate headline for conservatives would read:

“Voinovich sucker-punches GOP”

[Posted 04/19 04:36 PM]

George Voinovich just announced that he “does not feel comfortable” voting in favor of John Bolton on the Foreign Relations Committee. Hagel has announced he will vote for Bolton. The media has not focused on Voinovich for weeks, as he earlier announced his intentions to support Bolton.

UPDATE: In light of Voinovich's revelation, the SFRC agreed to delay the vote on Bolton for two weeks. After a month of speculating on Hagel and Chafee's intentions, it is the Republican senator from Ohio who probably just ended Bolton's chances of becoming U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

In addition, Voinovich did not attend the committee hearings last week - but he didn't let that stand in his way.

[Posted 04/19 03:52 PM]

The Senate may get its vote on John Bolton today, but Democrats are using the time to air out their grievances anyway. Again. Best quote so far comes from Chris Dodd, “I’m not interested in going through a long, elaborate process.” Funny thing is, that’s exactly what he’s doing right now.

He also said the accusations against Bolton merited federal prosecution. The least that could be said about Joe Biden is that he repeatedly noted the allegations against Bolton were simply that, lacking formal evidence or legal indictments.

[Posted 04/19 02:29 PM]

The Senate is preparing to vote on whether or not to enter a recess. If the recess vote passes, the Bolton nomination will be delayed.

Right now, Bill Frist has proposed a motion to recess, which will allow the Foreign Relations Committee to vote on Bolton. Democrats have objected and made use of a quorum call to delay time. They are now having the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms to request the presence of senators on the floor.

[Posted 04/19 02:11 PM]

Yesterday, I reported the record non-election year fundraising record for the RNC in the first quarter of 2005. The Democrats have released their fundraising totals, which are less than half of what the GOP raised during the same time span. Democrats raised $13.8 million in the first quarter, including more than $1 million per week since Howard Dean took over as DNC Chair.

[Posted 04/19 11:39 AM]

Bill First has issued a statement on the left’s filibuster of judicial nominations. Many critics of ending judicial filibusters say the vote could end the need for “bipartisan support” on all legislative issues. Frist responds:

“As more and more attention has focused in recent weeks on a partisan minority unfairly blocking simple up or down votes on judicial nominees in the Senate, some have claimed that any effort to restore precedent for up or down votes on judicial nominees would affect the rights of Senators when it comes to legislation.”

“If I must act to bring fairness back to the judicial nomination process, I will not act in any way to impact the rights of colleagues when it comes to legislation. Senate rules and practices now provide many tools for members, and leaders, to see legislative ideas brought to an up or down vote on the Senate floor and there is no need for change in relation to legislative matters.”

[Posted 04/19 11:34 AM]

Meanwhile, USA Today notes Democrats are using words such as “extreme” and “un-American” to describe a program Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist will take part in that criticizes judicial filibusters of certain conservative nominees as a move against people of faith.

The program, “Justice Sunday: Stop the Filibuster Against People of Faith,” will feature religious figures including Dr. James Dobson. Frist Spokesman Bob Stevenson called the attacks by Democrats hypocritical, noting John Kerry attacked President Bush from pulpit during the 2004 election campaign.

[Posted 04/19 11:25 AM]

Joe Lockhart has sent an email to the media promoting a new $5 million ad campaign by People for the American Way opposing an end to judicial filibusters:

“I wanted you to know that People For The American Way is stepping up its pressure on the Senate today, invoking both Tom DeLay's threats to the judicial system and Bill Frist's decision to stand with the Radical Right and launch an attack on Democrats and some Republicans as anti-faith.”

The ad features “common-sense Republican firefighter” Ted Nonini who reads the following script in the ad:

“I’m a common sense Republican. But some things are beginning to trouble me. When the government gets into the most private things a family can experience… When they start threatening judges… Dragging religion into politics… And the majority party tries to choke off debate…Well, something is wrong.”

[Posted 04/19 11:17 AM]

MoveOn has sent a new letter to supporters urging a letter writing campaign to stop an end to judicial filibusters. The letter relies heavily on scare tactics, noting:

“Overnight, some of our most treasured rights, like the 40-hour work week, basic environmental protections, and the right to privacy, would be in danger. We must act.”

MoveOn’s plan is to target Democrats and moderate Republican senators with 10,000 letters to local newspapers. Move On notes:

“Two weeks ago MoveOn members published thousands of letters in papers in all 50 states. Soon afterwards, three Republican senators came out against the nuclear option, including John McCain. If we get three more, we'll win.”

[Posted 04/19 09:58 AM]

There are at least two points to take from Clinton’s fundraising record:

First, as the Times notes, she spent most of her first four years in the Senate raising money for other Democrats and liberal interest groups. She has only now begun to focus mainly on raising money for her own re-election. Assuming Clinton runs for president in 2008, the number of Democrats and interest groups that will return loyalty based on her past financial assistance will be striking.

Second, if you are an aspiring White House candidate, there is usually a perceived danger in pursuing re-election to any seat one cycle before the next presidential election. A close race or a loss could doom a candidate’s chances. Possible Republican candidates including Rick Santorum, George Pataki, George Allen and Mitt Romney face this possibility. Bill Frist and Jeb Bush have already announced they will not seek re-election.

With Pataki and Rudy Giuliani declining to challenge Clinton in 2006, she faces no major opposition to her Senate re-election. Therefore, a commanding victory will only provide her with momentum as she embarks on a presidential campaign. And should she lose, she’ll have her Senate seat to come back to. Should she win, the New York gubernatorial race takes on new significance. If Eliot Spitzer wins that race, he would be able to appoint a Democrat to serve out Clinton’s term.

[Posted 04/19 09:46 AM]

Hillary Clinton has raised more money than any other senator seeking re-election. In the first three months of this year, HRC has raised $4 million and her staff says she will finish the quarter with $8.7 million. In 2000, Clinton raised and spent about $30 million in her entire race, which at the time was the most expensive Senate race in NY history.

[Posted 04/19 08:55 AM]

Karl Rove appeared on CNN yesterday to offer his support for DeLay. On Democrats who are attacking DeLay, Rove said, “They're just desperate. They're not offering ideas in the debate, they're not being constructive, and so some of their members are taking potshots at Tom DeLay."

Responding to complaints from some conservatives that President Bush has not spoken up enough in defense of DeLay, Rove added, "We strongly support Tom DeLay. He's a good man; he's a close ally of this administration. He was down here last week, visiting with the president a couple of times. Tom DeLay's going to continue to be a strong and effective majority leader for the Republicans in the House."

[Posted 04/19 08:47 AM]

Several media outlets are reporting this morning that Tom DeLay has sent an email to supporters in his district addressing the ethical allegations against him.

DeLay blames the charges against him on Democrats, liberal interest groups and a friendly media willing to pursue those charges without providing balance in their coverage, “It is abundantly clear that their fundamental strategy revolves around attacking me and working to tear down Republican leadership,”

The letter was mailed by DeLay’s re-election committee and notes, “Many of you have requested a 'fact versus fiction briefing document' that can be shared via e-mail or in clubs, organizations, or groups you are affiliated with,”

[Posted 04/19 08:31 AM]

Lugar added in a statement on his decision to not further delay the Bolton vote, “The charge that he improperly sought to influence intelligence conclusions is a serious one, and it is reasonable to assess his conduct in these encounters. But no one should be surprised to find that episodes of conflict have occurred in this environment over the course of a four-year tenure.”

However, USA Today notes that even should Lincoln Chafee or Chuck Hagel break with party ranks and vote against Bolton:

“Not even a negative vote or a tie vote in committee would not necessarily thwart Bolton's nomination. The panel could send his name to the floor without a recommendation, or even with a negative recommendation. A tie vote or negative vote would be politically damaging, however.”

[Posted 04/19 08:25 AM]

And now the Washington Post says Lugar has officially rejected the request for additional time to consider Bolton’s nomination.

[Posted 04/19 08:12 AM]

A week after breaking their promise to vote on John Bolton’s nomination, Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will now ask Richard Lugar for an additional delay. However, Lugar has indicated he will “urge” Democrats to keep their word this time and vote on Bolton, “I do not think the concerns raised about Secretary Bolton warrant our rejection of the president's selection for his own representative to the U.N.,”

Joe Biden will submit the request for a delay today, claiming the Democrats have three more allegations against Bolton they want to review. However, they will not publicly say what the allegations are.

[Posted 04/18 03:24 PM]

The Wall Street Journal has an editorial today (subscription required) on the AARP stating:

“AARP isn't even in the ballpark of serious debate about Social Security: Its continuing deception about the nature of the Trust Fund. To hear AARP tell it, the Trust Fund is a big pot of money sitting somewhere that will help the government pay benefits painlessly through roughly 2042. When pushed, AARP acknowledges that's not exactly true … it's almost enough to make us long for an intrepid antitrust lawyer to take on the senior lobby. One thing's for sure: We're never going to have a reasonable debate about policies for an aging society as long as AARP has an effective monopoly on that role.”

USA Next President Charlie Jarvis responded to the editorial:

“This Wall Street Journal editorial is right on target. AARP has wrongly been given a monopoly as the representatives of seniors. We are going to break that monopoly open and give all Americans families a real choice about the future.”

[Posted 04/18 02:38 PM]

In his past two state visits to Ohio and South Carolina, President Bush has been reminding voters of the advantage their state workers receive by having the option to invest in personal accounts. It’s a good strategy adjustment that gives skeptical voters a chance to see the plan for personal accounts won’t ruin the system – five million Americans are already showing it can work.

Meanwhile, the AP reports Democrats are changing their strategy as well. The report says Democrats will no longer say they will not negotiate on Social Security as focus groups show the Democrats stance shows them as obstinate. A top Democratic House aide added, “People feel like it doesn't show a good-faith effort. It makes us seem like we're `typical politicians.'"

[Posted 04/18 02:33 PM]

While addressing supporters in South Carolina today, President Bush talked about the options for Social Security reform. While noting Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham have been “leaders” on the issue, the president reminded the crowd that state workers in South Carolina, like many other states, have the option of investing in personal accounts:

“This concept isn't new. After all, in South Carolina, all state employees can choose to put part of their retirement savings in a traditional retirement plan, or in a conservative mix of bonds and stocks that can deliver a better rate of return. So when I talk about personal accounts available for younger workers, you know what I'm talking about right here in South Carolina. You've already made that decision for people who are serving the state.”

[Posted 04/18 01:09 PM]

715,000 Americans have donated to the RNC so far this year, including 68,200 new donors. The RNC set a non-election year record, having raised $32.2 million so far, with an average contribution of $45.

[Posted 04/18 10:56 AM]

The New York Sun notes Bolton accuser Melody Townsel is a self-described “liberal Democrat” who as a member of “Mothers Opposing Bush” in last year’s campaign.

A few critical points about Townsel: No one will publicly endorse her claims. She also failed to bring this information to light during Bolton’s 2001 confirmation hearings.

[Posted 04/18 10:25 AM]

The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) says Dennis Hastert is facing “pressure” from fellow GOPers to get the Ethics committee back to work.

"Mr. Hastert so far shows no willingness to reverse himself but compromises are being discussed. Privately, Republicans say the rules are a greater political worry for the party than the more publicized ethics questions about Majority Leader Tom DeLay. As a practical matter, Mr. DeLay's problems will persist until the impasse is resolved, since Democrats are blocking the Ethics Committee from giving the Texas Republican a hearing and a chance to clear himself."

[Posted 04/18 09:57 AM]

The Washington Post goes after Tom DeLay today for having the audacity to not devote his entire address before the NRA to the ethical accusations against him.

At the same time, the Post doesn’t miss the chance to take a few shots at gun rights, pointing out the more controversial points on the NRA platform.

However, DeLay did briefly address the recent bad press he has received, noting, “When a man is in trouble or in a good fight, you want to have your friends around, preferably armed. So I feel really good,”

About 2,550 NRA members paid $75 each for dinner and to hear DeLay and other figures speak.

Wayne LaPierre said of DeLay, "His work to preserve our constitutional rights has earned the respect of his colleagues, our 4 million members, and millions of law-abiding gun owners across this nation,"

[Posted 04/18 09:26 AM]

Roy Blunt and Steny Hoyer both appeared on Fox News Sunday. Amongst other subjects, they discussed Tom DeLay and how to get the Ethics committee functioning again.

Blunt: “Tom DeLay wants the Ethics Committee to reorganize, so he can go to the committee. We made three changes in the Ethics Rules in the Congress that I think are the right kind of changes to make. They don't in any way impair the ability of that committee to function in spite of what our friends are saying.”

And Hoyer: “We're not going to meet with an Ethics Committee that is neutered by the Republican leadership. That's what they did … This is a committee that's made up of five Republicans and five Democrats, so in effect, what they've said -- either side, Democrats or Republicans can stop investigations of ethical lapses in their tracks.”

[Posted 04/18 09:03 AM]

The New York Times explains why the House ethics committee can’t get its act together.

[Posted 04/18 08:54 AM]

So far, what have the Democrats really presented in their case against John Bolton?

Carl Ford’s accusations of intimidation came down to a stylistic critique that Bolton places his arms akimbo when upset. Smears that Bolton has colleagues fired were revealed to simply be requested reassignments.

Meanwhile, Democrats broke their promised to vote on Bolton last week. Even Lincoln Chafee, not exactly a bastion of conservative thought, has had nothing but praise for Bolton.

How would most Americans feel about Bolton’s record? That he seeks to reform a corrupt United Nations, that he sought to have irresponsible employees reprimanded and that Bolton speaks his mind on topics of expertise, refusing to placate those who wish America harm. Controversial or common sense?

[Posted 04/18 08:45 AM]

USA Today asks if Chuck Hagel is now leaning towards voting no on John Bolton. Hagel expressed reservations about Bolton while appearing on CNN’s Late Edition yesterday, but indicated he still plans to vote Bolton out of committee. Democrat Senator Dick Durbin said he thought Bolton would win approval as well.

[Posted 04/18 08:39 AM]

The New York Times adds more Bolton tabloid fodder today. The article focuses on Fulton Armstrong, whom several news outlets continue to cite as a possibly “outed” government agent, even though I reported last week Armstrong’s name appears regularly in the public record.

Armstrong attacks Bolton for attempting to have him reassigned after he and Bolton had several disagreements. Bolton does not dispute this and there’s nothing to suggest such a request was illegal or unethical. The Times cites Democratic Senate staff aides as their source material.

Otto Reich comes to Bolton’s defense, noting he too requested the transfer, as Armstrong had, in Reich’s words, a habit of “giving the benefit of the doubt” on human rights and security issues to fascist leaders such as Fidel Castro, Hugo Chávez and former President Jean-Bertrand Aristide of Haiti.

[Posted 04/18 08:20 AM]

As Rich Lowry has been reminding us over at the Corner, Democrats broke their promise last week to hold a committee vote for John Bolton. In exchange for postponing his hearings until after the Pope’s funeral, the Democrats promised committee chair Richard Lugar a vote last week. It has since been delayed until tomorrow at the earliest.

And as Rich predicated, they are using the broken promise in a vain attempt to dig up “dirt” on Bolton’s previous record. The Washington Post provides an assist this morning, using language to describe Republicans last week as “shaken” by Bolton’s testimony. The Post anonymously cites current and former Bolton colleagues who claim he did not provide certain documents to then Secretary of State Colin Powell that Bolton critics feel he should have passed along.

A ways down, the Post does not all Republicans still plan to vote for Bolton and that in his capacity as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control he had authority in deciding which memos to pass along and when.