Could Bush Recess Appoint Bolton?

[tritsofme]

If the Dems hold up this filibuster, it would seemingly make sense for him.

Bolton leaves with his administration, its not a lifetime appointment like these judges.

[saltpoint]

1. Bush has some support of the Senate Republicans but not --

-- enthusiastic support. Voinovich's letter to his colleagues probably is evidence that Bolton is in fact a lousy nominee.

An emotionally mature president would never have nominated such an asshole in the first place, or would have withdrawn the nomination in the face of such bi-partisan misgivings.

What an embarrassment this administration is to the United States.

[Goldmund]

2. Yes, technically.

Politically, I seriously doubt it.

[POAS]

3. "politics" never stopped him before!!!!!!!!!!!! n/t

[Goldmund]

5. Well, since he's been politically winning...

...until just this week, I'd say, I don't know what you're basing that statement on.

[POAS]

7. How about the appointment to President in 2000

that was a sidestep of the political process if I ever saw one.

[Goldmund]

8. I think you're speaking from the standpoint of a different definition of

"political". Mine has nothing to do with fair play or morality or anything but pure political pragmatism.

He got to be President in 2000, and he got to do most everything else he's wanted to do since then.

[POAS]

9. From that standpoint I agree my disagreement

stemmed from his overstepping normal politics and playing particularly dirty (ie attacks on McCain in SC or swift boat traitors attacks on Kerry). Not exactly politics as usual until Rove and CO.

I know politics has never been squeeky clean but it has also never been dirtier in this country than it is today.

[Goldmund]

10. True, it's never been dirtier,

but that's only because these players discovered a new, more effective way to play their game; also, it is because they can't achieve the goals they want to achieve (which are in themselves a precedent) without playing extremely dirty.

[genius]

4. Whose going to stop him? Not Reid.

[tritsofme]

6. Oh now this is rich...How would you have Mr. Reid

stop a recess appointment?

I'd really love to hear this one!

[housewolf]

11. This vote was to DELAY the vote, not to hold it up...

So that the Dems can keep trying to get the info on the NSA intercepts from the State Dept that they've been denying Biden. There WILL be a vote on Bolton when they come back from the recess in a couple of weeks. Nobody has any intention of blocking this nomination with a filibuster..

[wildflower]

12. Yes - BUT I understand a recess appt. is only temporary.

From Media Matters (note my boldface below):

Discussing "one other option" President Bush could resort to in order to secure John R. Bolton's appointment as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, if the Senate rejects Bolton's nomination, CNN host Wolf Blitzer had this suggestion for Bush: "e could do what former president Bill Clinton used to do, have what's called recess appointments and just get his nominee through with that technical procedure." CNN senior analyst Jeff Greenfield responded by noting that a recess appointment may occur only "when the Congress is in recess," but he neglected to mention that Bush has already demonstrated ample willingness to employ the procedure on his own: He made 110 recess appointments during his first term -- nearly as many as Clinton made during two terms in office.

A recess appointment is a temporary, unilateral appointment by the president to a position that normally requires Senate confirmation. The term expires at the end of the next Senate session or when either the recess appointee or another individual is nominated, confirmed by the Senate, and permanently appointed to the position. According to a March 15 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service on recess appointments, "President William J. Clinton made 140 recess appointments during his eight years in office, 95 to full-time positions. During his first term in office, President George W. Bush made 110 recess appointments, of which 66 were to full-time positions."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200505130007

ON EDIT: So that leads me to ask, when does the next Senate session end? He could be in from now until then.