No Holds on Hagel

Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) says that he won’t allow a hold on Chuck Hagel’s nomination.  It just takes a single senator to do a hold.  He intends to have the full Senate vote by the end of the week.  The Senate Armed Services Committee is voting later today.

But the GOP may still filibuster Hagel.

GOP Makes It Suck To Be Chuck

The GOP is considering walking out of a vote on Chuck Hagel’s DoD nomination if Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin (D-MI) holds one on Tuesday.  Kind of a mean-girls-middle-school thing to do.

Meanwhile, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), the ranking minority member on the Committee, is using the F-word about Hagel — he wants a 60-vote threshold to approve him, not a majority, so he’s threatening a filibuster.

Interestingly, Inhofe’s staff has concluded that Hagel has met the disclosure standard applied to previous nominees for Secretary of Defense, so the GOP’s demand for more information seems — surprise, surprise — to be total BS.

I hope the Prez gets up at his SOTU and shouts “You lie!” at the GOP members.

 

Quote of the Day

“Chuck Hagel is a good man, but these are dangerous times.  What kind of signal are we sending to the Iranians when our nominee for Secretary of Defense seems clueless about what our policy is? I hope the Obama Administration will reconsider his nomination.”

Sen. Lindsey “Butters” Graham (R- SC)

Slippery Butters

Lindsey “Butters” Graham (R-SC) is threatening to put a hold on both Chuck Hagel’s nomination for Secretary of Defense and John Brennan’s for CIA Director until the President explains what he did on the night of the Benghazi terror attack that left four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, dead.  Appearing on CBS’ Face the Nation, Graham vowed:

“I’m not going to stop until we get to the bottom of it.  We know nothing about what the president did on the night of September 11, during a time of national crisis, and the American people need to know what their Commander-in-Chief did, if anything, during the eight-hour attack.

“I don’t know what the president did that evening.  I don’t know if he ever called anyone. I know he never talked to the Secretary of Defense. I know that he never talked to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. … I know the Secretary of State never talked to the Secretary of Defense. This was incredibly mismanaged. And what we know now, it seems to be a very disengaged president.”

His battle cry is “No confirmation without information.”  Senator, I would say to you, “No clout without coming out.”

Rubin Pretty Much Calls Hagel a Traitor

From “Chuck Hagel Is Still Hiding,” Jennifer Rubin, “Right Turn,” WaPo:

“At this point it is obvious that Hagel, with the White House’s indulgence, is intentionally withholding information from the committee that is easily accessible but apparently controversial.  Levin may be compelled by the White House to hold his committee vote next week, but Republicans have every reason to do whatever is needed to prevent a nominee this unfit and uncooperative with the legitimate demands of the Senate confirmation process from reaching a position where he can do real damage (by incompetence, at the very least) to our national security and provide access to a host of shadowy figures whose identities Hagel is so insistent on concealing.”  Emphasis added.

I think Rubin is listening to too many “shadowy figures.”

Levin Defends Hagel

Having postponed the Armed Services Committee vote on Chuck Hagel’s nomination to DoD because of unreasonable GOP financial disclosure demands made in a 2/6 letter signed by 26 GOP senators, committee chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) is now standing up to the Republicans with a letter to his committee’s ranking minority member, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK).

Levin says the GOP letter “appears to insist upon financial disclosure requirements that far exceed the standard practices of the Armed Services Committee and go far beyond the financial disclosure required of previous Secretaries of Defense.”

After walking through what is normally provided, what Hagel has provided, and why the further demands are absurd, Levin concludes:

“The committee cannot have two different sets of financial disclosure standards for nominees, one for Senator Hagel and one for other nominees.”

Hey Carl, you wanna bet?