E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIf President Barack Obama selects United Nations envoy Susan Rice to replace Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, he’ll face determined opposition from at least three Republican senators: John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire. Ayotte and Graham would each place a “hold” on Rice’s nomination if she were nominated, their aides told NBC News Tuesday. McCain's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte stated that, after meeting with Amb. Susan Rice, they are more "troubled" and still have many questions regarding the administration's handling of Benghazi.
The three GOP senators met with Rice Tuesday and said afterwards they still weren’t satisfied with the administration’s handling of the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attack on the US consulate in Benghazi and Rice’s initial role in explaining that attack.
Related: Senators not satisfied with Rice's Benghazi story
If Rice were nominated and her nomination came to the Senate floor for a vote, it seems highly likely that with Democrats holding the majority in the new Congress, she’d be confirmed.
But her Republican opponents could use the Senate rules to try to prevent her nomination from coming to a floor vote.
A “hold” is an informal procedure by which a senator signals to his or her floor leader that he or she doesn’t want a bill or nomination to come to the floor. Holds have been used for years by senators to indicate that a nomination is so unacceptable to them that they’d try to filibuster it -- to stop it through endless debate -- if necessary.
Ambassador Nicholas Burns talks about Ambassador Susan Rice's meeting with Sens. John McCain, Kelly Ayotte and Lindsey Graham. He also talks about the challenges facing the next Secretary of State.
“I would hold her nomination until I had additional answers to questions, and then I will render judgment," Ayotte told reporters after meeting with Rice.
When Graham was asked by Defense News if he would place a hold on Rice’s nomination, he said, “Oh, absolutely. I would place a hold on anybody who wanted to be promoted to any job who had a role in the Benghazi situation.” Graham’s office confirmed that account.
Graham told a press conference Tuesday after he, McCain and Ayotte met with Rice that “before anybody can make an intelligent decision about promoting someone involved in Benghazi, we need to do a lot more (investigating).”
But indicating they’d put a hold on a nomination does not mean that Rice’s opponents could themselves kill her nomination.
If Rice were nominated and if the Foreign Relations Committee reported her nomination to the full Senate, it would be up to Majority Leader Harry Reid to decide when to bring it to the floor for debate.
Susan Walsh / AP
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, center, flanked by fellow committee members, Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., left, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., right, speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Nov. 27, 2012, following a meeting with UN Ambassador Susan Rice. Rice met with lawmakers to discuss statements she made about the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya that left the ambassador and three other Americans dead.
If senators opposed to Rice were able to keep debating the nomination, and if Reid failed to muster 60 votes for cloture, bringing the debate to a close, then the nomination would essentially be dead.
It’s early in this battle, and it’s not clear there would be enough Republicans to sign onto a filibuster, but one Democratic Senate aide said Democrats would welcome the fight and are confident she would be confirmed. “People are happy to fight for her,” the aide said.
There are echoes here of the nomination battles of the Bush era. Democratic filibusters blocked, and ultimately killed, a number of President George W. Bush’s judicial nominees and Bush’s nomination of John Bolton to be U.N. ambassador.
“I remember the John Bolton episode pretty well,” Graham told reporters Tuesday. “Democrats dug in their heels saying we're not gonna vote, we're not gonna consider this nomination until we get basic answers to our concerns.”
There were two cloture votes on Bolton’s nomination in 2005. He got 56 votes on one of them, four shy of the number needed to end debate and confirm him.
In some cases, a senator putting a hold on a nomination is enough to convince the majority leader or the chairman of the committee considering the nomination to not try to move ahead with it.
For example in December 2011 the Washington Post reported that Matthew Bryza, Obama's nominee to be ambassador to Azerbaijan, was "deemed insufficiently hostile to Armenia's enemies by the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) and two Democratic senators with Armenian American constituencies, Barbara Boxer (Calif.) and Robert Menendez (N.J.)."
Boxer and Menendez put a hold on his nomination, preventing or at least delaying a floor vote. Obama gave Bryza a recess appointment and renominated him.
But Boxer and Menendez continued to oppose him and the Post reported that Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. John F. Kerry, D-Mass., never scheduled a hearing on his nomination.
Sometimes a hold on a nomination is simply a way of trying to extract some specific policy change or administrative action from the executive branch.
For example, the Hill reported last year that Sen. David Vitter, R-La., announced he was lifting his hold on Obama’s nomination of Dan Ashe to head the Department of Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service.
Vitter wanted speedier action from the Obama administration on approving deep-water drilling permits in the Gulf of Mexico.
“I said I would lift it when we got to 15 permits,” Vitter said on June 1, 2011. “We finally reached that mark today, and I’m lifting my hold.”
But the stakes would be far higher if Obama nominated Rice, partly because it would be the first nomination battle since he won re-election last month.
NBC News’s Domenico Montanaro contributed to this story.
Leave a Comment:
The GOPs war on America continues,they are ruining this country! They care NOTHING for America,only their political agenda!
Could someone please pass the windex? We need to clean John's glass, to make him more see through. He wants John Kerry (the man he watched get swift boated and did nothing) to be the next SOS. Gee, what would that do for Massachusett's -- let's see a senators chair would come open. Wow oh Wow. Crystal clear, John
Where was John when we needed him to investigate why the heck we went to Iraq anyway.
A possible republican seat in Massachusettes? Really?
Scott Browns election was an anomoly and only because the democrat he ran against was so awful even liberals couldn't pull the lever.
You theory is absurd.
It is interesting that after Susan Rice (black female) met with these three they were even more against her, but when the former CIA Director(white male) testified that he gave her incorrect information they didn't bat an eye.
I forgot it is ALWAYS wrong to ever question a black person- God forbid. The CIA director did not go on 5 TV shows with incorrect info.
blah, blah, blah.......Susan Rice.......who........wait for it.......
happens to be a WOMAN and BLACK...............goes on at least FIVE............late night interviews.......
ADVANCES the LIE.....it was a "spontaneous demonstration".........then turns around........
LIES AGAIN......says "oh no, we all KNEW it was a "terrorist attack all along".....
( EVEN KNEW IT .....before the election when people could have USED that information)....
BUT...because she is BLACK and a WOMAN........... SHE GETS A PASS.....and if you say ONE WORD....
you are a RACIST.......must be NICE to know ........what ever you do you get a pass.....cause when all else fails you always got that RACE CARD up your sleeve!....must be nice!
She got the incorrect information from the CIA. The former director testified under oath that the CIA gave her the incorrect information. These three Senators are shooting the messenger.
If you read my post at the top of the page, I said exactly that,- leave Race out it.
No, I will not. There has been a disturbing pastern of the GOP in the senate giving minorities and women in the president's cabinet (or potentially in his cabinet) particularly harsh rhetoric (e.g. Holder, Warren, Rice).
NO you liberal lemming....who ONLY relies on liberal media template........
FACT....there was a DRONE flying over the Consulate.....
DURING THE ATTACK....
beaming LIVE VIDEO back to the WH "situation room".
The White House KNEW .......minutes into the attack.........it was members of al Qaeda....
stop SPEWING MANTRA. The LIE has been EXPOSED...........
EVEN RICE SAID SHE "KNEW IT WAS A TERRORIST ATTACK"......hell-the F-low!!!!
Thats what this is about.....not just some "angry white guys"..... picking on a "poor defenseless BLACK WOMAN"......
SHE LIED KNOWINGLY.........but its no big surprise her boss is the Liar-IN-Chief.
Willard - ok I wont either- why does the left go after with so much contempt Conservative women? if they are black and Conservative - all hell breaks loose and the name calling begins. Uncle Tom, Race Traitor, on and on.. you are a hypocrite if you do not see the harsh tactics the left employe to destroy Conservatives, especially women and most assuredly black Conservatives
If the left has something to be mad about, it should be what your president did to Rice, not what GOP senators did to her. Or should everything the president does just be taken as law and truth and the right had better keep their mouths shut?
The "left" does not have to do anything to "destroy" conservatives of any race, gender or creed. They are doing a fine job of it themselves. You know a party has problems when you ask; "did the rape guy lose" and the answer is; "which one?".
J Willard you are so typical of the left - throwing the race card because you have nothing else.
Why didn't Hillary hit these talk shows? Because she did not have "plausible deniability" which Rice, who was NOT directly involved in Benghazi, did. Both sides play this game - it is politics with a capital P. So to me, Susan Rice is only a thread that could possibly lead to the puppet master.
My question is this: Who in the administration decided to push forward with the ridiculous "video inspired protest that got out of hand" narrative? Why and who made the decision not to beef up security in Libya?
This has nothing to do with Rice being a black woman and everything to do with her being used as a patsy. She ought to be angry at the Obama administration for using her this way.
I bet if the truth were known, she was promised the Secretary of State position if she went on to the talk show circuit with this ridiculous story line when even the most oridnary person HAD to know that the assasination of our ambasador on Sept 11 was a terror attack.
And CLINTON .........beat up one of his..........victims Jennifer Flowers (pictures of a black eye to prove it)........and Ted Kennedy ........DROWNED HIS.
Williard-with all the corruption that is the left, do you really want to ask that absurd question? The president administration is full of criminals and proven liars!
Nice Alex Baldwin quote- come up with original material - if you want to look up stupid things Politicans say- watch any interview with Maxine Waters- on sorry she is black, how about the guy who thought Guam was sinking. Saying dumb things has no hold on one political party-
I think you are so entangled with the liberal mantra that you are not listening to what is being said. My read is that Grahm, McCain and Ayotte know that Rice was being used as a patsy and they want to know who put her in that position.
I specially liked the Jamie Foxx show recently where he stated "Our Lord and Savior Barrack Obama" The new liberal religion, not signified by a cross but a Brown stained O around the oral orifice.
RELIGION HAS NO PLACE IN POLITICS period end of story. IF a church gets involved in political debate even over abortion then that church should lose tax exempt status permanently they have NO BUSINESS telling politicians anything. I wish the democrats had taken mention of god out of the party platform, why because IT HAS NO PLACE BEING THERE. Under god needs to be taken out of all government currency, and the pledge it has nothing to do with the political process and should not government should not mess with religions and religions should have no place in politics.
Again..what difference does it make NOW?......
its information Americans could have used ..................BEFORE the election.
Question now becomes.............since Obama now ADMITS that it was al Qaeda
Why is Obama not "going after THOSE RESPONSIBLE".............
like he PROMISED the family members ...........of those who died?
Mruseurhead, get off the silly train.
How could Americans have "used" the information before the election? My thoughts are the results would've been worse for the right given one more of their clown shows.
Secondly, exactly who are YOU to know what's going on with the pursuit of the people who perpetrated the crime?
It's this simple, you'll never, ever admit to anything positive out of this administration. Your posts are consistently hate-filled and insulting.
Kind of like the way Bush went after those who carried out 9/11 ... like he promised the families of the 3000 dead.
Then he tripped and stumbled into Iraq.
No Chip my post are based in FACT....the fact that they seem "hate filled" to you astounds me(sarcastic).
I am simply pointing out the OBVIOUS..... and not liberal media mantra.
PERPETRATED A CRIME???
This was not A CRIME!
It was an attack on a foreign Consulate(which means the very soil on which the Embassy sits...IS AMERICA.
I do not have to ADMIT anything............Obama needs to simply DO HIS JOB..............COMPETENTLY.
Obama PROMISED when it was KNOWN who was responsible.........he would "go after them".
So Barry needs to ride into the desert (like he did with Bin Laden)........single handily.
And do what HE does best.........single handily(because SEALS did nothing during the Bin Laden compound raid, it was all Obama)........
and put a cap in these al Qaeda terrorists that killed 4 Americans.
Mruseuhead ummm nope, no facts there... Just opinion and a badly conceived one at that...
Your old remarks about the President taking direct credit and not giving credit to the team is a great illustration of your subjectivity.
Chip, you know mruseuhead will not understand what you are saying. you are using words that are too big and too deep in meaning. try again, only this time use words he can comprehend - and to make a point don't forget your cap lock -
the disgruntled Republicans are really capable of understanding, we just must be patient.
for ever dem you're right... I forgot myself.
Republicans hate anyone who isn't an old white man. Remember how much we hated Condoleezza Rice. Never mind that was the left who hated her. Are they racist also?
Kind of how after 9/11, a HUGE national security failure, McCain and Graham sat quietly.
now JoePhilly, you know the 911 security failure was not the Republican's fault - as Condi Rice said, " who could imagine anyone flying planes into buildings" I guess they did not get the memo the Clinton's left for them saying - they were determined to fly planes into buildings.
What does that have to do with republicans not liking her because she is a black woman?
The top Iraq war WMD cheerleaders are now lecturing us on National Security.
Really? REALLY?
The GOP just doesn't get irony.
Again Joe.....blame Bush when all else fails........point right........ as your fearless leader "F's" up on the left..........(bob and weave).
And the CHILDISH excuse..........."well he did it too"! ...........Oh okay........... well since "he did it too"!
SO DOES THAT MEAN YOU .............FORGIVE BUSH TOO???????
They found the atomic bomb in Iraq that Condi Rice spoke about before the invasion of Iraq. The darn thing failed to go off. Just another Bush Era Screw-up.
Doesn't matter much, on the first day the Dems. are going to change the filibuster rule so if that's all Republicans have they have nothing.
A Liberal View Today - disagreeing with or challenging Barack Obama, Anita Rice or Eric Holder shall be consider racism.
A Liberal View pre-Obama Administration - disagreeing with or challenging Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice or Henry Cisneros shall be consider good for the American public.
A Timeless Definition of Racism
rac·ism [rey-siz-uh m] noun
1) a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2) a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3) hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
A Timeless Definition of Hypocrite
hyp·o·crite [hip-uh-krit] noun
1) a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2) person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statement belie his or her public statements.
Choice is yours..........
I don't think it is racially motivated I think it is entirely political. If John Kerry gets the job it opens up a Senate seat for another election and that , I believe, is what Republicans want. Rice just happens to be collateral damage in their attempt to gain a Senate seat.
The Committee Leadership Assignments in the House of Representatives tell the real story of the Republican Party. Every Committee Chairman in the House is a "White Male". UN Ambassador Susan Rice is a "Black Woman" and the White Guys are quite upset that another Black is getting a top job in our government. Brace yourselves guys, the women are getting tried of the crappy job you have done for decades, and I predict the new order in American Politics will be run by women, not grumpy old white guys. Get over it, the Black Guy won the White House, and the Black Guy can nominate a Black Woman to be the next US Secretary of State. Attention GOP: Think 2014!
Who got a ringing endorsement by the GOP for Secretary of State? John Kerry. What happens if John Kerry gets the position? They have a special election in Massachusetts to fill his Senate seat. Who won a Senate seat in a special election in 2010 with low voter turn out when Ted Kennedy died in Massachusetts? Scott Brown. Who just lost his Senate seat and would love to run in a special election in Massachusetts? Scott Brown. This has nothing to do with Benghazi or Rice and everything to do with the GOP having a shot at a special election for Scott Brown.
Rice clearly disqualified herself as a senior official by playing the role of a robot whose only duty was to parrot talking points she had been fed. She is unfit to serve in this capacity. Is this what Obama wants? No doubt this would make his work easier but is that the business of the Secretary of State?
I think John Bolton's concerns are valid. Rice is a poor choice. We can do better!
Using declassified talking points isn't being a robot it is exactly what anyone in her position would have done if they didn't want to get treason charges. She does not, nor does anyone in her position make the decisions as to what is classified or declassified. If she had talked about classified information the same people on here accusing her of lieing would be on her trying to convict her of treason.
Hey Pepper... Under your scenario the entire Bush administration and the entire Congress should have been disqualified during the previous administration.
Which of course would be bogus. Just like that post...
It is just another distraction from other more deserving issues like the economy, education, taxes etc that affects all americans. This is not a battle worthy of fighting for. After all Susan Rice is not the only qualified candidate in the planet for the job. What Susan Rice should do is to put the country first by stepping aside.
Step aside? From what, she hasn't even gotten nominated yet? You advocate for being bullied out of a position she is qualified for? If every time one political party cried and stamped its feet to get what they wanted and people just rolled over where would we be? I'm sure you would let them kick you to the curb if you where in the same position right?
Step aside? From what, she hasn't even gotten nominated yet? You advocate for being bullied out of a position she is qualified for? If every time one political party cried and stamped its feet to get what they wanted and people just rolled over where would we be? I'm sure you would let them kick you to the curb if you where in the same position right?
Elliott go pick up Lallen, go buy some lunch and then go back to watch Faux News - you might be missing some important misinformation if you stay here posting nonsense -
The GOP will do what is has been doing for years now ... obstruct. Their new goal? To make sure the dem's are only a two term party since they failed at making Obama a one term president when America caught on to them. I guess they think they can get away with it this time.
The GOP has lost its way. They are still more interested in their party politics and the favors they owe to rich lobbyists than whats best for the country. What's sadder is even after all of the lies they told, they still trust Rush and FOX news to create their message for them.
Yes, the GOP is going the way of the Dodo and the pet rock, but they can still cause major damage on the way out.
Why can't the Republicans just be adults?
These guys are still acting like they are calling the shots. Clearly this has become an issue to attack the President's foreign policy credibility and to get a shot at Kerry's seat. Politics as usual from the party that got us into a bogus war that killed hundreds of thousands and ran up a tab their tax cut policies wouldn't pay for. Now granted, it is the job of the minority party to question and challenge what the majority wants to do. However, it is another to posture on issues like this and the UN Disability treaty. Which brings us to the fiscal cliff issue....
Too right. In Great Britain the minority party in Parliament is called the Loyal Opposition, because they offer counter arguments to the majority, yet they remain loyal to the nation and its betterment. The GOP acts only in its own self interest. They are the kid who flips the Monopoly board over when they start to lose. They seek no consensus and block all attempts to meet it. They will hold America hostage in order to gain a few House seats. For them it is about power and how to attain it. We have seen the tactics they employ to try and win elections, but once they gain a seat we have also seen that they have no interest in actually governing. They simply use their seats to tear down others in hopes of increasing their share of power. But you can't build one man up by simply tearing another man down - that is why the GOP has no platform. They have not worked on providing the American people with one. They only work on ways to hurt their opponents, which is exemplified perfectly with this little childish spat over Susan Rice.
They are comparing the hold on John Bolton to Susan Rice???
First of all Bolton was a terrible candidate for UN Ambassador because he thought the UN should be dissolved. He was more of a saboteur than an ambassador. Rice is a good candidate for Secretary of State as she has much experience with foreign diplomats through her role as UN Ambassador.
Suggesting that she must answer for Benghazi is @!$%#ing ridiculous. @!$%#ing childish and ridiculous. What exactly did she have to do with Benghazi in her role as UN Ambassador? Did she have oversight of the defense budgets? Did she decide how consulate security should be handled? Was she the point woman for responding to threats? No, no, and abso@!$%#inglutely no. She was merely given information to convey to the media, which at the time reflected the best information on hand, minus a few inconsequential details that were classified. The gang of three GOP children have nothing but a semantic argument to make against the administration's reporting of the attack. Who the @!$%# gives a rat's ass if they said it was Al Qaeda or not? What would be the possible motive for a cover up? Can't any armed Islamist militia just call themselves Al Qaeda these days anyway? This group wasn't Al Qaeda, they were merely Al Qaeda sympathizers who came out to a protest with weapons. Arguing over these semantic distinctions is childish and not befitting a senator of the United States of America.
Comparing the reasons given to hold up Rice's nomination to the reasons against Bolton is nuts. Bolton was not a functional member of the UN assembly. He protested every single decision and meeting. He was nothing but combative and uncooperative. He furthered none of America's values. He simply operated as America's dick at the UN. At least Rice has some skill at diplomacy, but I guess the GOP would rather play childish games (again) with America's ability to effectively move forward and engage with the world.
I hate the GOP and every American ought to as well. They are traitorous, self absorbed, muck raking, obstructionists who seem to have no other goal than to cripple the functioning of our government and economy.
Face it, this is just a blatant political move by the Republicans to try to force Kerry out of his Senate seat so they can run Scott Brown.
Now it's the CIA's fault. Obama is going to use that chuck hole for anything and everything. He is to blame and everyone knows it. BUT, impeach him for lying to congress. Unthinkable! We just do it to presidents like Nixon who DID NOT kill his own people.
Steve free clue... The President didn't kill his own people.
How can you hypocrits say something like that and then turn around (and make up) admonish him for saying he killed Bin Laden. Which of course he didn't.
Oh wait, I see it's due to mass confusion and a lack of comprehensive skills.
Carry on...
So, reporting news you know to be false is less of a fault than those who gathered it? I guess so, MSNBC does it everyday.
The hypocrisy form both sides is absurd. The left exonerates Rice because she reported news that turned out to be false (despite knowing otherwise, and only a fool would believe she DIDNT know otherwise). But, the CIA and FBI are idiots, morons, faulty and should be fired for essentially doing the same thing?
Then, the right protects the CIA and FBI while blaming Rice.
Everyone preaches about ending biased loyalty to one party, group or people...but we are all overwhelmingly guilty of it everyday.
This is a non-troversy.
Rice can't release classified information and the unclassified intelligence from the CIA was lagging behind and scrubbed of details.
She wasn't responsible for any of the actions or consequences in Libya.
This is all politics from the right to force some kind of political bargain with the President on the fiscal cliff or to force Kerry to be nominated so they can run for his Senate seat.
They could yell at clouds. Or maybe a chair.
I say let Obama nominate her for something she is really qualified for. Leader of the monkey compound at the Bronx zoo!! While he's at it he can send along Feisty redhead from this post as the queen monkey crap cleaner upper!! LMAO
On Day one, the Senate needs to entirely get rid of the filibuster period. The American people do NOT want this crap going on ANYMORE. MAJORITY RULES PERIOD.
These republican senators have no shame, no honor, and no integrity. We in turn have no respect for them.The sooner they resign, lose their seats, or die, the better.Why the hell didn't they ask Condi Rice about the "mushroom cloud" during her nomination?Her lies about the WMD in Iraq lead to the death of 4500 soldiers, a million Iraqis, and hundreds of billions of dollars in cost, not just 4.
Until the right wing losers demand answers about the Iraq war and the mass murderers of the Bush admins, and as long as Darryl Issa keeps investigating only democrats and not republicans, I don't care what they say, how they feel, or what they do.Susan rice will be confirmed, like it or not.Much like Obama was re-elected, like it or not.
Very well said chad10. Progressive Power Think Tanks have been very 'troubled' by the GOP/RNC tactics since 2009. Everyone should read the book by Robert Draper entitled. "Do Not Ask What Good We Do." This is a book that the GOP/Tea Beggers do not want you to read. It is very obvious why the GOP/RNC want to bury their "Caucus Conspiracy."