Today, consideration of the Dawn Johnsen nomination to lead the critical Office of Legal Counsel at the DOJ was delayed and put off, yet again, for the fourth time. From Main Justice:
The Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday postponed for the fourth time a vote on on the nomination of Dawn Johnsen to head the Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel because of the White House health care summit with members of Congress this morning.
Committee chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said the health care summit, which several members of the panel attended, was an “extraordinary circumstance.” Traditionally, panel members can only ask to hold over a nominee once.
Any excuse is a good excuse. Note, however, that the Senate Judiciary Committee was able to find time today, in spite of the healthcare summit, to pass a witness protection bill the DOJ sought. Oh, and the SJC also found time to approve the nominations of two US Attorney candidates, both of whom were just nominated by President Obama two months ago on December 24th. But they just couldn’t find time for Dawn Johnsen, who was tapped by Obama to lead the OLC over a year ago, before Obama was even inaugurated.
It is interesting that the two US Attorney nominees moved out of Committee today were nominated on December 24, 2009 as that was the very same day the first nomination of Dawn Johnsen to lead the OLC was killed by the obstreperous neglect of the Obama Administration.
In fairness to the SJC, they have arguably had excuses for the four, count em four, instances in which they have set over consideration of Obama’s renomination of Johnsen this year. Further, Chairman Pat Leahy, as well as SJC members Sheldon Whitehouse and Arlen Specter, have all been forthright in their desire to get Johnsen confirmed.
But the Senate, whether the Judiciary Committee or having 60 votes to obtain cloture on the floor, has never really been the hold up on confirmation of Dawn Johnsen; the failure has been an utter lack of desire by the Obama White House to confirm their own nominee. I have previously established that the Obama White House had the sixty (60) votes necessary to confirm Dawn Johnsen as of the split second Senator Al Franken was sworn in and seated on July 7, 2009.
If there were any questions about Arlen Specter being the 60th vote for Johnsen’s confirmation for the entire second half of Obama’s first year in office, they were answered completely by Senator Specter two days ago. If you want extra gravy on the proof, add in the fact that the two Senators from Maine, Snowe and Collins, have never indicated they would block a vote on Johnsen and have allowed up or down votes in such situations before, and Ben Nelson has never even been asked by the White House to support her.
So, when the Obama White House has been able to confirm their own nominee all this time, and they refuse to even request a vote, you have to wonder why? You would think with all the recent commotion about the lack of ethics and shoddy work produced by the Office of Legal Counsel over the last eight years, and the inability of the DOJ to police the substandard work of their own attorneys, getting a strong, principled, experienced and competent leader like Dawn Johnsen confirmed would be a glaring priority for Barack Obama and his White House team, just like Obama swore was his desire when he first nominated her.
You would think confirming Dawn Johnsen would be a priority for the Obama White House, but clearly you would be wrong. What is even more startling is, given the heavy exposure of the problems in the OLC, and inability of OPR to regulate it, the last few days that no one in the press and media are asking the Obama White House why they have so hung their own nominee out to dry. I guess prattling on and on about the Kabuki theater of the health care summit and the status of Sally Quinn’s dysfunctional family is just more important to the papers of record these days.



49 Comments






Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Emptywheel





RSS/XML Feed
My guess: They want the OPR report issued, spiked and forgotten before she takes over.
I’m starting to wonder WTF is going on with ObamaCo protecting BushCo. It can’t just be about the Almighty Agenda. Perhaps some enterprising GOPer kept personal copies of Obama related communication intercepts from whatever they’re calling carnivore these days.
Boxturtle (Or maybe this is just another Chicago-type political deal)
I predict there will be at least a decent potential explanation discussed right here, on this blog, this afternoon. I have ESP you know; stay tuned!
I guess President Graham hasn’t moved his thumb up.
It’s all Rahm’s fault!
I could understand ObamaCo trying to ignore a lot of BushCO wrongdoing for the sake of Obama’s vision of bipartisanship. But it’s reaching the point that Obama is taking significant political risks to keep it covered up. That’s a level of risk well beyond any known reward.
Boxturtle (And the difference between ESP and pimpin’ your next post is…?)
Hallelujah!
I’m thinking more from the other direction. Given all we know now about Obama’s active participation in the charade of “closing secret detention sites” while actually confining the closure to CIA and not JSOC sites, his desire for choosing a trial venue based only on the probability of conviction and his endorsement of indefinite detention without charges, I turn the question into this one:
After all, she stands for everything they don’t.
Cue the loyalists: “Of course he wants Johnsen confirmed!! Why nominate her twice otherwise? That just doesn’t make any sense!”
I dearly wish I were exaggerating …
In anticipation of your prediction, could you clarify for this uninformed one, whether Johnsen will have any authority to take up, lets call it,”looking back”, or is she limited to opinions asked of her?
Lets remember the Repugs will be back in power someday with none of the judicial debauchery from the Bush years sorted out. Yoo is already on the stump declaring confirmation of unlimited powers for the Pres.
The question you pose?
Ah, that is THE question.
We must be careful with what we pre-supposes.
Your question, Jim, needs no fertilizer …
DW
And the response is “Of course, it makes sense. It has left the position open for more than a year!”
I wonder how long Johnsen will allow herself to be a part of this theatre.
Because Gitmo’s still open?
This administration doesn’t want Dawn Johnsen to work for it. It wants to look like it wants her. Not having her running OLC is a godsend to the semi-lawless Rahm Emanuel; it is one more stick in the eye from Obama and Rahm for the rule of law.
In a paper published last year in BU Law Rev, D.Johnsen counsels in favor of an approach which preserves the verve of the US presidency construct; link to abstract of her article. The paper text is 580KB if the reader downloads the full article. Interestingly perhaps, for those who favor video, the article at pdf page 27, footnote 31, provides a working link to video (3 minutes) of interim head of olc Daniel Levin getting waterboarded in a cinderblock room about 3ft x 7ft as part of his research into Goldsmith*s reasons for disavowing that specific traditionally illegal torture modality. It is worthwhile reading Johnsen*s narrative providing the context of Goldsmith*s having prepared three resignation letters in his 9 months on the job prior to Levin*s yet more fleeting tenure. Johnsen also contextualizes by discussing Gonzales* effect upon olc memos, and reviews Mukasey*s policies.
My impression is the soft pedal on Johnsen*s procrastinated vetting and vote is it drives toward a thoughtful process which is at the core of every reason the modern Republican party seeks to have its own presidency someday again; and that the current administration has something of the president*s own predilection for interlocution instead of bluster.
A lot of documents are in the public domain now that were unavailable at the time Johnsen*s linked article appeared in 2009; it might be interesting to see a future article the renominated professor might write around the same themes incorporating the now extant materials.
I can conceptualize the current Republican party as a metaphorically embodied replication of Ashcroft during the moment when the Comey Goldsmith cavalcade raced upstairs skipping every other step in the dread that Gonzales Card*s guides might have attained the inner sanctum of the postsurgical critical care area to access, in Johnsen*s terminology, **a very ill and sedated** (Ashcroft). I think Obama*s administration is worried what bizarre events might ensue, if the Republican party is roused from its furze and forced to provide even simple advice and consent in re nomination of head of olc.
Rule of law, what a quaint idea.
This is as good a reason as any to withhold my vote from the incumbent president. If it is what it sems, I’d like to see Dawn Johnson withdrawal.
If she did, it would be one of the few withdrawals out of strength not embarrassment … the identity fraud of Zeitlin notwithstanding. I’m not ready to conclude the Zeitlin story is as the press characterized it but nobody’s stepping up to set the record straight either.
Dawn Johnson deserves better than to be Rahm and Obama tool. She seems like a straight shooter. Has anyone asked her what she thinks is going on?
I really have absolutely no idea why they are doing what they are doing. Maybe they’ll confirm her just to prove Bmaz wrong.
It’s been clear from early on that O doesn’t want someone like Johnson in that position. So the relevant Q is why did he nominate her? My guess is to throw a bone to the L&O crowd.
Like the previous administration it’s looking like Mr. Bipartisan’s administration is only interested in toadies and blind loyalists willing to merely follow orders.
It was never the intent of the Snowbama Administration to have Dawn Johnsen confirmed. They were simply hoping that Progressives would feel good with the nomination alone. Since then, however, the Snowbama Administration has learned that they can be upfront about giving the finger to those who elected him.
Prof. Johnsen needs to hang in for the long haul. I do believe that she will be confirmed, but the wait is painful.
Why do you think she’ll be confirmed?
Off topic but un.believe.able……
Senator Claire McCaskill Invites You to Join President Barack Obama for a Grassroots Reception
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
6:30 PM
Renaissance Grand Hotel -*- 800 Washington Avenue -*- St. Louis, Missouri
RSVP Required
Ticket Levels:
$25 per person: Includes 1 Standing Ticket
$75 per person: Includes 1 Standing Ticket
$100 per person: Includes 1 Ticket with Priority Standing
$250 per person: Includes 1 Ticket with Premier Seating
$500 per person: Includes 1 Ticket with Ropeline Priority Seating
So for $500 to stand at the rope, can you give Obama a piece of your mind??
Obviously these people’s idea of grassroots, is considerably different than mine. If they consider their “grassroots” having the cashola kicking around for this, then who are their grassroots? Rich yuppies? Maybe I’m in the wrong dimension or something.
Grassroots? Laughing really hard.
Guess they have fairly wealthy grassroots….or am I in the wrong reality? I thought grassroots was average everyday people? Don’t know about anyone else, but most average everyday people are having a hard enough time putting food on the table.
The key…what does she stand for. Will she be serving at the pleasure of the President?
Isn’t that something? It’s also on ActBlue’s page. Got this email. Unreal.
Got it! ;-)
http://www.salon.com/entertainment/comics/this_modern_world/2010/02/01/this_modern_world/story.jpg
At least they want under a thousand dollars per ticket.
Very OT: I just read that Yoo was speaking this evening at UTx Law School. Local paper is Statesman.com if you want to look for any coverage tomorrow.
Johnson’s abstract makes it clear that she is unlikely to agree with “not looking backward” as Obama stated he will cover for the BUSHCO crimes.
It would seem she was nominated for this very outcome, the continuation of the Bushler/Darth status quo ante. What’s surprising is anyone is still bewildered by all this.
The Obama turn against the electorate is so stunning in his aggressiveness that it seems like Benedict Arnold an act of treason.
The 2009 Johnsen paper is fairly colloquial, although profusely footnoted in the usual fashion; one of the unique features the article provides is website links, especially to the then contemporaneous work of Lederman and JB at balkinization blog. DJohnsen*s article was readable in 2009. I think there are several vantages, JKaye has chronicled some of those with emphasis on the progression of history. The issues for the prof seem mostly institutional. Johnsen even pans some of the Whitehouse highlighted concerns congress had, even if only for the teleologic benefit of constitutional continuity. I appreciate bmaz*s reflection of the abyss the administration faces with respect to normalizing olc.
Is it possible at this point in time, considering all the evidence brought forward as well as all the statements made concerning torture and rendition, that Dawn Johnsen, after being confirmed as head of Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel, can walk into Barry’s office and advise the President that he should or must proceed with charges of manslaughter and criminal negligence against those involved from Bush on down? If so would the President then be responsible because of that legal advice and be open to charges of obstruction of justice. In other words could Johnsen sandbag Obama or Holder for that matter.
The whole Republican push is to stop any progress by the White House or Congressional democrats. They are planning a Waterloo for Democrats in the mid term election. Thank you for the data links and explanations. The rhubarb is not about substance it is about power.
Sounds like they have an announcement to make.
WTF is it?
No, not possible in the least. OLC has nothing whatsoever to do with the prosecutorial function of DOJ. However, as head of OLC, she could withdraw and/or distinguish existing OLC legal opinions that the Obama Administration is relying on to continue the Bush/Cheney surveillance, indefinite detention, drone assassination, military tribunals etc. and other war on terror modalities. There are still several key cases in the court system, notably al-Haramain and Padilla v. Yoo that could be substantially affected and it also could affect the way people look at the failure to prosecute some of the war crime facts. But she could not directly do what you suggested.
Thanks bmaz.
In politics, timing is everything. Johnsen represents a special wildcard that ObamaCo wants in its hand for a reason. Is he holding this card to trump some opposition act? IOW, “if you do this, we’re going to push Johnsen’s nomination through.”
Or is he waiting for some other kind of situation to release the nomination? For example, now that the Health Summit if “over,” and the kumbaya moment has passed, will he release the nomination within the next week?
I cannot believe that Obama nominated her, and then renominated her, if he has no intention of ever letting her nomination through. That just makes no sense to me. Even if her nomination was intended merely as a sop to the Left, how does that sop work if her nomination is never allowed to go through, especially in the absence of obvious roadblocks?
I bet her nomination goes through and she takes office by summer.
Bob in AZ
Remind me again how these things work. Obama nominates someone and then… the Senate confirms or denies it. I understand the fact that Obama may not be putting any pressure what so ever on the Senate to actually vote on her nomination. But still, he can’t exactly stop them from voting if they want to. If every trivial matter requires Obama’s micromanagement, its hard to see how the government can function. (It doesnt.) But perhaps we shouldnt expect one man to micromanage the senate.
The last time I checked Pat Leahy was the chair of the Judiciary Committee.
She’s too good for Obama. She doesn’t need the taint of his association.
An epu’d more serious answer – the trials v. commissions fight. She’s not someone Obama wants weighing in, particularly not from a slot that gives her leverage to skew his political decisions with legal analysis.
I keep getting requests from the Obama administration for more donations. I will resume my donations when Dawn Johnsen is confirmed. Not before.
Last year, Leahy passed her out of the Judiciary Committee in March of 2009. There became 60 votes to get her cloture for an up or down vote on the Senate floor as of July 7 2009 when Franken was sworn in. That Harry Reid did NOT call for a vote on her is because he was being told NOT to do so by the Obama White House. You seem to be missing the point, the Senate Majority Leader from a president’s own party does not refuse to schedule a vote on such an important nominee for over half a year unless he is specifically told not to; just doesn’t happen.
Timing, hmmm. Excellent thought there, bobschacht. Strategically thinking, would it help or hurt the Ds in the midterms to announce investigations and/or prosecutions of Bush administration officials? See, I’m wondering whether the DJ delay might be related to election cycles. (And yes, to anticipate an obvious question: I do think the current WH workers are fully capable of that degree of calculation and cynicism.)
That’s exactly what I’ve been suggesting for a few months. Just to keep the Republican brand from regaining any respectability during an election season.
Bob in AZ
I probably just internalized your idea then. There we go thinking alike again.
There is a certain strong logic there.
Again, count the votes to approve Mukasey as AG and you’ll see that the liberal Dems do not control the Senate and that 20 or so Senators are dictating the political direction of the country towards the right:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00407