Washington – A visibly annoyed President Barack Obama and tough-talking Senate Republicans clashed sharply Wednesday over Susan Rice’s qualifications to become secretary of state, a strong reminder that all the post-election talk about bipartisanship has its limits.
The fight started with trial balloons in the news media this week signaling that Obama plans to nominate Rice as secretary of state when Hillary Clinton steps down
Two Republican senators responded Wednesday. Sen. John McCain of Arizona called Rice “not qualified,” and Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said flatly, “I don’t trust her,” because of her statements about the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans.
Obama, in an unusual show of emotion Wednesday, defended Rice, the United Nations ambassador who’s been a mainstay of his foreign policy team since his 2008 campaign.
“If Senator McCain and Senator Graham want to go after somebody, they should go after me,” he said at a White House news conference. “To besmirch her reputation is outrageous.”
Rice has been under fire ever since she was dispatched by the Obama administration to tell Sunday talk shows five days after the Libya incident that it resulted from a spontaneous demonstration, a narrative that turned out to be false.
In defending Rice Wednesday, Obama may have inadvertently suggested she lacked the stature of a secretary of state, arguing that she was only a spokesman on the Libya story, reciting talking points given her by intelligence agencies.
“For them to go after the U.N. ambassador who had nothing to do with Benghazi?” Obama asked. “And was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received?”
Please support Truthout’s work by making a tax-deductible donation: click here to contribute.
Republicans weren’t buying that.
“This is about the role she played around four dead Americans when it seems to be that the story coming out of the administration – and she’s the point person – is so disconnected to reality, I don’t trust her,” said Graham. “The reason I don’t trust her is because I think she knew better, and if she didn’t know better, she shouldn’t be the voice of America.”
Unfair, protested Obama.
“But when they go after the U.N. ambassador, apparently because they think she’s an easy target, then they’ve got a problem with me,” Obama said. “If I think that she would be the best person to serve America in that capacity at the State Department, then I will nominate her.”
After the press conference, Graham, often considered a Republican who works well with Democrats, wouldn’t let up.
“Mr. President, don’t think for one minute I don’t hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi. I think you failed as commander in chief before, during and after the attack,” he said.
The fight comes at a post-election time when the two parties have signaled they want to work together. The Rice flap throws a grenade into the works.
Having Rice in the mix “doesn’t help,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, a Republican with a history of finding bipartisan consensus.
Presidents and senators try to avoid nomination fights, partly because opponents traditionally believe a president is entitled to his team, and partly because they don’t want to start off a year on an ugly note.
Nominees who prove toxic are often withdrawn before they get a vote. When controversial nominees get that vote, they rarely lose, though the new president often has to spend valuable political capital winning approval. In 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder weathered a stormy confirmation hearing – and Republican-imposed delays – and was confirmed with 75 votes.
Republicans see Rice through a broad lens: They want more answers on the Libya incident – and view it as a way of scoring points against Obama – and criticizing Rice is an attention-getting way of accomplishing that goal.
“We will do whatever’s necessary to block the nomination that’s within our power as far as Susan Rice is concerned,” McCain told a news conference. He and other Republicans want a special committee to investigate the Libya incident.
Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., a senior Foreign Relations Committee member, went further, saying Rice’s problems go beyond Libya.
“Rice has been the Obama administration’s point person in pursuing liberal causes that threaten U.S. sovereignty,” he said. “She has also not been an effective diplomat or manager at the U.N.”
The nomination first would be considered by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, now chaired by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. Kerry has been mentioned for State as well as Defense.
The committee’s top Republican is slated to be Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, known for cooperating with Democrats.
Wednesday, Corker would not go as far as some Republicans, but he was puzzled why Rice did not know more about the incident.
“It’s a very big problem,” he said. “We all rely on people in these positions to be transparent and honest.”
“How could we, knowing that our intelligence officials in Libya in real time . . . were letting our folks know back here that this was a terrorist attack – it’s beyond me that we would be out publicly talking about the event in that way,” he said.
But unlike others, Corker would not say whether Rice could be confirmed. “You have to give someone a full hearing,” Corker said.
Democrats were more sympathetic.
“She’s qualified to be secretary of state,” said Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich. “She may have had bad information.”
Levin urged considering the whole of Rice’s resume, and to wait to hear her side of what happened regarding Libya.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
After the election, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy