Regarding the recess appointment of John Bolton to the post of UN Ambassador, our esteemed Senator said the following:
"The abuse of power and the cloak of secrecy from the White House continues. ... It's a devious maneuver that evades the constitutional requirement of Senate consent and only further darkens the cloud over Mr. Bolton's credibility at the U.N."
So let me get this straight: Kennedy is claiming that a recess appointment is an abuse of power? Since when? If it's so bad, why is it in the Constitution? It's right there in Article II, Section 2. In the paragraph right after the one about "Advice and Consent." Recess appointments in no way "evade" the requirement for advice and consent. They were designed as temporary appointments until that advice could be obtained. (On the very sensible grounds that someone needs to be in position to do the job.)
Comments