Thanks Spencer!

Great News:)

I can haz war cryme posekewshins?

So, you know — structures, not personalities. That’s what matters.

What does this mean in terms of the actual authority that she’ll be able to exert?

“When Harry Reid calls for the vote . . . ”

Yeah, like, WHEN? How long can Harry tie THIS one up like he did Dorgan?

This one ain’t over till her swearing in, and even THEN something could go wrong . . . .

Beat me to it. What makes anybody think Reid is going to bring the nomination to the floor? All he needs is a hint of opposition from anybody and he’ll collapse like a cheap card table.

Hey SD: You don’t have to sugar-coat it for us. ;-)

Sorry, but I believe three or four key people in key positions at the right time make all the difference; whatever structure is there, they go around it. Keep fingers crossed for Dawn.

How long to wait ’til our brethren on the right put a hold on Ms Johnsen?

Hold in 3…2…

I’ll wait until she is confirmed to celebrate, if you don’t mind.

Please change this post’s title. It is misleading.

Harry Reidless is famous for putzing with vote schedules to avoid outcomes not desired by the PTB.

Now is the time to demand the actual vote, not to relish or caution about what Ms. Johnsen would do after that vote is taken and passed.

recess appointment, NOW, please.

Yes. Waiting for spineless Harry could take quite a while. Will, however, keep my fingers crossed.

Seems we have TWO waits before we see if this is a good thing.

Wait #1 is for Reid to actually call a vote, and for her to get confirmed.

Wait #2 to see if she’s a tool of Obama, or will fight for all things rightous.

Holding my breath on either is not an option, so I’ll wait to see on both counts.

I’d LOVE to have her confirmed, I hope for nothing less than a full examination of all things Bushy Admin (and now Obama Admin) . . . . but given the reality of change that’s been offered so far, my expectations are real, real low. Almost nil, for that matter.

We won’t ‘look back’ and we won’t investigate or prosecute present shit as it’s too disruptive and might seem partisan!

Oh well . . . . wait and see, hope for the best . . . . shit’s not really working out, though, for progs.

I think that rather than platitudes like “it’s structure not personality” is pointless. Of course it matters who occupies any given position to maintain the opposite is absurd.

The fact that she may be at odds with Obama as regards civil liberties and that she may not be the determining voice in defense of those rights, speaks volumes as to the moral turpitude of Obama and his WH.

It is precisely because of the fecklessness of the WH that people like Jhonsen are more essential than ever. Think of where the country would be were it not for Elliot Richardson, Donald Ruckelshaus and Archibald Cox.

It’s good news, though of a limited nature. I’m starting to like Sestak.

I think the one thing that Johnsen’s practice would assure is that there are no extra-legal interrogation techniques in use now. I don’t think she could influence the decision not to prosecute past torture, but at least it it should make torture a lot less likely under this President.

But then, the only times Obama proves me wrong is when I display some optimism.

I agree – the headline is very misleading indeed. Please revise in the interest of truth, as this is far from the fait accompli it appears based on simply checking some numbers. There are powerful forces opposed to her, and they have as much chance of keeping her out as her proponents do of getting her in.

Surely Lieberman will save the day. :-((

Thanks Spencer. It is progress.

For the record, Sam Stein, I believe, at HuffingtonPost, was told by Reid’s office – when Stein was recently leaked the news that Johnsen would be renominated by Obama this session – that Dawn’s nomination will have to pass through the Senate Judiciary Committee again, before Reid finally can or will bring it to the floor.

If Lugar has been there all along, he made 60, even without Specter, so what, exactly, was the hold-up on Johnsen’s nomination that left her, and less than 10% of all committee-approved nominees, out in the cold on Christmas Eve, while more than 70 others – including Bernanke and Southers, both with public Republican holds on them – breezed through for consideration in the next session of Congress by unanimous consent? Inclusion in that UCAgreement, from which Johnsen was specifically excluded, means that those 70+ (Bernanke included) need neither renominations, nor new committee votes before floor action on their nominations in 2010.

That 12/24/09 Unanimous Consent request went like this:

Mr. CARDIN [on behalf of Reid]. As in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that all the nominations received by the Senate during the 111th Congress, first session, remain in status quo, notwithstanding the December 24, 2009, adjournment of the Senate, and [] the provisions of rule XXXI, paragraph 6, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, with the following exceptions: PN1119, COL David Teeples; Calendar No. 32, Dawn Johnsen; Calendar No. 205, Mary Smith; Calendar No. 312, Christopher Schroeder; Calendar No. 488, Edward Chen; Nos. 491 and 492, Craig Becker, and Calendar No. 579, Louis Butler.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Pryor). Without objection, it is so ordered.

Here’s the Executive Calendar, post-12/24′s action, with the names of still-pending nominees (judiciary and non-judiciary) who have already been favorably reported out of committee, ready for floor action. Those nominees alone amount to 72 committee-approved nominees held over for the next session, by the Cardin/Reid UCAgreement. The oldest pending nomination on that calendar was reported out of committee in May, 2009.

See also this Washington Post compilation of presidential appointments and nominations, apparently exclusive of Judicial Branch nominees:

By Status

Announced (17)
Nominated (80) [A week ago WP still included Dawn Johnsen here]
Confirmed (293)
Appointed (40)
Open (125)
Withdrawn (12)
Resigned (1)

Spencer Ackerman, your headline is misleading because she is not NEAR to being appointed yet. In fact, I believe Obama has to renominate her and that has not even been done yet (only the pledge by a minor character in the Obama administration to do that). Agree with other posters that this headline is completely misleading.

Nor do I buy Ackerman’s “it’s structures not personalities” that matter. The same structure was there when Yoo was there so PERSONALITIES do indeed matter. When the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Gore election case in 2000, it had the same structure it has had for more than 200 years. BUT it had right-wing judges who decided to set aside 200 years of judicial precedents and get the federal government involved in a state level matter. That’s all about PERSONALITIES too. We’ve had other presidents in the same structure before but GEORGE W. BUSH, because of his personality and his viewpoints, pushed the executive branch where it has never gone before. That was due to HIS PERSONALITY and temperament, not to structures.

Good news
Good predictive headline
Good point that the appointment, possibly a very fine one, of Johnsen won’t cause the earth’s orbit to change.

Please change the headline. It celebrates victory before the race has been run. Progressives can no longer afford to reward possibilities, only promises fulfilled.

Who thinks Warren Buffett gives bonuses for forecasts and not for generating cash in hand? Who thinks anyone but Harry Reid rewards promises of Yes votes rather than those who put their name in the Yes column when the votes have been tallied.

Frankly, this title’s post is dumbfounding. Ms. Johnsen’s nomination remains an egg. Its nest may be getting warmer, but it’s a tad early to start carving the Sunday roast chicken when the egg hasn’t hatched.