>>>
following breaking news. will republicans follow through on a threat to hold up the
brennan
nomination to be the new
cia director
? in the next
30 minutes
they're expected to vote on the
brennan
nomination but senators
john mccain
and
lindsay graham
are vowing to, quote, stop the nomination in the full senate unless they receive more information from the
white house
on the attacks in mbenbenghazi.
>>
john and i are
hell bent
on making sure the
american people
understand this debacle called
benghazi
.
>>
i have had questions, written questions for mr.
brennan
for nearly three weeks now. we have not received a single answer. i think we deserve an answer and i have some questions about torture.
>>
i'm not going to vote on a new
cia director
until i find out what the cia did in
benghazi
.
>>
joining me now, democratic strategist
chris
kofonis and
carrie brown
. part of the laundry list that they say have been unanswered is they want to know why on the anniversary of the worst
terrorist attack
in
american history
, that is quote from their letter, after multiple attacks on the u.s. and western interests in libya and rising insecurity in countries across the
middle east
,
u.s. military
units and assets in the region were not ready to respond in a timely fashion. that's one on a long list from the senators here of questions they say they have not had answered and here we are again with a nomination that could be delayed even further.
>>
yeah. it is not clear whether what the
administration
provided on
benghazi
is enough for these senators to stand down and say -- and pull back from what you showed graham saying he's
hell bent
on answers or else he won't move forward with a confirmation. it is unclear yet whether it's enough. certainly on the drone memos, it would seem to be enough to get the democrats who have said that they wanted to see those memos. we still haven't heard for sure but this is clearly an attempt by the
administration
to push along
brennan
's confirmation.
>>
chris
, you know, it's interesting.
carrie
said is it enough? that question after the
chuck hagel
situation where it turns in to a loss for republicans, because after all the time spent that could have perhaps been focused on other issues, the nomination went through, when is it ever going to be enough with
benghazi
for these three senators?
>>
i don't think it's ever going to be enough. the part i would say that's perplexing is so senator kerry when he was confirmed as secretary of state did not face these kind of questions.
>>
exactly.
>>
when he was going to be secretary of state. they hit, you know,
senator hagel
very hard on
benghazi
and then they confirmed him and now it's -- you know,
john brennan
's turn. now it's kind of a --
>>
you cannot forget then secretary of state
hillary clinton
as well testified. there's been a laundry
list of people
and i think fairly put, there have been and are legitimate questions here but this ongoing threat of holding up nominations for individuals, people thought
brennan
would take heat on
enhanced interrogation
tech nears, ie torture according to some opposed to what happened in libya. something he had nothing to do with as well as
chuck hagel
.
>>
yeah. listen. i think it's fine to advise and consent. that's the senate's role.
>>
right.
>>
but for
senator mccain
and the others, it's become more about irritate and obstruct and some point it becomes a dangerous situation when you have a serious number of threats the country's facing, whether it's the growing threat of
al qaeda
in africa, you know, instability in the
middle east
, iran. and so, the question becomes when is enough enough? it doesn't seem to be anything for the
administration
to say to pacify them.
>>
speaking of the
administration
,
carrie
, let's play what
jay carney
said on this issue just within the past hour.
>>
we have been enormously cooperative with congress on the issue of
benghazi
. hours and hours of testimony including the secretary of state, tens of thousands of pages of documents, i believe. numerous hearings and working with members on their concerns as, you know, with regards to these nominations. but again, our nominees ought to be considered on qualifications.
>>
carrie
, if it's effective strategy to threaten to hold up
brennan
here, how do the republicans allow it to pay off? what i'm saying is, again, back to
chuck hagel
, after the wrangling and the drama, he ends up confirmed. does the
brennan
situation end in the same way?
>>
i think that's the -- that's seeming to be what most people acknowledge on the hill, among republicans. that, you know,
john brennan
on the merits he seems to be, you know, on his way to confirmation. just a matter of when. and what republicans are able to get out of the
administration
before then. i mean, this is something that the hill often does. hold up nominations. put holds on judges and others trying to get the
administration
--
>>
but we saw with hagel was extraordinary, unprecedented. while we see the delays not to this degree, radiosfigt.
>>
well, no. you're exactly right. this is to a new level and something that democrats i think when the shoe's on the other foot, a republican president, this is setting a precedent to see democrats doing the same thing for a republican, to a republican president and his nominees and that's i think what folks are sort of warning about that the precedent has set is one that, you know, in the long term could be pretty damaging to the institution.
>>
carrie
, it is the same senators, mccain, graham and ayotte and senator cruz may also delve in this. i think a 39% approval rating in the state which is good for him at this point or decent for him.
>>
i mean, exactly. this, again, this is something that, you know,
members of congress
do. again, like you said, doing it on a nominee is something more unusual but, you know, in the view of
lindsay graham
and
john mccain
, they have serious questions, struggled to get information out of the
administration
to the extent they want it. of course, like
chris
says, that
goal post
may be moved several times but in their view they're exercising their right as
members of congress
.
>>
speaking of exercising rights, i want to read
dianne feinstein
's latest statement on the drone program and the questions that she and others have regarding that. she said i've reached an agreement with the
white house
to provide the committee access to all
justice department
office of legal counsel
opinions related to the targeted killings of americans in a way that allows members to fulfill their overnight responsibilities so at least senator feinstein,
chris
, says regarding the drone program and some of these documents she is satisfied at this point but questions linger on. if you're a betting man and looking back, i'm sure you're expecting
brennan
to get more questions on enhanced interrogations in the bush years and his role maybe than
benghazi
.
>>
well, you know, listen. it's fine i think for senators to have questions that they want answered. especially when you're talking about a security position and been involved in an array of, you know, serious issues and challenges that have faced the country so i think that's fine. where it becomes problematic is
senator mccain
and senator graham which is a litany of unanswered questions and no matter the answers or information provided it doesn't matter. there's not enough.
>>
and no matter who answers the question.
>>
right.
>>
this hasn't stopped at one person's door.
>>
right. and i think the question then becomes, what is the real
end game
here? i don't think this is about holding up
brennan
. the
end of the day
he will be confirmed, a week or two weeks or whatever it might be. this really is i think a
shot across the bow
in terms of president and how he conducts the
foreign policy
. i think that's the troubling part about it. i think
senator mccain
hasn't come to terms with the fact he's not the president and the president as commander and chief has the role and responsibility and power to decide what the
foreign policy
is for the country. and
senator mccain
clearly has a different vision of this so this is the game they're playing. this is trying to box, you know, the president in. i just don't think it's a smart strategy and something to win over a lot of support amongst people.
>>
thank you. great pleasure having you both on.
Source: http://video.msnbc.msn.com/newsnation/51054511/
full moon aubrey o day masters live johan santana viktor bout ncaa hockey role models
