regency over the United States, an unamused Kissinger responded that "we are facing a new version
of McCarthyism." A few days later Kissinger said of the Pike Committee: "I think they have usedclassified information in a reckless way, and the version of covert operations they have leaked to
the press has the cumulative effect of being totally untrue and damaging to the nation." [fn 22]
Thus, as Bush's confirmation vote approached, the Ford White House on the one hand and the Pike
and Churcput it at the time. One explanation of the leaking of the Pike report was offered by Otis Pike himselfh committees on the other were close to "open political warfare," as the Washington Post (^)
on February 11: "A copy was sent to the CIA. It would be to their advantage to leak it for
publication." By now Ford was raving about mobilizing the FBI to find out how the report had been
leaked.
On January 19, George Bush was present in the Executive Gallery of the House of Representatives,
seated close to the unfortunate Betty Ford, for the President's State of the Union Address. This was
a photo opportunity so that Ford's CIA candidate could get on television for a cameo appearance
that might boost his standing on the eve of confirmation. The invitation was handled by Jim Connor
of the White House staff, who duly received a hand-written note of thanks from the aspiring DCI.
Senate floor debate was underway on January 26, and Senator McIntyre lashed out at the Bush
nomination as "an insensitive affront to the American people." The New Hampshire Democrat
argued: "It is clearly evident that this collapse of confidence in the CIA was brought on not only by
the exposure of CIA misdeeds, but by the painful realization that some of those misdeeds wereencouraged by political leaders who sought not an intelligence advantage over a foreign adversary, (^)
but a political advantage over their domestic critics and the opposition party."
McIntyre went on: "And who can look at the history of political subordination of the CIA and
expect the people to give an agency director so clearly identified with politics their full faith andconfidence? To me it is a transparent absurdity that given the sensitivity of the issue, President Ford (^)
could not find another nominee of equal ability--and less suspect credentials--than the former
national chairman of the president's political party."
In further debate on the day of the vote, January 27, Sassailing Bush as "the wrong appointment for the wrong job at the wrong time." Churcenator Biden joined other Democrats inh also
continued his attack, branding Bush "an individual whose past record of political activism and
partisan ties to the president contradict the very purpose of impartiality and objectivity for which
the agency was created." Church appealed to the Senate to reject Bush, a man "too deeply
embroiled in partisan politics and too intertwined with the political destiny of the president himself"to be able to lead the CIA. Goldwater, Tower, Percy, Howard Baker, and Clifford Case all spoke up
for Bush. Bush's floor leader was Strom Thurmond, who supported Bush by attacking the Church
and Pike Committees. "That is where the public concern lies, on disclosures which are tearing down
the CIA," orated Thurmond, "not upon the selection of this highly competent man to repair the
damage of this over-exposure."
Finally it came to a roll call and Bush passed by a vote of 64-27, with Lowell Weicker of
Connecticut voting present. Those voting against Bush were: Abourezk, Biden, Bumpers, Church,
Clark, Cranston, Culver, Durkin, Ford, Gary Hart, Philip Hart, Haskell, Helms [the lone GOP
opponent], Huddleston, InouyeMondale, Morgan, Nelson, Proxmire, Stone, and Williams. Church's staff felt they had failed, Johnston, Kennedy, Leahy, Magnuson, McIntyre, Metcalf, (^)
lamentably, having gotten only liberal Democrats and the single Republican vote of Jesse Helms.
[fn 23.
It was the day after Bush's confirmation that the House Rules committee voted 9 to 7 to block the