Meaning: This quote comes from a statement made by Mark Shields, a well-known journalist and political commentator. Shields made this comment in reference to John Bolton, who was nominated by President George W. Bush to be the United States Ambassador to the United Nations. The quote reflects Shields' reaction to the testimonies and discussions that took place during Bolton's confirmation hearings before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2005.

At the time of his nomination, John Bolton was a controversial figure due to his strong views on foreign policy and his outspoken criticism of the United Nations. His nomination faced opposition from some senators who raised concerns about his temperament and management style, as well as his past statements and actions.

During the confirmation hearings, there were heated debates and testimonies regarding Bolton's qualifications and suitability for the role. Mark Shields' statement captures a moment of support for Bolton from his principal advocate on the committee, who emphasized that there was no evidence of him breaking any laws. Shields' use of the term "principal supporter" suggests that this endorsement came from a key figure or influential member of the committee, adding weight to the statement.

The quote can be interpreted as a moment of relief or reassurance for Bolton, as it highlights a positive assessment of his conduct in relation to legal standards. In the context of a contentious confirmation process, Shields' words could be seen as an attempt to emphasize a favorable perspective on Bolton's performance and qualifications for the role of Ambassador to the United Nations.

Mark Shields' comment also reflects the dynamics of political hearings and the role of public statements in shaping perceptions of nominees and their suitability for high-level positions. By highlighting the absence of evidence of legal wrongdoing, the quote suggests an effort to counter criticisms and doubts about Bolton's candidacy.

In the broader context of political appointments and public scrutiny, the quote raises questions about the criteria for evaluating nominees and the weight given to legal considerations in confirmation processes. It also underscores the significance of public endorsements and statements of support in shaping the narrative around controversial nominations.

As a journalist with a keen understanding of political dynamics, Mark Shields' comment serves as a reminder of the complexities and nuances involved in high-stakes political appointments. It captures a specific moment in the confirmation hearings and encapsulates the tension and debates surrounding Bolton's nomination.

In conclusion, Mark Shields' quote provides a glimpse into the charged atmosphere of John Bolton's confirmation hearings and the efforts to defend his candidacy. It reflects the intricacies of political scrutiny and the role of public statements in shaping perceptions of nominees. The quote also raises broader questions about the criteria for evaluating nominees and the dynamics of confirmation processes in the political arena.