John Bolton lied to Congress?

[Jobber of the Week 0]

EDIT: Damnit, meant to put a question mark at the end of that title. Mods?

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../w182142D96.DTL

 

State Dept. Now Says Bolton Interviewed

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer

 

John Bolton, President Bush's nominee for U.N. ambassador, neglected to tell Congress he had been interviewed in a government investigation into faulty prewar intelligence that Iraq was seeking nuclear materials in Africa, the State Department said.

 

Democratic senators said the admission should forestall Bush from using his authority to give Bolton a temporary appointment to the U.N. post, without Senate confirmation, when the Senate goes on vacation in August.

 

Bolton was interviewed by the State Department inspector general in 2003 as part of a joint investigation with the CIA into prewar Iraqi attempts to buy nuclear materials from Niger, State Department spokesman Noel Clay said Thursday.

 

His statement came hours after another State Department official said Bolton had correctly answered a Senate questionnaire when he wrote that he had not testified to a grand jury or been interviewed by investigators in any inquiry over the past five years.

 

Clay said Bolton "didn't recall being interviewed by the State Department's inspector general" when he filled out the form. "Therefore, his form, as submitted, was inaccurate," Clay said. "He will correct it."

 

Bolton, former undersecretary for arms control and international security, had no role in a separate criminal investigation into the leak of an undercover CIA officer's identity, Clay said.

 

The reversal followed persistent Democratic attempts, led by Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., to question Bolton's veracity just days before Bush could make Bolton's a recess appointment, meaning he could occupy the U.N. post until the end of next year when the current Congress ends.

 

"It seems unusual that Mr. Bolton would not remember his involvement in such a serious matter," said Biden, the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "In my mind, this raises more questions that need to be answered. I hope President Bush will not make the mistake of recess appointing Mr. Bolton."

 

Another Democrat, California Sen. Barbara Boxer, said a recess appointment would send "a horrible message" and called on Bush to withdraw the nomination.

 

For months, Democrats have prevented the Senate from confirming Bolton to the post, while demanding more information from the Bush administration on Bolton's tenure as the State Department's arms control chief. Some critics also have said Bolton is temperamentally unsuited to the diplomatic post.

 

Bush has said that Bolton would be ideally suited to lead an effort to overhaul the world body's bureaucracy and make it more accountable.

 

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other officials Thursday refused to rule out a recess appointment for Bolton. "What we can't be is without leadership at the United Nations," Rice said on the PBS'"NewsHour With Jim Lehrer" program.

 

The new information does not change the Bush administration's commitment to Bolton's nomination, said a senior State Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the political sensitivity of the subject.

 

While the State Department and criminal investigations are independent, they spring from the same source — intelligence that Iraq was trying to buy materials in Africa to produce nuclear weapons.

 

In the criminal probe, a federal grand jury is investigating who leaked the name of CIA officer Valerie Plame to the news media. Biden had earlier asked Rice about a report that Bolton was among State undersecretaries who "gave testimony" about a classified memo that has become an important piece of evidence in the leak investigation.

 

The rest of the article is just a timeline of the Plame thing. Gee, John, forgot you had anything to do with that whole ordeal, huh?

[Gary Floyd 0]

"How can we be in politics if we can't be friends?"

 

Ok, theres you're obligitory Michael Bolton joke.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Condy is very funny here. "We NEEEEEEED leadership at the UN (that we hate and don't support). Whhhhhy are you taking soooo long!"

 

This is sort of like all those callers on the talk shows: "Weeeee won the election!!! WHY aren't weeeee winning???" Quit crying.

 

Maybe the rest of the world would like to send somebody who is a diplomat! Rather than somebody who is just going to walk in with a report of the place the Bush Admin is dropping the next set of bombs. We could have somebody who negotiates with EVERYBODYS best interests in mind! Wowzers!

 

 

Is he a liar? Well look who he runs with. Jebus!

[NoCalMike 0]

I think it is pretty awful that Bush won't just let this one go, I mean there are people on both sides that don't want Bolton in this position. I even heard an audio clip yesterday of a Republican speaking before his peers, crying that(and no not crying as in complaining, but literally brought to tears), in his good concious he couldn't help send Bolton to the UN. This Bolton guy is obviously no good, either his flat out lying when he says he can't "recall" any of the events regarding testifying about faulty war intelligence, or he is legit so forgetful that he couldn't be trusted as a UN Negotiator in the first place.

[Gary Floyd 0]

I think it is pretty awful that Bush won't just let this one go, I mean there are people on both sides that don't want Bolton in this position.  I even heard an audio clip yesterday of a Republican speaking before his peers, crying that(and no not crying as in complaining, but literally brought to tears), in his good concious he couldn't help send Bolton to the UN.  This Bolton guy is obviously no good, either his flat out lying when he says he can't "recall" any of the events regarding testifying about faulty war intelligence, or he is legit so forgetful that he couldn't be trusted as a UN Negotiator in the first place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bush will never let this guy go. Does Karl Rove still have a job? Yes he does, and if he can still have a job, then Bolton is still going to keep his unfortunately.

[Guest Biggles]

Too busy sneering at a subordinate while stepping on the neck of another.

[Art Sandusky 0]

No, Rove's slip isn't comparable. This is much more important.

[Guest Biggles]

This is yesterdays news but I haven't seen it posted yet:

 

Bush appoints Bolton to U.N. post

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8758621/

 

WASHINGTON - President Bush sidestepped the Senate and installed embattled nominee John Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations on Monday, ending a five-month impasse with Democrats who accused Bolton of abusing subordinates and twisting intelligence to fit his conservative ideology.

 

“This post is too important to leave vacant any longer, especially during a war and a vital debate about UN reform,” Bush said. He said Bolton had his complete confidence.

 

Bush put Bolton on the job in a recess appointment — an avenue available to the president when the Congress is in recess. Under the Constitution, a recess appointment during the lawmakers’ August break would last until a newly elected Congress takes office in January 2007.

 

Bolton was to be sworn in later Monday and go immediately to U.N. headquarters in New York to begin work, said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.

 

Bolton joined Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice at the announcement ceremony and said he was honored and humbled by the president’s appointment. “It will be a distinct privilege to be an advocate for America’s values and interests at the U.N. and, in the words of the U.N. charter, to help maintain international peace and security,” he said.

 

Bush said that Bolton’s nomination had been supported by a majority of the Senate but that “because of partisan delaying tactics by a handful of senators, John was unfairly denied the up-or-down vote that he deserves.”

 

Bush had refused to give up on Bolton even though the Senate had voted twice to sustain a filibuster against his nominee. Democrats and some Republicans had raised questions about Bolton’s fitness for the job, particularly in view of his harsh criticism of the United Nations.

 

U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan welcomed Bolton’s appointment and steered clear of the controversy over whether Bolton would be weakened by the recess appointment. “We look forward to working with him as I do with the other 190 ambassadors, and we will welcome him at a time when we are in the midst of major reform,” Annan said. He said the manner of Bolton’s appointment was Bush’s prerogative.

 

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said Bolton was a “seriously flawed and weakened candidate.” He charged that Bush “chose to stonewall the Senate” by using a recess appointment.

 

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said, “The president did the right thing by sending Mr. Bolton to the U. N. He is a smart, principled and straightforward candidate, and will represent the president and America well on the world stage.”

 

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., sharply criticized the move.

 

“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,” Kennedy said.”

 

Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, a senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said, “The president has done a real disservice to our nation by appointing an individual who lacks to the credibility to further U.S. interests at the United Nations.”

 

Republican Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio also said he was disappointed.

 

“I am truly concerned that a recess appointment will only add to John Bolton’s baggage and his lack of credibility with the United Nations,” Voinovich said.

 

Bolton’s appointment ends a five-month impasse between the administration and Senate Democrats.

 

The battle grabbed headlines last spring amid accusations that Bolton abused subordinates and twisted intelligence to shape his conservative ideology, and as White House and GOP leadership efforts to ram the nomination through the Senate fell short.

 

In recent weeks, it faded into the background as the Senate prepared to begin a nomination battle over John Roberts, the federal appeals judge that Bush chose to replace the retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor at the Supreme Court.

 

At Bolton’s April confirmation hearing, Democrats raised additional questions about his demeanor and attitude toward lower-level government officials. Those questions came to dominate Bolton’s confirmation battle, growing into numerous allegations that he had abused underlings or tried to browbeat intelligence analysts whose views differed from his own.

 

Despite lengthy investigations, it was never clear that Bolton did anything improper. Witnesses told the committee that Bolton lost his temper, tried to engineer the ouster of at least two intelligence analysts and otherwise threw his weight around. But Democrats were never able to establish that his actions crossed the line to out-and-out harassment or improper intimidation.

 

A separate deadlock

Separately, Democrats and the White House deadlocked over Bolton’s acknowledged request for names of U.S officials whose communications were secretly picked up by the National Security Agency. Democrats said the material might show that Bolton conducted a witch hunt for analysts or others who disagreed with him.

 

The top Republican and Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee received a limited briefing on the contents of the messages Bolton saw, but were not told the names.

 

Democrats said that was not good enough, but later offered a compromise. After much back and forth, with the White House claiming Democrats had moved the goal posts, no other senator saw any of the material.

 

Last week, the administration telegraphed Bush’s intention to put Bolton on the job.

 

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the vacancy needed to be filled before the U.N. General Assembly’s annual meeting in mid-September. Former Sen. John Danforth left the post in January.

 

In a letter released Friday, 35 Democratic senators and one independent, Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont, urged Bush not to give Bolton a recess appointment.

 

“There’s just too much unanswered about Bolton, and I think the president would make a truly serious mistake if he makes a recess appointment,” Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said in an interview.

 

I believe the term "cowboy diplomacy" works for this on so many levels...