Bolton and the Plame Affair

[whometense]

There's been some confusion over the past few days as to whether or not Bolton testified before the Plame grand jury. There's also been confusion as to when that would have happened.

If he testified before the grand jury before his hearings with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, then he has a big problem, since he didn't happen to mention that appearance on the questionnaire he filled out for the committee. (Karen Hughes did mention her testimony.)

Steve Clemons writes:

John Bolton and the Valerie Plame Grand Jury: MSNBC STANDS FIRM ON STORY

MSNBC reports to TWN that its source on Bolton being interviewed by the Valerie Plame Wilson grand jury "is unimpeachable."

MSNBC is standing "firmly" by its story -- and is shirking off the fact that other networks and major news organizations have been unable to confirm what MSNBC feels is a solid fact.

CNN has not yet responded to TWN on the White House source who allegedly stated that the Bolton report "was erroneous."

There are now rumblings, given what has been reported in the media, that various Senators may request the State Department to clarify whether or not Mr. Bolton met with the grand jury and/or its investigators. If he did so, they may ask when this took place.

This disclosure is a requirement of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which while Bolton's nomination has passed through the Committee without support, is still tasked with maintaing "the record" on John Bolton so as to inform the whole Senate.

More later.

-- Steve Clemons

[whometense]

1. brief update

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000803.html

Efforts are underway to resolve "officially" whether John Bolton met with the Valerie Plame grand jury or its investigators. If he did before submitting his declaration statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, his recess appointment will not occur. If he simply failed to amend his declaration but did meet with the Committee, there is still a chance he could squeak by during recess.

[TayTay]

2. Thanks for this

I hope he did meet with them and won't get the appointment.

[whometense]

3. I hope so too -

have my fingers crossed.

[rox63]

4. Geez, how difficult can it be to confirm this?

It should be a matter of record SOMEWHERE.

[whometense]

5. new update

Lots of new stuff now on Steve Clemons' site, this one of particular interest as he tries to chase down the truth of the latest Bolton flap:

John Bolton and the State Department Inspector General: SMOKING GUN?

There is an ongoing skirmish about whether John Bolton did or did not testify before or meet with investigators from the Valerie Plame case grand jury. It seems to me that the White House and State Department should simply state what the facts are for the record since that disclosure is required by the Senate for all diplomatic nominees.

If Karen Hughes can answer the question -- why can't Bolton? If the answer is NO, then say it.

However, whether or NOT John Bolton met with the Valerie Plame grand jury operation and thus potentially may have made an "untruthful statement" to the Senate in his disclosure statement, there is "another case..."

<snip>

...At minimum, a dozen red flags.

[TayTay]

6. Bolton the Bastard, just cut the guy loose

Honestly, I have never seen a nominee twist so slowly in the wind for so long. (not that I'm not enjoying this, but come on.)

Really, does anyone in the White House really believe this guy can get anything done at all at the UN? It just boggles the mind that the WH hasn't pulled this nomination back.

[rox63]

7. Another update, more evidence Bolton lied on nomination form

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000810.html

How many Inspector General investigations were there?

-snip-

State Department IG investigations involving Bolton. Here is the SFRC question to which Bolton replied, "No":

Interviews -- Have you been interviewed or asked to supply any information in connection with any administrative (including an inspector general), Congressional or grand jury investigation within the past 5 years, except routine Congressional testimony? If so, provide details.

That's a very broad query. While questions have swirled as to whether Bolton testified or was interviewed in the Valerie Plame investigation, Steve pointed out that Bolton was most likely either interviewed, or had to provide information to the State Department Inspector General over the development of a State Dept. fact sheet which included the bogus Niger uranium claim. That led me to remember a second IG investigation involving Bolton's office.

A May article in The Hill reported on an Inspector General investigation even more closely centered on Bolton's office:

State Department officials have shared with Senate Democrats the findings of a sensitive State Department inspector general's report that could further undermine the nomination of John Bolton to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

The inspector general's report, which is considered sensitive but not classified, is critical of the expansion of a State Department bureau's role in assessing intelligence under Bolton during his service as the undersecretary of arms control and international security, according to sources who have read the report.

In this little bit of failed intrigue, Bolton was trying to end his dependence on State's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, the analytic agency that was getting its intelligence calls right during the run-up to war. The independence of the INR was problematic for Bolton, "lost confidence" and all that, as we saw in his treatment of its employees. Thus, Bolton wanted to turn one of his arms control shops into a stand-alone analysis agency that would feed him what he wanted to hear (see more).

But what is relevant to this new thread of controversy is that it indicates that Bolton faced a second IG inquiry that he would have had to disclose on his nomination form. (Who wants to bet there's a third lurking around somewhere?) Thus, this makes any omission not just a single hapless oversight.

-snip--

[rox63]

8. Now confirmed - Bolton lied

State Dept. Now Says Bolton Interviewed

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer

John Bolton, President Bush's nominee for U.N. ambassador, mistakenly told Congress he had not been interviewed or testified in any investigation over the past five years, the State Department said Thursday.

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

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

More here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cia_leak_bolton

[whometense]

9. Fantastic!!!!

So I wonder if this now means he's recess-appointment poison?? Everyone was expecting that to happen tomorrow afternoon.

Unbelievable:

WASHINGTON - John Bolton,
President Bush's nominee for U.N. ambassador, mistakenly told Congress he had not been interviewed or testified in any investigation over the past five years, the State Department said Thursday.

Mistakenly??? Give me a friggin' break...

[ginnyinWI]

11. mistakenly told Congress something this important?

If he could "forget" or "misspeak" about something this big,he definitely doesn't have enough brain cells to go to the U.N.! Of course intelligence isn't a requirement with this WH.

[whometense]

12. What's lying to

congress? That's practically a prerequisite for a job with this administration. :mad:

[kerrygoddess]

14. "new info does not change the Bush administration’s commitment to Bolton"

“It seems unusual that Mr. Bolton would not remember his involvement in such a serious matter,” said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., 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.”

The Bush administration is not however, FLIP-FLOPPING on a recess appointment for Bolton:

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.

MORE & LINKS - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=94

[whometense]

10. Steve Clemons has it too:

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000825.html

State Department Admits that Bolton's Disclosure Was Inaccurate

Hot off the wires; Biden gets results:

John Bolton, the nominee for U.N. ambassador, inaccurately told Congress he had not been interviewed or testified in any investigation over the past five years, the State Department said Thursday, responding to a Democratic critic.

Bolton was interviewed by the State Department inspector general as part of a joint investigation with the Central Intelligence Agency related to Iraqi attempts to buy nuclear materials from Niger, State Department spokesman Noel Clay said.

When Bolton filled out a Senate questionnaire in connection with his nomination, "he didn't recall being interviewed by the State Department's inspector general. Therefore, his form, as submitted, was inaccurate," Clay said. "He will correct it."

The response came after Sen. Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record), D-Del., wrote to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asserting Bolton had been interviewed and suggesting he had not been truthful in his questionnaire.

"He didn't recall." Five months of scrutiny -- including loud public questions about his involvement in the Niger-uranium case -- maybe it's just me, but that would have jogged my memory. Perhaps Bolton blacked out in an angry tirade and bumped his head?

-- Dave Meyer

Update, 9:41 pm EST: The AP story linked above has been updated. It now includes an anonymous State Department official stating that the administration doesn't care about Bolton's selective memory:

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.

[ginnyinWI]

13. Talking Points Memo has some choice comments:

"It's amazing how the mind works.

Of all the things for John Bolton to forget about, he forgets that he was interviewed for the Joint State-CIA IG Report on the Niger forgeries.

Here's a question, though. My impression is that you don't just fill these confirmation disclosure forms out one evening in the den over a cup of tea..."

more:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2005_07_24.php#006183


love his style!

[Island Blue]

15. It's a wonder

that any of these people that Shrub surrounds himself with even remember to put their pants on in the morning. I've never seen a more "forgetful" group of folks in my life! And do they really think that no one will find out about their lies - I mean forgetfulness? I am so proud of the Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. They knew there was something rotten with this clown all along, and they've just taken their time to methodically prove it!

[rox63]

16. It must run in the family

Poppy Bush forgot everything about Iran-Contra back in the day...