Is it at all possible that maybe, just possibly,... John Bolten

[Norquist Nemesis]

is the leaker of Valerie Plame's name to Novak?

There is a definite rush to get him in as Ambassador. The investigation has been proceeding, and we haven't heard much of anything lately on that.

Given the letters that have been coming in regarding his ability or "style", but moreso his penchant to take vengeance ...well, as an ambassador, could he receive "diplomatic immunity"?

It sounds silly, but with the way this administration twists the law...it that part of what this nomination is about?

[stopbush]

1. I don't think so. He's this month's Bernard Kerik -

a hardline ideologue that * has nominated simply to rub LW noses the wrong way. It's not at all about his qualifications or lack thereof. It's not about his abusive past. These things were all well known about the guy before the nomination was sent up. It's all about * saying "I'm nominating an unqualified asshole. Rs better fall in line and support me...and we'll make the Ds look like wimps in the process."

[Norquist Nemesis]

4. But did Kerik spread lies and break laws to get things done?

Or do things that were not common practice? (For instance, Bolten asked for the names of the American at least 10 times regarding intercepts. Biden asked if this was a standard practice, and asked why Bolten would be asking for it.)

You may be right on the mark. I just have one of those "feelings" in my gut about this. They are rare when I get them, but they're often correct.

[tex-wyo-dem]

2. Not out of the realm of possibility...

and would fit his modus operandi.

Great question, though...might further investigation into this worms past reveal such evidence?

[Norquist Nemesis]

6. Note the 10 intercepts asking for the American's identity. n/t

[seemslikeadream]

3. What about those intercepts that Biden was talking about

10 times he said Bolton tried to get names, Biden said State Dept. hasn't given them the info he wanted yet.

and there's this

Is Rice Obstructing the Bolton Investigation

cal04 (1000+ posts) Wed Apr-20-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message

20. Is Rice Obstructing the Bolton Investigation

A very serious allegation buried in a story in today’s Washington Post:

On Monday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told her senior staff she was disappointed about the stream of allegations and said

she did not want any information coming out of the department that could adversely affect the nomination,

said officials speaking on the condition of anonymity.

The committee released 25 pages of responses yesterday to follow-up questions Bolton had been asked concerning allegations he was abusive to other officials in and out of the State Department, overreached on policy issues and mishandled intelligence. In several instances, Bolton did not directly respond to the questions or left them unaddressed.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1408584#1408717


Panel Delays Vote on Bolton Nomination to U.N.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1691-2005Apr19.html

[Norquist Nemesis]

5. That's what's starting to connect the dots for me

He was all for going in to Iraq at any and all costs. Given what we are learning about him, it seems in line with his character to do something like that and start pushing it up the stovepipe. It also keeps the high level WH staff's hands clean. Now, he can be rewarded AND get immunity.

[seemslikeadream]

7. and then there's this

Newsweek: 'He Was Very Angry’

By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek

Updated: 7:25 p.m. ET April 20, 2005April 20 - President George W. Bush’s former ambassador to South Korea has contacted the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to report two confrontations he had with United Nations Ambassador-designate John Bolton, NEWSWEEK has learned. And Senate investigators are raising more questions about

how Bolton and his staff handled sensitive intelligence matters while serving as under-secretary of state for arms control and international security.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7577473/site/newsweek/

[seemslikeadream]

9. Bolton is a member of PNAC

December 2000
In a highly contentious Presidential vote battle on the home turf of PNAC member Jeb Bush, the Supreme Court decided that George Bush was the new President.

Bush now had the green light to seamlessly merge members of the PNAC into his Administration with no one the wiser. PNAC members elevated to the Bush hierarchy include, among others:

Donald Rumsfeld - Secretary of Defense
Paul Wolfowitz - Deputy Secretary of Defense
Elliott Abrams - Member of the National Security Council
John Bolton - Undersecretary for Arms Control and International Security
Richard Perle - Chairman of the advisory Defense Policy Board
Richard Armitage - Deputy Secretary of State
John Bolton - Undersecretary of State for Disarmament
Zalmay Khalilzad - White House liaison to the Iraqi opposition
http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/PNAC_101

[PKG]

13. And how does that mean anything?

PNAC has nearly every member of the administration. That's entirely unsurprising. They're *the* neoconservative think tank. Let's look at this rationally.

1. Neocons exist.
2. PNAC is a think tank hiring neocons.
3. Therefore neocons go to PNAC.
4. This administration has a neoconservative foreign policy.
5. Therefore PNAC is a good place to find appointments.

[never cry wolf]

29. Not only that, the 16 word sentence...

I thought I read somewhere that Bolton was the one that insisted that the SOTU speech keep the yellowcake lie in it, the very same lie Joe Wilson debunked. Maybe he was told to go clean up his own mess...

On edit: 16 words, not 13.

[Norquist Nemesis]

30. Can you find a link to that read? That would be closer to

a connection.

[seemslikeadream]

31. HERE - Bolton Pushed Niger Yellowcake Story

March 14, 2005
JOHN BOLTON PUSHED NIGER-URANIUM FIASCO AT STATE -- Then Tried to Hide his Tracks and Staff Lied to Congress

I just received this March 1, 2005 letter written by House Government Reform Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman to Representative Christopher Shays who chairs the Government Reform Committee's Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Security.

Waxman is basically blowing the whistle on the administration's extravagant use of "sensitive but unclassified" designations on official acts to block public access to and transparency of government policymaking.

On pages 5-7, Waxman reveals that John Bolton promulgated the Niger-Uranium fiction at the State Department despite rejection of this claim by State Department and CIA intelligence analysts.

Waxman then argues that not only did Bolton and his people then try and conceal Bolton's role in pushing the Niger-Uranium agenda by marking the material "sensitive but unclassified" and blocking it in case of a Freedom of Information Act request, the State Department actually LIED TO CONGRESS about John Bolton's role.

I think Senator Hagel might want to reconsider his support for the Bolton nomination now. . .

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000370.html

Waxman letter

Concealment of a State Department Official's Role in the Niger Uranium Claim

In April 2004, the State Department used the designation "sensitive but unclassified" to conceal unclassified information about the role of John Bolton, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control, in the creation of a fact sheet distributed to the United Nations that falsely claimed Iraq had sought uranium from Niger.

On December 19, 2002, the State Department issued a fact sheet entitled "Illustrative Examples of Omissions from the Iraqi Declaration to the United Nations Security Council." (9) The fact sheet listed eight key areas in which the Bush Administration found fault with Iraq's weapons declaration to the United Nations on December 7, 2002. Under the heading "Nuclear Weapons," the fact sheet stated:

The Declaration ignores efforts to procure uranium from Niger.
Why is the Iraqi regime hiding their uranium procurement?

It was later discovered that this claim was based on fabricated documents. (10) In addition, both State Department intelligence officials and CIA officials reported that they had rejected the claim as unreliable. (11) As a result, it was unclear who within the State Department was involved in preparing the fact sheet.

On July 21, 2003, I wrote to Secretary of State Colin Powell, asking for an explanation of the role of John Bolton, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs, in creating the document. (12) On September 25, 2003, the State Department responded with a definitive denial: "Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs, John R. Bolton, did not play a role in the creation of this document." (13)

Subsequently, however, I joined six other members of the Government Reform Committee in requesting from the State Department Inspector General a copy of an unclassified "chronology" on how the fact sheet was developed. (14) This chronology described a meeting on December 18, 2002, between Secretary Powell, Mr. Bolton, and Richard Boucher, the Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Public Affairs. According to this chronology, Mr. Boucher specifically asked Mr. Bolton "for help developing a response to Iraq's Dec 7 Declaration to the United Nations Security Council that could be used with the press. According to the chronology, which is phrased in the present tense, Mr. Bolton "agrees and tasks the Bureau of Nonproliferation," a subordinate office that reports directly to Mr. Bolton, to conduct the work.

This unclassified chronology also stated that on the next day, December 19, 2003, the Bureau of Nonproliferation "sends email with the fact sheet, 'Fact Sheet Iraq Declaration.doc.'" to Mr. Bolton's office (emphasis in original). A second e-mail was sent a few minutes later, and a third e-mail was sent about an hour after that. According to the chronology, each version "still includes Niger reference." Although Mr. Bolton may not have personally drafted the document, the chronology appears to indicate that

he ordered its creation and received updates on its development.

The Inspector General's chronology was marked "sensitive but unclassified." In addition, the letter transmitting the chronology stated that it "contains sensitive information, which may be protected from public release under the Freedom of Information Act" and requested that no "public release of this information" be made. (15) In fact, however, the chronology consisted of nothing more than a factual recitation of information on meetings, e-mails, and documents.

This is not a constructive reformer out to promote American interests in a dignified manner in the world's most significant multilateral institution.

There are many administration jobs that John Bolton may be completely appropriate for -- but the one that he has been nominated for is not on that list.

[seemslikeadream]

33. Also - State's Bolton Says Iran "Dead Set" on Building Nuclear Weapons

State's Bolton Says Iran "Dead Set" on Building Nuclear Weapons

Iran is continuing to pursue the production and possession of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, despite being a signatory to international treaties banning them, said Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton.

In his prepared testimony before the House International Relations Committee June 24, Bolton said, "We cannot let Iran, a leading sponsor of international terrorism, acquire the most destructive weapons and the means to deliver them to Europe, most of central Asia and the Middle East, or beyond."

The under secretary presented evidence such as U.S. intelligence findings in the biannual "721 Report to Congress on the Acquisition of Technologies Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advance Chemical Munitions," reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and statements by Iranian officials in order to back up his statements to the committee.

The under secretary described in detail the basis for the Bush administration's strong belief that Iran has a clandestine program to produce nuclear weapons, despite being a signatory to the Nonproliferation Treaty.
http://tokyo.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20040630-04.html

[never cry wolf]

32. Here ya go....

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000378.html

snip---

March 15, 2005
Christian Bourge Queries Hagel; Bolton Facing Tough Hearing

Check out this well-done UPI piece that queries Senator Chuck Hagel about the "Waxman Brief" on John Bolton.

Senator Hagel's public comments supporting Bolton's nomination occurred before broad public awareness of the contents of a letter by Rep. Henry Waxman to Rep. Christopher Shays. In this letter, Waxman alleges Bolton played in promulgating the Niger-Uranium story in State Department reports, despite rejection of that evidence by CIA and State Department intelligence analysts.

Waxman then argues that Bolton's people tried to conceal Bolton's role and that State Department staff lied to Congress regarding Bolton's involvement.

unsnip------

However, the following article says that it was Bolton's to be successor. I found numerous references to Bolton's being the instigator of using the Nigergate lie and maybe this Robert Joseph was the speech writer.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/01/11/despite_false_claim_his_star_rises_former_bush_aide_eyed_for_state_job?mode=PF

snip-----

Despite false claim, his star rises
Former Bush aide eyed for State job

By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | January 11, 2005

WASHINGTON -- The man who insisted that President Bush make the claim that Saddam Hussein was seeking uranium for nuclear weapons in Africa is poised to assume a top State Department job that would make him the lead US arms negotiator with Iran and North Korea, according to administration officials.

Robert G. Joseph, a special assistant for national security to President Bush until a few months ago, is on the short list to become undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, the nation's senior diplomat in charge of negotiating arms control treaties, said the officials, who spoke on the condition they not be named.

snip----

Rice and Joseph are allies of the policy makers at the Pentagon most responsible for Bush's Iraq policies and his refusal to negotiate directly with Iran or North Korea. Robert Zoellick, the US trade representative named last week to replace Armitage as deputy secretary of state, is considered a moderate of the Powell and Armitage stripe, as is NATO Ambassador Nicholas Burns, set to be the undersecretary for political affairs.

But with Rice replacing Powell and Joseph replacing John Bolton, the lone State Department hard-liner in the first term who was allied with the administration's neoconservatives and was often at odds with Powell and Armitage, the overall team at State will nonetheless lean more heavily toward the neoconservative agenda, the observers said.

"It doesn't bode well for future negotiations of threat-reduction agreements," said Cirincione. "Bolton and Joseph are dedicated to tearing down the arms control treaties, not building new ones."

unsnip-------------

I found other references to Bolton being responsible for the 16 words in the SOTU speech, but they were bloggers... He obviously had a hand in it one way or another.

[elehhhhna]

34. Retroactive immunity for treason? How does that happen?

[never_get_over_it]

8. When Biden was talking about these intercepts the other day

my FIRST thought was VALERIE PLAME!!!! I think it is highly possible.

[KharmaTrain]

10. Anyone Seen Scooter Libby Lately?

Bolten stovedpiped a bunch of the WMD lies around before the Plame situation and i'll bet if we traced the intimidation of the UN in the days in surrounding that last UN vote to press for inspections and Powell's major liefest (when there were reports UN diplomats had their phones tapped), I'll bet we could find Bolten's fingerprints all over that charade.

Libby and Hadley's names were out there for quite a while when the Plame story broke, but I haven't seen their names dragged into it for quite some time.

The Novakula-Bolten connection is surely a plausible one, but I think it was used for other purposes.

I honestly think this regime thought it could ram Bolten through...more "in your face" to Democrats and to show the moderates in the Repugnican party they better keep in line. Voinovich pooped in their cornflakes or this confirmation would have cruised through. Now, thanks to the hard work by Democrat Senators, the moderates are wanting a second look. Let's see what we shall see. Cautious optimism doesn't hurt these days.

[PKG]

11. Do we have absolutely any evidence for this at all?

Or is this on par with saying, "I bet Kerry found out about her and leaked her so that he could complain about it in the election?"

[Norquist Nemesis]

15. Fore!!!

Hell no "we" don't have evidence of it. However, one of the rules of investigation is to have a theory which evidence is sought to either prove or disprove. I just asked the question and stated why. Dismiss it as loony if you want; it's no skin off my nose. :shrug:

BTW, cute pic of Kerry with Nixon.

[PKG]

16. But too often conspiracies start like this.

A question is asked and circumstantial evidence presented. Soon more and more circumstantial evidence is added, with innuendo, allegations, and loaded questions thrown on the pile. But at some point, if you can't find any facts, it should be dismissed. Unfortunately, people have already bought into it too deeply by that point to ever dismiss. It's usually a good idea when people start to shift from "Is it possible he..." to "I bet he..." to ask if there's ever any facts involved. Take MIHOP, for example. We're three and a half years into the theory, and still there are no facts, but only constant choruses of, "there are questions!" Questions don't imply an answer.

See: Gannongate, Bush Picked the Pope, Bush Ordered 9/11, Anything Involving Clinton Murdering People, and Anything Involving UFOs,

Oh, and it's an Elvis pic, actually.

[seemslikeadream]

17. AT SOME POINT!

Good God we've been on this for all of one hour now, give it up I tell you give it up, nothing to see here, nothing at all!

Are we not lap dogs?
Coleman Martinez Thune...................:sarcasm:

[PKG]

18. And I was just asking if there was any one piece of evidence that

would make one thing Bolton actually did this, or if it was still just as likely that Kerry did it as Bolton?

[annabanana]

19. "conspiracies start like this"....

Actually, conspiracies happen. It's the uncovering of conspiracies that starts like this.....

[PKG]

21. Ah. Well, you go off and uncover the

Clinton murders and Bush Papal Appointments while you're at it. :eyes:

[annabanana]

22. excellent... you maintain that there's no such thing

as conspiracies...

[PKG]

25. No, I maintain that nearly every conspiracy of the week

on the Internet, liberal or conservative, is stupid.

[seemslikeadream]

26. So has DU become a crusade for you?

To save us all from ourselves, thanks for playing!

[seemslikeadream]

23. BUSH PAPAL APPOINTMENTS!!! NEIL BUSH THAT IS!

NEWSDAY, Thursday, April 21, 2005

THE NEW POPE BENEDICT XVI
Neil Bush, Ratzinger co-founders
President's younger brother served with then-cardinal on board of relatively unknown ecumenical foundation

BY KNUT ROYCE AND TOM BRUNE
WASHINGTON BUREAU

April 21, 2005

WASHINGTON -- Neil Bush, the president's controversial younger brother, six years ago joined the cardinal who this week became Pope Benedict XVI as a founding board member of a little known Swiss ecumenical foundation. The charter members of the board were all well-known international religious figures, except for Bush and his close friend and business partner, Jamal Daniel, whose family has extensive holdings in the United States and Switzerland, public records show.

(snip)

Gary Vachicouras, a theologian and foundation official in Geneva, would not explain in a telephone interview yesterday why Bush, who has no clear public connection to religious causes, was on the first board.

(snip)

The foundation, based at the Orthodox Center of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Geneva, is listed by Dun & Bradstreet business credit reports as a management trust for purposes other than education, religion, charity or research. But Vachicouras said the designation must be a mistake of translation to English because the foundation is a private nonprofit established under Swiss law. He said the foundation is being "relaunched" on its mission to publish the original text of the Bible's Old Testament in Hebrew, its New Testament in Greek and the Quran in Arabic.

Fatio, who left the board three years ago, said the foundation "never had any money." Vachicouras declined to discuss finances. He said, "We keep a low profile because that makes it easier to get work done."

Copyright © 2005, Newsday, Inc.http://www.nynewsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-wochar214226829apr21,0,2092802,print.story


---while I'm at it and thanks to JackRiddler

[PKG]

24. Let's think about this.

A Protestant man from the most influential religious family in America--one who heads an educational company--met with many well-known religious figures, including the second-most-powerful man in the Roman Catholic Church to discuss launching a religious-education venture that never got off the ground.

The second-most-powerful man in the RCC was later elevated to the position of the most powerful man in the RCC.

I see. This of course means that the Protestant businessman had a direct hand. In an closeted election consisting entirely of Catholic leaders in which Ratzinger was the clear favorite.

Right.

:crazy:

[annabanana]

27. Huh? sheesh.. I thought this was a Bolton thread..

seemslikeadream,
It's all yours, I'm outa here.

[seemslikeadream]

28. Oh I was just eating lunch annabanana

and had a few moments to kill, thanks for coming by :hi:

[elehhhhna]

35. "still no facts" " ?!! Honey, the facts exist--the BA's covered them up.

[seemslikeadream]

12. profile of John Bolton

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/04/03/hard_liner_faces_test_in_senate_for_un_post/

Laura Rozen's war and piece blog.
http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/001836.html

[seemslikeadream]

14. How ironic

Miller's UN Reporting
by Russ Baker

The editorial page of the New York Times recently led with a justifiably outraged condemnation of George W. Bush's choice for United Nations ambassador--John Bolton, a famously outspoken anti-UN and antimultilateral ideologue. How ironic, then, that the Times's news editors had previously dispatched to the UN a reporter tight with the same Boltonite unilateralist clique--a reporter who has written about alleged wrongdoing at the UN in such an exaggerated way as to cast the organization and its leadership as almost beyond redemption.

When she began her work at the UN, Judith Miller was still under a cloud for her starring role in the Iraq Invasion Follies, in which she hyped Saddam Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction and Al Qaeda ties--claims that greatly buttressed the White House case for war but that ultimately proved unfounded . The Times, which has since published a series of mea culpas, placed Miller in a quasi quarantine, according to insiders at the paper. Yet she re-emerged, amazingly, still writing about Iraq--now from an oblique angle: the UN's alleged mismanagement of the Iraqi Oil for Food program.
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi=20050418&s=baker

[annabanana]

20. Miller's probably got a nice equity tied up in the Bahamas somewhere

for her good service to the powers that be.

[lala_rawraw]

36. Possible, but not acting alone...

Would have been on the behalf of his masters.