Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Bolton Endgame

By Laura Rozen, TomPaine.com. Posted May 12, 2005.


While John Bolton's nomination is likely to be approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the Democrats have succeeded in making a public display of the Bush administration's extremism.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Laura Rozen

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

On the eve of the John Bolton vote, a dizzying stream of new information continued to wash in, filling in the portrait of Bolton and his loyalists as a kind of rogue political force engaged in all-but-open warfare against their bureaucratic enemies in the State Department and the U.S. intelligence community, and openly working to undermine the president's policies of supporting multilateral negotiations on North Korea and Iran's nuclear programs.

Emerging this week were more revelations about the unorthodox staff arrangements Bolton had, including the high-priced management consultant Matthew Freedman, who worked as a consultant for Bolton on a six-figure, taxpayer-funded salary with security clearance while also maintaining a side business consulting private clients whose identities he refused to disclose to the Senate committee staff. Also unusual was the fact that Bolton's acting chief of staff, Frederick Fleitz, worked simultaneously for Bolton and for his home agency, the CIA's non-proliferation department, WINPAC.

Then, on Wednesday, The Hill reported that some Democrats believe Bolton started to avail himself of an alternative intelligence operation bulked up during Bolton's tenure at State which some Democrats said resembled Doug Feith’s alternative intelligence shop at the Pentagon that produced hyped and misleading assessments of Saddam's collaboration with Osama bin Laden and Iraq's nuclear program. All these latest revelations were just more data points in the amply documented portrait of Bolton as a paranoid rogue operator who behaved as if he were dropped behind enemy lines while working in Colin Powell’s State Department, and using wired-in operatives to spy on his American bureaucratic enemies.

This persistent stream of revelations continues to damage Bolton, the moderate GOP senators who may vote for him (under tremendous threats and pressure from the White House), and the Bush administration. Indeed, this kind of all-or-nothing White House fanaticism shows how terrified the administration is to lose party discipline on any single issue.

While the Senate Foreign Relations committee chair Richard Lugar and even the Iowa trading group, TradeSport, predicted Bolton would get through committee on Thursday, a few observers said it was still too early to call the game.

"I don't think it's over," insists Steve Clemons, a New America Foundation senior fellow and former Hill staffer, who has led public opposition to the Bolton nomination from his blog, The Washington Note. "Lugar and everyone are acting as if it's a done deal. That's good psychological warfare. But my sense is that there are too many huge problems for these people to automatically vote yes on. It's very complicated for these senators."

On Capitol Hill—where Senate Foreign Relations committee staff have been pulling 20 hour days the past three weeks conducting an intensive investigation and more than 30 interviews since the Bolton vote was stalled in a surprise move by Ohio Republican Sen. George Voinovich last month—the mood late Tuesday night was that whatever the outcome, it was a process fought well with everything they had.

"We're going to convince one or more Republicans that this nominee is unqualified," says Norm Kurz, spokesman for Sen. Biden, only partly tongue in cheek. "Surely everyone must recognize that."

"We're going to win on the merits," said Kurz. "There's no dispute about Bolton's arm twisting, the cherry picking the material to fit his own views, surely no one can dispute that he tried to get Christian Westermann fired. He can't run a mission at the U.N. because of the way he abuses people, lied to the committee, under oath ... ."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Laura Rozen covers foreign policy and national security from Washington, D.C. as a journalist for The American Prospect and for her weblog, War and Piece.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Where he should be
Posted by: oceanye on May 12, 2005 4:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John Bolton is to a large extent responsible for giving Bush a thread of credibility on attacking Iraq with his lies. Bush is rewarding him for his lies by appointing him as ambassador to the United Nations. Instead of going to the United Nations, Bolton should be beginning his prison term.

Jerry Warsing

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Where he should be Posted by: Wacre
Some Hope
Posted by: Video on May 12, 2005 8:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's still a chance to stop Bolton's nomination at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee vote. Barbara Boxer is trying to convince Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chafee, who (according to Boxer) has reluctantly decided to support Bolton. Boxer is urging everyone to sign her petition that can be found here and to call Chafee's office to let him know how you feel. (202) 224-2921

He may or may not get nominated, that's up to the Foreign Relations Committee. But should he get nominated, wouldn't you like to go to bed tomorrow knowing you did everything in your power to halt Bolton?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Some Hope Posted by: roygib
» sonofthewest Posted by: sonofthewest
» RE: Some Hope Posted by: dragonsi55
building the case
Posted by: roygib on May 12, 2005 8:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact that Bolton is going to be confirmed is certain, and it gives more weight to the case the Dems should be making, that the Republicans consistently place party loyalty ahead of doing whats right for the country.
Will they make that case? I doubt it. I wouldn't even be too surprized if he gathers a few Democratic votes when it comes to the floor. As for damaging the administration with the revelations about Bolton's behavior, give me a break. Go and ask any random person on the street what they know about Bolton. I'll bet 2/3 can't even tell you who he is.
The Dems can't even pull together to investigate the very shady dealings that may have cost them the election, let alone make a coherent case against the neocon agenda using Bolton as the focal point.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: building the case Posted by: Sandy47
» RE: building the case Posted by: oceanye
sonofthewest2
Posted by: sonofthewest2 on May 12, 2005 9:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Quit grasping at straws, the Democrats gained nothing through their twisting turning vacillation on fighting bare knuckled against the Republicans beginning with Florida in 2000. Now, they are fighting rear guard actions instead of crushing the rightwing sociopaths running the country. In the name of preserving the glimmer of democracy, definitely not a shining presence of democracy, attacks have been muted over and over. Even our troops, instead of being pulled out, are supported with more and more money leading to more deaths and Bolton was part of the cabal that put together this fascist like foreign policy. Nazi Germany went to the east to liberate Poland, the Baltic States, Russia, Ukraine, Czeck and Slovakia as well as Spain, and Ethiopia (by assisting the Italian fascists) and now we have went to free Iraq for democracy and the Democrats are explicitly at fault and must share the blame for this invasion. As we say out west, when we are fed a line of bull, horsepucky, and that's what it amounts to to say that the Democrats accomplilshed anything.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: sonofthewest2 Posted by: gonzoskismet
There are too many Idiots on the Right
Posted by: BriMan on May 12, 2005 3:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Almost every single right-winger I know personally (which is about a dozen), truly believes that the MSM is liberally biased.

I have asked almost everyone where they get their news and the answers are Fox, Rush, NBC (owned by Westinghouse - defense contractor), & other right-wing talk radio outlets. So they arent even listening to the media that they claim is biased!

I have also asked them how many non-fictional books they have read lately. Not a single one has done any extra-curricular reading whatsoever. "I am too busy", "I have too many personal & family issues to deal with" are two popular cop-outs for not improving their knowledge base. In other words, they are gorging on "fast-food" news and liking it as truth. They lack any perspective at all.

They all wave the flag, support the troops, love "W", and disparage people who think otherwise. I dont engage them because I get character-assasinated and the discussion always deteriorates to a one-sided immature bully session. I have thick skin, mind you, but I wont play their silly little name-calling game and resort to defending Clinton (because he is the source of all that is wrong in the world - dont you know).

Not a single one of them knows anything about history or is willing to learn so you cant have an intelligent back-n-forth anyway.

Will these people be going anywhere soon? No. Are they victims of their own stupidity, recalcitrance, and bigotry? Yes. Do I feel sorry for them? In a very big way because I take pity on all who are victims of class warfare even those who dont recognize who the real enemy is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Filibuster vigilantly
Posted by: VAGreen on May 13, 2005 5:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bolton must be filibustered. If confirmed, it is likely that he will humiliate the U.S. as badly as Kruschev humiliated the U.S.S.R. with the shoe incident.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Truning back the Neo-Con Takeover
Posted by: Michael on May 13, 2005 5:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Democrats have helped themselves by managing to sound
uncharacteristically reasonable, while the Republicans have
managed to sound so extreme, victims of this kind of Caligula
force."

Gee! Imagine the surprise to those inside the Washington
Beltway. To those of us out here in America, comrade Rove's has
seemed both blatent and extreme for some time, as the article
Bolton, Bush, and the Neo-Con Agenda
goes to some length to
point out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PUBLICLY, RICE SUPPORTS BOLTON, PRIVATELY? ©
Posted by: Betsy L. Angert on May 15, 2005 10:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it fascinating that many republicans are willing to admit to the real reason that they support the Bolton nomination. Senator Norm Coleman [R-Minnesota] is among these. This week on the News-hour with Jim Lehrer, Coleman offered, “This is about the president's choice of a person . . . the reality is that George W. Bush gets to make that decision.” Coleman adds, “There's nothing in the record that substantiates or corroborates allegations that he [Bolton] tried to unduly influence intelligence policy, or in fact that he even tried to fire anyone.” Yet, the record is incomplete.

Senator Joseph Biden [D-Delaware] requested the full record. He asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to provide the Bolton papers. Biden, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee believes that a full accounting of Bolton’s service is necessary; it would facilitate the process. Miss Rice promised to cooperate. She stated, "We have every desire to have the committee have the information that it needs.” Condie assured Mr. Biden, asserting that the State Department will respond "as rapidly as possible”; yet, they have not. They have not produced the documents requested. Miss Rice made no promises; she did not say whether the department would ever provide all the information requested. There is a reason for this.

Please read my own recent post, at Be-Think. I offer this excerpt.

PUBLICLY, RICE SUPPORTS BOLTON, PRIVATELY? ©
When the President first nominated Bolton to serve as United Nations Ambassador, Republicans and Democrats alike wondered whether Rice influenced the choice. It is well known that that Rice wanted Bolton in a position where his contribution to policy would be limited. She felt certain that Bolton needed to be controlled; he needed to be given instructions and be forced to follow these. She also believed that Bolton was a loose cannon. Is it possible that Secretary of State Rice persuaded the President to appoint John R. Bolton to the United Nations to avoid having him in the State Department?

It is; after all, she could easily make the case. “Bolton’s critical stance toward the United Nations dovetailed perfectly with the administration's own thinking.” If she pressed her points well, she would be free; Condie would not be burdened with a closer confluence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NABNYC
Posted by: NABNYC on May 15, 2005 12:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The focus on Bolton's personality obscures the purpose of his appointment. The Republicans hope that so much time will be spent attacking Bolton for his obnoxious behavior that either a promise by Bolton to behave, or a new appointee who is polite, will resolve the dispute.

But the goal of the Republicans is to destroy the U.N. They
don't care if it is Bolton or someone else, as long as the appointee follows orders. That is the reason for the Republican clamor about the so-called oil-for-food scandal, and personal attacks on Kofi Annan. The Republicans plan to send in their person to precipitate conflict, to lie and make up stories, then recommend that the
U.S. withdraw from the U.N.. The U.N.
will be told to get out of the U.S., will have nowhere to go and little money, will probably relocate in a third world country, and be barely noticed thereafter. The U.S. will set up a "new" U.N. which will be yet another vehicle for the ultra wealthy to control the world, so there is no one speaking up for the average person.

Everything the Republicans do is designed to get more control and wealth in the hands of the ultra-wealthy, and to destroy any institution which works against that. They want to "reform" Social Security for the purpose of destroying it. The no child left behind act is designed to impose impossible standards, cut funding, then encourage parents to put their
children into private school, with public funds flowing into the private (religious) schools and out of public education, which will destroy the system. They promote unrestricted immigration and outsourcing for the purpose of destroying the ability of American working people to earn a decent
living and perhaps occasionally stand up for themselves. After all, few other people in the world have the ability to stand up for themselves in the face of the ultra wealthy in combination with the U.S. military. The Republicans have destroyed the electoral system by controlling voting machines, so the results of the elections are pre-determined.

Whether it is Bolton or someone else, the goal of the Republicans is the same: get the U.S. out of the U.N., and destroy the institution of the U.N.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]