Bolton’s busted … but will it matter?

It seemed like a pretty straightforward, easy-to-answer question. Asked to fill out a Senate questionnaire about his professional background, U.N. ambassador-nominee John Bolton said he had not been interviewed or given testimony in any federal investigations over the last five years.

As of yesterday afternoon, the Bush administration stood by Bolton’s claim, insisting that the in-writing response to the Senate’s question “was truthful then and it remains the case now.”

A few hours later, the story had changed. Apparently, Bolton is forgetful.

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 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.

The admission 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.

Just to be clear, this isn’t in reference to the Plame scandal, the administration is still denying that Bolton testified before Fitzgerald’s grand jury. Rather, Bolton was interviewed as part of an investigation by the State Department and the CIA into forged documents that led Bush to believe that Iraq had a nuclear program.

Regardless, this is no minor reversal. Bolton clearly didn’t tell the Senate the truth and may have hid his role in the investigation to avoid more embarrassing questions about his professional record. This was a serious probe — for Bolton to claim now that he simply forgot about his interview strains credulity and raises questions anew about his competence and truthfulness.

Bolton’s U.N. nomination couldn’t get through the Senate before, but this kind of debacle should finish off his chances once and for all. Well, it should, but the Bush White House plays by different rules.

President Bush is expected to sidestep Congress and appoint John Bolton, his controversial choice for United Nations ambassador, to the job temporarily because opponents have blocked his confirmation by the Senate, several lawmakers and influential conservatives said Thursday.

Bush is poised to make the hawkish, tough-talking Bolton a recess appointment under a constitutional provision that allows the president to fill a vacancy during a Senate recess. Congress is expected to adjourn for August vacation Saturday or Sunday.

Administration officials wouldn’t discuss Bush’s intentions Thursday, but several senators and conservatives close to the White House think the president will tap Bolton shortly after Congress goes home.

This is straight out of the Bush playbook. If you get caught lying to Congress, you’ll be rewarded anyway.

Remember, no less an authority that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) has said that that a Bolton recess appointment “would weaken not only Mr. Bolton but also the United States.”

Even Trent Lott (R-Miss.) isn’t happy about the broader implications.

“…I do think it’s a little bit of a thumbing of the nose at the Senate, which will cause you more problems down the road,” Lott said. “We are a co-equal branch; he doesn’t get to make his choices in a vacuum.”

Reward offenders, circumvent Congress, undermine goodwill on the Hill, weaken America’s role on the international stage. Just another day for our president.

Expediency –

Definition: [n] the quality of being suited to the end in view

from Hyperdictionary

Oftentimes when I’ve just finished a fine post here at TCR, a certain word will pop into my mind that sort of labels the subject matter addressed.

Venality might be one or obfuscation or just bizarre. But todays word that came to mind in this case is Expediency. Whatever it takes. In the annals of American History, the Tales of Bolton will stand out.

The “end” is still a mystery but the means should have us all a little concerned.

  • If Lugar has ANY self-respect left as well as honor, he will either publicly or privately tell Bush that Bolton’s lying to the Senate — and there is no other way to describe this except as intentional, flat-out, lie-your-ass-off lying — is not acceptable and therefore the recess appointment had better NOT occur. It’s bad enough that Bush is already thumbing his nose at the dignity and the Constitutional role of the Senate by stonewalling on all of the document requests; this would just pour salt in the wounds.

    If Biden has ANY self-respect left as well as honor, he will get Reid to go nuclear on the White House, by refusing to allow ANY actions on any further appointments by Bush — ESPECIALLY on the Roberts’ SCOTUS nomination. Why on Roberts, you ask? Because Bush is pulling the same stonewall shit on documents requested for Roberts that Bush did on Bolton.

    We should not allow Bush get the same reward (i.e., a recess appointment or actual Senate confirmation) for the same disregard of the Dems in particular and the Senate in general. Think about it; if we go through the same stonewalling about Roberts, will the Dems be able to defeat cloture with the Gang of 14 being so unpredictable? I doubt it. So, Reid then MUST slow down the Senate so that NOTHING that Bush wants gets done.

    If this battle is lost by the Senate — and the Rethugs don’t care, so it is up to the Dems to win it — then truly our Constitutional separation of powers will mean diddly squat forevermore. This battle cry needs to be sounded BEFORE Bush makes the Bolton recess appointment, so that we can frame the Senate retaliation as the result of Bush’s arrogance rather than as Dems’ obstructionism.

    Well, Lugar, Biden and Reid, whatcha gonna do???

  • This battle cry needs to be sounded BEFORE Bush makes the Bolton recess appointment, so that we can frame the Senate retaliation as the result of Bush’s arrogance rather than as Dems’ obstructionism.

    Once again, AL nails it. We must get ahead of the curve on these things.

    C’mon Reid!

  • I’d further add that, given that a recess appointment would mean that Bolton would be utterly impotent in the UN, word needs to get out that this appointment can only be a cronyistic quid pro quo. Bolton gets a big paycheck with a fancy title and won’t have to do anything because he can’t do anything.

    Call it “your tax dollars at work.”

  • our Constitutional separation of powers will mean diddly squat forevermore.

    I agree with Edo: AL did it again. Beneath all the stuff which oozes from this Administration is their mindset in all separations (church from state, exeutive from legislative or judicial) are regarded as irrelevant or, if pressed, treasonous. It’s as though Bush and his handlers are something between Divine Right monarchs and corporate CEOs, absolute rulers without rivalry or conscience.

  • Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), quoted while busy at work washing several of George Bush’s trucks down on the ranch, and just before he started mowing the lawn in Crawford, has said that that a Bolton recess appointment “would weaken not only Mr. Bolton but also the United States.”

  • Hey, you guys just don’t get it. It’s the newest
    right wing tactic. The “I forgot” excuse for
    lying.

    John Roberts started it. Now watch them all
    start using it. Can you imagine how embarrassed
    Rove must feel – somebody, John Roberts,
    out clevered him. Or did Rove come up with
    it in the first place?

    It oughta work great when those perjury
    indictments come down. “I just forgot.”

  • I hope they do try the “I forgot” defense–it just opens the door wide for critics to question why it is that an absent-minded idiot is being appointed to be our face at the UN. Frame it like: “Let’s assume he is telling the truth (which he may not be); doesn’t America deserve someone who isn’t going senile?”

  • Hey, you guys just don’t get it. It’s the newest right wing tactic. The “I forgot” excuse for lying.

    I thought Reagan perfected this during the Iran Contra hearings?

    I think we’re just witnessing the renaissance.

    Bolton is either a liar or an idiot and each conditions makes him perfectly unqualified for his appointment.

  • I thought Reagan perfected this during the Iran Contra hearings?

    IIRC, Reagan’s line was “I don’t recall”. IMHO, this is even better than “I forgot”. Similar, sure, but definately better.

  • For those old enough to remember him when he did stand-up, Steve MArtin did a whole bit on “I Forgot”.

    When arrested, just say ” I forgot armed robbery was against the law”!

  • “… doesn’t America deserve someone who isn’t going senile?”

    I was going to say something witty about that, but now I forgot (don’t recall) what it was.

  • Comments are closed.