Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bolton Appears Headed for Confirmation
Associated Press ^ | April 12, 2005 | BARRY SCHWEID

Posted on 04/12/2005 3:41:04 PM PDT by RWR8189

Bolton Appears Headed for Confirmation Despite Accusation He Abused Intelligence Officials

Apr. 12, 2005 - John R. Bolton appeared a step closer to confirmation as ambassador to the United Nations despite scathing testimony Tuesday by a former State Department intelligence chief that he was a "serial abuser" of analysts who disagreed with his hard-line views.

A committee vote to send President Bush's nomination of Bolton, who has frequently dismissed the United Nations as irrelevant and misguided, to the full Senate could come as early as Thursday, depending on whether his Democratic foes request a few days to review State Department documents they sought to have declassified.

Carl Ford Jr., a former chief at the State Department's bureau of intelligence and research, denounced Bolton as a "kiss-up, kick-down sort of guy" who directed an abusive tirade at analyst Christian P. Westermann for questioning whether Cuba was developing biological and chemical weapons.

But the pivotal Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, said he was "still inclined" to vote to confirm Bolton, who is now undersecretary of state for arms control.

The Constitution gives Bush considerable leeway to name ambassadors and "I see the bar as very high" for rejecting his choices, Chafee told reporters after the hearing was adjourned.

Ford was the only witness called besides Bolton, who testified for more than seven hours Monday, although Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., told a reporter a "whole slew" of U.S. officials could have echoed Ford's accusations of harassment.

With Republicans in the majority, Bolton's nomination could be approved by the committee Thursday or early next week. Bolton was probably more vulnerable in the committee because Republicans outnumber Democrats there only 10-8. They have a safer margin, 55 to 44 with one independent, in the full Senate.

Democrats said Bolton's mistreatment of lower-level officials who would not bend to his hard-line views was underscored by Ford, who appeared voluntarily as a witness to support the accusations of harassment.

Praised by Sen. Paul Sarbanes, D-Md., for "standing up," Ford said that while he is a Republican conservative and a devout admirer of Vice President Dick Cheney, he "feels like a target" for challenging a senior Republican.

"I have never seen anyone quite like Mr. Bolton," Ford testified under oath. "He abuses his authority with little people."

Contradicting Bolton's assertion Monday that he never tried to have officials who disagreed with him discharged, Ford said Bolton tried to have Westermann fired. "I had my own confrontations with Bolton," Ford said, but added that abusing an official on a much lower level was a different matter.

Reflecting on the testimony, Dodd said in an interview, "If this isn't enough I don't know what you can do" to derail the Bolton nomination. But he said he had not been told that any Republican would oppose confirmation.

The chairman, Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said the "paramount issue" was giving President Bush the nominee he wants to undertake reform at the United Nations. "Bluntness may not be very good diplomacy, but on occasion it may be required," Lugar said as the hearing drew to a close.

Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., who led the fight to block the nomination, responded angrily to Ford's accusation of mistreatment. Anytime a senior official abuses a lower-level one, he said, "that's just not acceptable."

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said it was not an isolated incident, since Bolton had harassed at least three officials who disagreed with the extent of threats he thought Cuba and other countries posed.

Calling Bolton a "bully," Boxer said, "I think Mr. Bolton needs anger management at a minimum and he does not deserve to be promoted" to the U.N. post.

 



TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 109th; bolton; chafee; johnbolton; lugar; senate; term2; un; unitednations; ussenate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 last
To: RWR8189

Sorry, but John Bolton is going down! Prediction, Republicans will lose their balls and his nomination will be defeated in committee. Ford did a number on him today!


41 posted on 04/12/2005 6:43:36 PM PDT by meandog (bellum nec timendum nec provacandum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meandog
Sorry, but John Bolton is going down! Prediction, Republicans will lose their balls and his nomination will be defeated in committee. Ford did a number on him today!

Nah, even Chaffee isn't going to block him. Even if Chaffee were to make an 11th hour reversal against Bolton in committee, I doubt he'd vote no to keep Bolton from going to the full Senate for a vote. He could abstain and Republicans would still win 9-8.

42 posted on 04/12/2005 6:52:14 PM PDT by tellw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: denydenydeny
Another quote from the 1998 site you posted:

Indeed, Sen. John Kerry [D Ma] seemed to understand that. He explained that Saddam's aim was not to lift sanctions, but to build weapons of mass destruction. That is the point which the Clinton administration stubbornly refuses to acknowledge. Kerry took issue with Biden, saying that the matter was much bigger than whether Scott Ritter or his team could get into a site or not. Kerry said, as he had before, that the US should be prepared to use force to achieve its goals, even as it would be necessary to prepare the public. He also suggested that any US military strike on Iraq should involve sustained targeting of the regime.

43 posted on 04/12/2005 7:19:47 PM PDT by John Thornton ("Appeasers always hope that the crocodile will eat them last." Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tiredoflaundry

http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/9187343.htm

Posted on Mon, Jul. 19, 2004

INTELLIGENCE

Small agency's Iraq record beats large rivals'

Armed with a mere 165 analysts, the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, was least wrong about the state of illicit weapons in prewar Iraq.

BY DOUGLAS JEHL

New York Times Service

EXCERPT

AGENCY BACKBITING

Not surprisingly, the praise that has been directed at the bureau, including a widely noticed column in May by David Ignatius in The Washington Post, has prompted some backbiting at other intelligence agencies from officials who argue that its successes are being exaggerated.

''Everyone has to get it right once in awhile,'' a senior Defense Department official said with some sarcasm.

The bureau, with about 300 people in all, including support staff, is too small to shoulder the kind of analytical burden placed on the CIA and other larger agencies. Its bureaucratic distance from spy-masters at the CIA, the signals-intelligence mavens at the National Security Agency and the satellite gurus at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency means that it has little interaction with those who actually collect information around the world, intelligence officials say.

`CURMUDGEONLY'

''The analysts at INR are a curmudgeonlike group who delight in being different and getting to the body of something and not caring what other people think,'' said Carl W. Ford Jr., a former career CIA official who led the State Department bureau from 2001 to 2003.

But still, Ford added in an interview, ``It is important for all of us in the intelligence community to talk about where we went wrong.''


44 posted on 04/12/2005 8:12:35 PM PDT by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: denydenydeny

Dang, I read the whole page, and the quote you were posting if for was not the highlight----jeez, these hearing notes should be read on the Senate floor tomorrow---there would be some mighty embarrassed Senators for calling Bush all of the names they have for the last 4 years---

The same dems that are accusing Bush of lying about the WMDS, like Levin, Kerry, Biden were openly talking about going into Iraq militarily to get rid of the WMDS that THEY were convinced were there....

HO-HOOOOOOOOOOO---talk about the pot calling the kettle....


45 posted on 04/12/2005 8:24:34 PM PDT by Txsleuth (Mark Levin for Supreme Court Justice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 537cant be wrong
why oh why is this sl*t on all these hearings.

Because she's been sitting on her tush in the Senate since 1992.

46 posted on 04/12/2005 8:56:18 PM PDT by Racehorse (Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker
The choice the administration has made is to clean up the U.N. Bolton will possess that same vision. Tough Love.

Who at the UN is going to believe that Bolton and Bush want to change it for the better? Why will they agree to follow Bolton's lead, given his history?

We have more sway than you think.

But we won't use it.

As to why he'd do this? Honor. Duty. Opportunity to confront the evil in the institution he despises and perhaps do some good.

Again, why should anyone at the UN believe that Bolton wants to make positive change at an institution he despises?

47 posted on 04/13/2005 4:30:56 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Bolton thinks Cuba is a threat to the US. How odd. I guess Boxer has forgotten the Cuban missile crisis, well, so has NPR and the rest of the Liberal crowd.


48 posted on 04/13/2005 4:34:46 AM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
You don't think so? Hasn't American foreign policy changed the world over the last three years?

No, I don't. Iraq still has the support of only a small minority of the UN members. Bolton isn't going to change that.

The message is not to fall in line with the tyrants of the world giving away our sovereignty. The message is not to run away and isolate ourselves from the rest of the world. The message is to change the world -- more freedom, more like us.

Why send someone who will accomplish nothing, when you could leave the seat empty and send a more powerful message? By leaving the seat empty, Bush is thumbing his nose at the UN and showing how little he thinks of it. By sending Bolton, Bush is sticking his thumb in the eye of the UN. And why would the other nations there react positively to that?

49 posted on 04/13/2005 4:35:10 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
By sending Bolton, Bush is sticking his thumb in the eye of the UN. And why would the other nations there react positively to that?

sorry N-S, but those that will, will, and those that won't, won't... if they haven't made up their minds and figured out which/who's side they are on by now... screw-em!!!
With US or against US... but choose. no more carrot now comes the stick.

50 posted on 04/13/2005 6:41:14 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist ©®)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson