Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

State Dept. and Dems Tangle on Bolton (did he lie re. investigations?)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-28-05 06:36 PM
Original message
State Dept. and Dems Tangle on Bolton (did he lie re. investigations?)
NYT/Reuters:
State Dept and Democrats Tangle on Bolton
By REUTERS
Published: July 28, 2005
Filed at 7:14 p.m. ET


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration and Senate Democrats tangled on Thursday over whether U.N. ambassador nominee John Bolton told Congress the truth when he said he had not been involved in recent grand jury or government investigations.

The State Department insisted Bolton's "answer was truthful" when he said he had not been questioned or provided information to such inquiries in the past five years.

But Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware said he had information Bolton was interviewed as part of a State Department-CIA joint investigation on intelligence lapses that led to the Bush administration's pre-Iraq war claim that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger....

***

Earlier in the day, reporters questioned State Department spokesman Sean McCormack on whether Bolton testified before the federal grand jury investigating who leaked the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame, as MSNBC reported last week.

McCormack recited the questionnaire on whether a nominee "has 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 five years...."Mr. Bolton, in his response on the written paperwork, was to say 'No.' And that answer is truthful then and it remains the case now," McCormack said....


http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/politics/politics-bush-b...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clydefrand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-28-05 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. What happens if Bush gives him the position during recess?
What happens if Fitzgerald and others say that he was interviewed or gave sworn testimony? Will he be allowed to keep his position until Jan. 07?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bumblebee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-28-05 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. That reads like he was not before the GJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OrangeCountyDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-28-05 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. ANY ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION
The article covers More than just a GJ investigation.

"interviewed or asked to supply any information in connection with any administrative (including an inspector general), congressional or grand jury investigation, within the past five years..."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bumblebee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-28-05 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Yes, I am just disappointed that Fitz has not been interested in him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OrangeCountyDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-28-05 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Does This Necessarily Indicate He Wouldn't Be Indicted?
Is it sometimes the case that when a prosecutor intends to indict someone, he wouldn't actually interview the suspect or have them appear before the GJ? If there is enough evidence to actually indict someone, does their guilt suffice, to serve the main purpose of charging them with the crime?

Is it possible Fitzgerald just knows Bolton was involved and is guilty? Could this also be the case with Shrub & cheney?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bumblebee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-28-05 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Don't know but suspect he would have been interviewed by him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bumblebee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-28-05 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. here's more
State Dept. Says Bolton Was Interviewed

*
E-Mail This
* Printer-Friendly



By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: July 28, 2005

Filed at 8:40 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) --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, D-Del., wrote to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asserting Bolton had been interviewed and suggesting he had not been truthful in his questionnaire.

Democrats have tried to turn up the pressure on Bolton, hoping to persuade President Bush not to appoint Bolton on a temporary basis while Congress is on its summer recess.

Bolton's nomination has been stalled for months, and Rice and other officials refused to rule out a recess appointment for Bolton. ''What we can't be is without leadership at the United Nations,'' Rice said on the PBS' ''NewsHour With Jim Lehrer.''



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 18th 2017, 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC