Buh Bye Bolton -- Busted by TalkingPointsMemo

[DemsUnited]

Talking Points Memo, by Joshua Micah Marshall

(July 22, 2005 -- 11:39 AM EDT

That's odd.

Today's Times says that John Bolton did not disclose having given testimony before the Plame grand jury in the forms he had to fill out for his confirmation hearings. That took that too mean he hadn't been called.

But on Hardball yesterday David Shuster said Bolton did testify.

Who's right and who's wrong? Or are both right, and Bolton simply failed to disclose it?

ON EDIT: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

-----------------

Lied on his confirmation hearing forms. OOOPPPSSS.

[lala_rawraw]

1. God I love

It when I am fucking right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Goldmund]

4. You must love it a lot then, lala

You guys at RAW have been doing fucking awesome work. :hi:

[lala_rawraw]

30. we don't sleep or eat... that is our secret

we are slaves man, but thanks:D

[Eloriel]

43. Ya'll have certainly gained MY respect and then some

(and I remember "way back" -- to those bad old days, when RAW stories weren't allowed in LBN... :evilgrin: )

[lala_rawraw]

50. Really?

I don't remember that... how come? Wait, DU does not link to Raw????? Hold up here, how come? We are always plugging DU.

[Eloriel]

51. Yeah, I'm probably not the one to ask about this

since you're not really supposed to talk about DU on DU, and now that ATA is closed, you can't do it there either. But yes, no Raw Story articles were allowed in LBN for a good long while. They'd get moved, every single time.

[lala_rawraw]

52. Sounds like another place

I know, which would rather compete than work together... but glad that changed. Now we need to get Skinner to put Raw as a link under news sites, no?

[Up2Late]

45. Hey lala_rawraw, I'll defer to you on this but,I think we have a NEW Crime

or at least, an Extremely Un-ethical act by the NYTimes here.

I was just about to publish the link to what I thought was the SAME article, that is being published in Saturday's "International Herald Tribune," which I'm sure most here know, is owned by the same Corporation as The New York Times.

Turns out, an article with the same name, same authors, accredited to the same Newspaper (The New York Times) is being republished by the same Corporation, but in an Edited form!

Edited to REMOVE the last 5 Paragraphs of the original New York Times Article, the part that contains all references to John R. Bolton!

I'm about to start a new Post saying just this, but what is this? Is this more than just un-ethical?

:wtf:Is this NEW News?

Their are a few other minor edits, but this one seems Major to me. Here are the links for comparison:

<http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/07/22/news/leak.php#>

<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/22/politics/22leak.html?ei=5094&en=da4770e9392bb1c6&hp=&ex=1122004800&partner=homepage&pagewanted=all>

[lala_rawraw]

49. Send this

to [e-mail]

We collect them all day and i am not on edit tomorrow (sorry, but I have not slept in a few days now working on Patriot Act, Gitmo, and god commentary). But send, and our intern will pick it up and slot it for John to look through.

[King Coal]

11. Lala I would love if it even if you did it wrong.

[lala_rawraw]

28. heheheh:D

[crispini]

2. Oh SNAP!

Bolton is toast. Eeeeeeeexcellent!

Link please?

[maryallen]

20. Hope you're right, but ...

I bet this j*ck*ss will STILL appoint Bolton during the recess.

I haven't seen anything to convince me otherwise.

[rateyes]

25. From what I just heard on Franken's show...

It's not legal to appoint someone who is involved in an ongoing criminal investigation. If he testified--he's toast, IMO.

[hang a left]

34. Wouldn't he have to be a subject? Or a target?

If he was just a witness I don't think that would qualify. I could be wrong.

[DemsUnited]

36. On their forms, Karen Hughes & Robert Joseph disclosed that

they were interviewed by the Special Prosecutor, according to today's NY Times. Does that mean Hughes/Joseph are subjects/targets? Or does it mean anyone (including Bolton) must simply disclose "any legal matters they had become involved in"?

<snip>
In another indication of how wide a net investigators have cast in the case, Karen Hughes, a former top communications aide to Mr. Bush, and Robert Joseph, who was then the National Security Council's expert on weapons proliferation, have both told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that they were interviewed by the special prosecutor.

Ms. Hughes is to have her confirmation hearing on Friday on her nomination to lead the State Department's public diplomacy operation. Mr. Joseph was recently confirmed as under secretary of state for arms control and international security. As part of their confirmation proceedings, both had to fill out questionnaires listing any legal matters they had become involved in.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/22/politics/22leak.html?hp&ex=1122004800&en=da4770e9392bb1c6&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=login
<snip>

[mistertrickster]

40. Yeah, I heard that too. Franken may be one of the first to have

spotted the discrepancy, that he said he DIDN'T testify to the Grand Jury to the hearing committee and that Schuster said he DID.

Oops . . . caught in a lie, by the author of "Lies, and the Lying Liars who Tell Them." I love it.

[Cha]

46. They don't give a shit who

did what..the more low down and dirty ..the better for appointments and they'll throw in some medals, too.

It's going to be a Glorius Day when everything comes tumbling down on their Heinous, two-pronged, heads.

[UT troll]

3. GOP senate

Well - unless the media pushes this :eyes: - it's up to the GOP dominated senate. It doesn't look promising.

[applegrove]

5. If this is true - he will chase someone down a hall in his narcissistic

anger.

[Double T]

12. So True And Who Will Get The Blame??

[Bumblebee]

6. Hope Shuster picks it up today and says more about it

To make sure his info was accurate. Olbermann will probably say something about it as well -- he most definitely reads TPM

[AntiCoup2K4]

8. Franken's talking about it right now

So it's on the radio at least.

[liveoaktx]

21. Vidclip from Hardball last night-Schuster mentions Bolton

Memo

[Tom Kitten]

7. Al Franken talking about this right now.nt

[rocktivity]

9. Franken mentioned MSNBC

but it TPM broke it last night, then he gets the credit.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Imalittleteapot]

10. Bolton to us.

That was an oversight. A simple mistake.

With or without press, the * WH will cover Bolton's ass with their usual spin.

[DemsUnited]

13. "TWN has confirmed with MSNBC that it it standing by its story."

The Washington Note

July 22, 2005
JOHN BOLTON TESTIFIED BEFORE GRAND JURY IN VALERIE PLAME INVESTIGATION

David Schuster of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews made a whopper revelation about grand jury testimony in the Valerie Plame-outing investigation: John Bolton has testified about the top secret document that Colin Powell had aboard Air Force One.

TWN has confirmed with MSNBC that it it standing by its story.

<snip>

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/

[Bumblebee]

14. Great. Hopefully both the WP and the NYT are working on this

angle now. There has been talk about a possible August recess appointment so I would think they really want to compete with each other -- and everyone else -- to break the story :)

[yy4me]

15. Great Sticker, AntiCoup2K4

Where can I get it?

[AntiCoup2K4]

32. This one and others can be found at....

http://www.cafepress.com/bloodforoil

[Burried News]

16. Chicago on the Potomac

Cell Block Tango Lyrics
http://www.seeklyrics.com/lyrics/Chicago/Cell-Block-Tango.html
"And now the 6 merry murderers of the cook county
jail in their (re)ndition of the cell block tango"

"They had it coming
They had it coming
They had it coming all along
I didn't do it
But if I'd done it
How could you tell me that I was wrong?"


Looks like a few of the puppets have cut their strings. Even at the WSJ.

[Missy Vixen]

53. It's a bit OT for this thread,

but I LOVE that performance in the movie.

"He ran into my knife. Twelve times."

Julie

[Sam_Lowry]

17. Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy

He'll land on his feet I'm sure. I'm sure he could find work in an anger management clinic as a counselor

:sarcasm:

[DirtyDawg]

18. When will Tenant grow....

...some balls and finally out these SOBs for all the slimy, sorry-ass crap that they 'made' him, and the CIA, do in the name of loyalty and their version of national security? Surely they couldn't possibly have paid him enough to bury whatever passes for a conscience...particularly when they keep piling the blame on him and the organization that he oversaw...forever?

[Tommymac]

35. I have a hunch

Tenet is deep throating these jackasses. He, along with other unhappy intelligence assets are behind a lot of the stuff coming out now. They protect their own. But it is a dangerous game, and they must be discrete.

Those stars on the wall at Langley are speaking out.

[rrrevolution]

19. Bolton's failure to disclose tantamount to lying to the Senate?

If you had a copy of the disclosure form Bolton signed, it probably has an affirmation at the bottom just above his signature which states all the information provided is complete and true under penalty of perjury.

Line up a jail cell for Mr. B because you just know that he did not spill the beans on his fellow neo-cons in testifying truthfully before the grand jury. Fitz probably has him on the ever lengthening list of witnesses that lied to him who will get a dose of the Martha Stewart treatment.

Also, You can bet that the classified intercepts and docs the Dems insisted on seeing prior to a confirmation vote on Bolton are dynamite. Bolton is a hatchet man for the neo-con cabal.

If I were Fitz I would ratchet up the pressure on Bolton since he has a real problem controlling his temper. No telling what he might blurt out!

[formercia]

33. It's all about copping a plea from here on.

Tighten 'dem screws fitz. LOL

[warrens]

22. A gallows built for 12

[Burried News]

23. Well now we know why the Prez didn't want to let the Dems see

the documents during the Bolton hearings. Isn't it funny how when the truth comes out everything seems to fit in place and confusion is replaced by coherent explanation.

If there has been a hallmark of this administration it is CONFUSION.

Confusion is the product of lies, misdirection and deceit. It isn't an accident or a misfortune or a result of complication - it is a deliberate construct.

End the confusion - tell the truth.

[rateyes]

26. It's the AHA moment! And, it's great!! nt

[Supersedeas]

27. Congress waive your oversight authority...WAIVE IT...WAIVE IT- * says

Now, do ya trust the Frat Boy in Chief, Bill Frist?

[Ravy]

24. Don't go overboard. Dates could come into play...

He may have been called to testify AFTER he filled out the forms, for instance.

I just hate to see us hang our hat on this particular point if it can be easily blown away. We need to know when each was done, and if the reports are correct, of course.

[DemsUnited]

29. According to TPMCafe post, Bolton testified before his nomination

Bolton testified before he was nominated (3.00 / 0) (#20)
by northstardon on Jul 22, 2005 -- 01:40:01 PM EST


Bolton was nominated on March 7, 2005.

Save for the testimony of Cooper and Miller, Fitzgerald's investigation was essentialy complete by October 2004.

Therefore, Bolton testified at least six months prior to his nomination.

Now, whether it was actually far enough back for him to conviently "fail to recall" the fact that he testified is an open question.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/22/121129/943

------------

Quite a good bit of discussion over there as to whether or not this causes a problem for Bolton.

[Ravy]

38. Thanks for the info/link! (n/t)

[rrrevolution]

31. reportedly Forms require Disclosure all legal matters involved in ...

He would have had to disclose his "involvement" even if he filled the forms out before he was called before the grand jury, and the timing does not appear to be in Bolton's favor since this investigation has being going on for almost 2 years.

[Catchawave]

37. When can we take our effffing country back from these

MORANS? Does everything have to be about fear, lies and loathing in this administration? Accccck.

I can't find ONE positive thing to say about this BushCo since they took office in '01. Not one. Even the Tsunami's original US support was an international embarrassment.

:rant:

[0007]

41. I've heard that a few of them floss on a daily basis. But that's

just hear say!

[savemefromdumbya]

39. Q. John Bolton Was Regular Source for Judith Miller WMD and Nat. Security?

Wow!

July 22, 2005
SCOOP: John Bolton Was Regular Source for Judith Miller WMD and National Security Reporting
TWN has just learned from a highly placed source -- and in the right place to know -- that John Bolton was a regular source for Judith Miller's New York Times WMD and national security reports.

The source did not have any knowledge on whether Bolton was one of Miller's sources on the Valerie Plame story she was preparing, but argues that he was a regular source otherwise.

It's all "thickening."

-- Steve Clemons
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/

[Garbo 2004]

54. That's a connection many had suspected. Thanks for the info. n/t

[Eloriel]

42. Good GAWD -- what makes you -- or Kos -- think this would sink him?

I don't know of any Repug who wouldn't just ignore a thing like that (perhaps after grousing just a bit for show), and no Dem in the Senate with enough guts and/or power to do anything about it either.

[natrat]

44. yea what's a little treason?

[Up2Late]

47. Save you copy NOW (the NYT page) to your hard drive, before it's gone!

(pop) oops, too late! Almost, as I posted above The NY Times has already edited the Saturday International Herald Tribune version WITHOUT the Bolton section!

I started a New thread about this at this link: <http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1950103#top>

[AuntiBush]

48. God. How Can Anyone Keep-Up With All Their Lies & Henchmen!?!