Sen Rockefeller's letter to Luge & Biden re; Bolton & the NSA intercepts

[housewolf]

From Steve Clemmons "The Washington Note"


He has concerns and is speaking on the floor of the U.S. Senate this very moment about his concerns about John Bolton. What is fascinating about the letter that follows below is that you can sense Rockefeller's frustration with NSA and with the process involved that he was unable to pursue further questions he has about Bolton and how he used the NSA intelligence information.

Rockefeller has been forced to draw some conclusions from an incomplete data set. He was not allowed to see the names of those U.S. officials that had been provided to Bolton -- and he was not able to investigate whether or not there were "other cases" of misuse of information -- other than that where Bolton sought out an individual to "congratulate him" based on the intelligence Bolton had seen.

But Rockefeller points to behaviors that further underscore Bolton's reckless disregard for procedure and process and which collectively amount to the undermining of U.S. foreign policy initiatives and objectives.

Here is the letter:

Read it here...
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000657.html

[jean]

1. when in doubt (incomplete data) vote NO on Bolton. WH is not forthcoming?

Our Senators cannot, in good faith, in their duty to THE COUNTRY, vote yes on such a nominee when the bush WH withholds vital info on the guy.

[dogday]

2. They need that information, why did Boxer release hold?

This should not have anything to do with the Judicial nominees, but you never know what deals are being struck where and with who.

[housewolf]

4. See this post...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3729256&mesg_id=3729256

[JDPriestly]

3. Was the name Valerie Plame? or someone in a similar position?

Or do I not understand what happened.

As you may be aware, I wrote to then-Director of the National Security Agency (NSA), Lieutenant General Michael V. Hayden, on April 20, 2005, requesting any documentation related to Mr. Bolton's requests for the identity of a U.S. person included in classified intelligence reports produced by the NSA.

. . . .

The Committee has learned during its interview of Mr. Frederick Fleitz, Mr. Bolton's acting Chief of Staff, that on at least one occasion Mr. Bolton is alleged to have shared the un-minimized identity information he received from the NSA with another individual in the State Department. In this instance, the NSA memorandum forwarding the requested identity to State INR included the following restriction: "Request no further action be taken on this information without prior approval of NSA." I have confirmed with the NSA that the phrase "no further action" includes sharing the requested identity of U.S. persons with any individual not authorized by the NSA to receive the identity.

In addition to being troubled that Mr. Bolton may have shared U.S. person identity information without required NSA approval, I am concerned that the reason for sharing the information was not in keeping with Mr. Bolton's requested justification for the identity in the first place. The identity information was provided to Mr. Bolton based on the stated reason that he needed to know the identity in order to better under the foreign intelligence contained in the NSA report. According to Mr. Fleitz, Mr. Bolton used the information he was provided in one instance in order to seek out the State Department official mentioned in the report to congratulate him. This use of carefully minimized U.S. person identity information seems to be not in keeping with the rationale provided in Mr. Bolton's request.

An interview of Mr. Bolton by your Committee may provide a more complete understanding of the extent to which he may have shared with others the nineteen U.S. person identities he requested and received from the NSA. I believe it is a matter that deserves more thorough attention.

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000657.html

[housewolf]

5. I don't think this is related to Valerie Plame...

The NSA intercepts on question relate to classified data from the National Security Agency that contain information about what some American citizens said.

The theory is that Bolton was trying to find out who was saying what about him (Bolton), but no one in the Senate has yet been given access to the names of the persons Bolton requested the info about.

Roberts and Rockefeller (chairs of the Intelligence Committee) were allowed to see the intercepts, but not the names, and it was all classifed so they can't talk about what was in the intercepts.

One of the biggest questions now is what Bolton DID with the information he received. It seems there might have been nothing wrong with him requesting the info, but might be something wrong with what he did with it.

Very sticky situation, there's still an on-going investigation about all this with Bolton and it doesn't seem right that Frist brought the nomination to the floor while there's an ongoing investigation.

[JDPriestly]

6. I still don't understand what this means.

I thought he requested information on some sort of American agents. What kind of information was requested? What people said about Bolton? Do you mean what people who worked for Bolton said about him? Why would NSA be collecting information about what American citizens said about Bolton? What would that have to do with American security? I don't understand at all.

[FreedomAngel82]

7. Question from me

What would happen if it's found out it was Bolton who leaked the name of Plame? What would happen if it was also found out someone higher helped him? Didn't Cheney often go over to the CIA place and put pressure on them etc?

[housewolf]

8. Well, I expect if there was any evidence that Bolton did that...

the Special Investigator would call him in for a Grand Jury hearing, and take it from there, being that there is still a criminal proceeding going on about this.