quote: Senators may have blown the cover of a covert CIA officer yesterday.
During a hearing on John R. Bolton's nomination to be ambassador to the United Nations, Bolton and members of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee referred to the analyst as "Mr. Smith." They were discussing one of the officials involved in a dispute over what Democrats said was Bolton's inappropriate treatment of an intelligence analyst who disagreed with him.
"We referred to this other analyst at the CIA, whom I'll try and call Mr. Smith here," Bolton said at one point.
But the committee chairman, Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), and Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) mentioned a name that had not previously come up in public accounts of the intelligence flap.
In questioning Bolton, Kerry read from a transcript of closed-door interviews that committee staffers conducted with State Department officials before yesterday's hearing.
"Did Otto Reich share his belief that [the person in question] should be removed from his position? The answer is yes," Kerry said, characterizing one interview. "Did John Bolton share that view?" Kerry asked. Again, he said the answer was yes.
"As I said, I had lost confidence in Mr. Smith, and I conveyed that," Bolton replied. "I thought that was the honest thing to do."
It's not clear this is lefe threatening, since the person was an "analyst." But it seems to me that if you're trying to keep something secret, and you're going to talk about it in public, you would only bring the redacted version with you. It's hard to remember to do a substitution every time you see a word when you're reading aloud.
posted
We're clearly going to need to create a Red Carpet Club for operatives whose cover has been blown by members of the government, for one reason or another.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not clear they wanted this person secret for security reasons or just to avoid naming someone incidental to the topic. If this was classified at all, then they're walking around the Senate into public hearings with classified, unredacted information - fairly frightening. If they were just trying to protect this person's privacy, then it's "mere" incompetence.
Why Can't the CIA Tell Us More About Hugo's Plotting?
By MARY ANASTASIA O'GRADY/Editor The Americas
Wall Street Journal
The U.S. national intelligence officer for Latin America, Fulton T. Armstrong was called to testify before the House's International Relations Committee on Feb. 27. The HIRC invitation asked for an overview of "political and economic trends in the Western Hemisphere." Mr. Armstrong declined, according to the committee, on the grounds that he did not want to speak in an open, unclassified format.
From the NIC website.
quote: Fulton Armstrong National Intelligence Officer for Latin America Fulton T. Armstrong was appointed National Intelligence Officer for Latin America on 1 June 2000. Previously Mr. Armstrong served as Chief of Staff of the DCI Crime and Narcotics Center (CNC). Prior to that, he served two terms as a Director for Inter-American Affairs at the National Security Council (1995-97 and 1998-99) and as Deputy NIO for Latin America (1997-98).
Mr. Armstrong began his government career in 1980 as Legislative Assistant and Press Secretary to US Representative Jim Leach. In 1984-95, he served as analyst, political-economic officer, and manager specializing in Latin America in the both the intelligence and policy communities.
Prior to joining government, Mr. Armstrong worked four years as a reporter, editor, and translator in Taiwan. He earned his B.S. in Linguistics and Spanish at Georgetown University in 1976. He is fluent in Spanish and Mandarin Chinese.
I don't think it was a secret. Maybe it's just me.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is Amrstrong the one who was named? I didn't see his name anywhere.
Like I said, the only thing clear is they were trying to keep his name out of it and failed. It's not clear why.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
WASHINGTON - Mr. Smith came to Washington again Monday, as an alias for a Central Intelligence Agency officer who works covertly. Senators, however, may have blown his cover.
During questioning on John R. Bolton's nomination to be President Bush's ambassador to the United Nations, Bolton and members of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee referred to "Mr. Smith" as one official among several who were involved in a dispute over what Democrats asserted was Bolton's inappropriate treatment of an intelligence analyst who disagreed with him.
"We referred to this other analyst at the CIA, whom I'll try and call Mr. Smith here, I hope I can keep that straight," Bolton said at one point.
Committee Chairman Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., both mentioned a name, Fulton Armstrong, that had not previously come up in public accounts of the intelligence flap.
It is not clear whether Armstrong is the undercover officer, but an exchange between Kerry and Bolton suggests that he may be.
In questioning Bolton, Kerry read from a transcript of closed-door interviews that committee staffers conducted with State Department officials prior to Monday's hearing.
"Did Otto Reich share his belief that Fulton Armstrong should be removed from his position? The answer is yes," Kerry said, characterizing one interview. "Did John Bolton share that view?" Kerry said, and then said the answer again was yes.
"As I said, I had lost confidence in Mr. Smith, and I conveyed that," Bolton replied evenly. "I thought that was the honest thing to do."
posted
Trust me, most Senators don't know what is going on until 10 minutes prior to a hearing...sure, they get a memo the night before, but who knows if they read them...when they receive the breifing memo, opening statement and questions, they are relying on their staff to have written up everything correctly.
Hearings are like scripted plays with some improv every now and then...
Printer-friendly view of this topic
