Melody Townsel’s letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:
I’m writing to urge you to consider blocking in committee the nomination of John Bolton as ambassador to the UN.
In the late summer of 1994, I worked as the subcontracted leader of a US AID project in Kyrgyzstan officially awarded to a HUB primary contractor. My own employer was Black, Manafort, Stone & Kelly, and I reported directly to Republican leader Charlie Black.
After months of incompetence, poor contract performance, inadequate in-country funding, and a general lack of interest or support in our work from the prime contractor, I was forced to make US AID officials aware of the prime contractor’s poor performance.
I flew from Kyrgyzstan to Moscow to meet with other Black Manafort employees who were leading or subcontracted to other US AID projects. While there, I met with US AID officials and expressed my concerns about the project — chief among them, the prime contractor’s inability to keep enough cash in country to allow us to pay bills, which directly resulted in armed threats by Kyrgyz contractors to me and my staff.
Within hours of sending a letter to US AID officials outlining my concerns, I met John Bolton, whom the prime contractor hired as legal counsel to represent them to US AID. And, so, within hours of dispatching that letter, my hell began.
Mr. Bolton proceeded to chase me through the halls of a Russian hotel — throwing things at me, shoving threatening letters under my door and, generally, behaving like a madman. For nearly two weeks, while I awaited fresh direction from my company and from US AID, John Bolton hounded me in such an appalling way that I eventually retreated to my hotel room and stayed there. Mr. Bolton, of course, then routinely visited me there to pound on the door and shout threats.
Keep reading, it gets worse.
He indicated to key employees of or contractors to State that, based on his discussions with investigatory officials, I was headed for federal prison and, if they refused to cooperate with either him or the prime contractor’s replacement team leader, they, too, would find themselves the subjects of federal investigation. As a further aside, he made unconscionable comments about my weight, my wardrobe and, with a couple of team leaders, my sexuality, hinting that I was a lesbian (for the record, I’m not).
When I resurfaced in Kyrgyzstan, I learned that he had done such a convincing job of smearing me that it took me weeks — with the direct intervention of US AID officials — to limit the damage. In fact, it was only US AID’s appoinment of me as a project leader in Almaty, Kazakstan that largely put paid to the rumors Mr. Bolton maliciously circulated.
As a maligned whistleblower, I’ve learned firsthand the lengths Mr. Bolton will go to accomplish any goal he sets for himself. Truth flew out the window. Decency flew out the window. In his bid to smear me and promote the interests of his client, he went straight for the low road and stayed there.
John Bolton put me through hell — and he did everything he could to intimidate, malign and threaten not just me, but anybody unwilling to go along with his version of events. His behavior back in 1994 wasn’t just unforgivable, it was pathological.
I cannot believe that this is a man being seriously considered for any diplomatic position, let alone such a critical posting to the UN. Others you may call before your committee will be able to speak better to his stated dislike for and objection to stated UN goals. I write you to speak about the very character of the man.
It took me years to get over Mr. Bolton’s actions in that Moscow hotel in 1994, his intensely personal attacks and his shocking attempts to malign my character.
I urge you from the bottom of my heart to use your ability to block Mr. Bolton’s nomination in committee.
Respectfully yours,
Melody Townsel
Dallas, TX 75208
You can read more corroboration about John Bolton’s horrendous temper and poor judgment in Susan’s diary about his abuse of intelligence analysts.
John Bolton should have been fired from his job at the State Department for poor performance and abusive leadership. It makes no sense to hire John Bolton to represent our nation’s interests to the United Nations. Diplomacy is clearly not John Bolton’s strong suit.
You can read another thread on this at dkos. Kossack amyindallas has been best friends with Melody Townsel since they went to college together.
as well as US military and economic goals and objectives, not to mention overall foreign policy, it sounds like he’s the perfect match.
Kind of like Negroponte for Stasi chief.
Good Christ Almighty I’d like to say something pithy but I’m thinking my vocabulary has used up all my bad words for this crew of scumbags.
He sounds exactly like what BushCo looks for in a diplomat.
I don’t know how to balance the disgust with fear for this country.
– were Richard ‘the Night Stalker’ Ramirez and Charles Manson. But those were deemed to delicate and complaisant.
over on dKos and my jaw just dropped. How can anybody who operates like this be seriously considered for any sort of diplomatic post?
I hope Ms. Townsel gets to testify before the committee. This is just . . . there’s no words. I’m a word guy and I don’t have words for this. Every time I think I’ve hit Maximum Outrage Overload it just piles on some more.
Since this was first posted on dKos yesterday morning, it’s been picked up all over the place, by a number of Beltway-type blogs.
With all that publicity, I am hopeful that it is even now being read, studied, examined by folks in DC and that the writer will be allowed to tell her story in public.
No, he doesn’t. He is, by most accounts, a horrible man; the worst possible choice to represent this country.
After reading this account several times, I feel something’s missing. There’s no transition between the fifth and sixth paragraphs. A description of the actual meeting between the author and Bolton is not there. They meet; he starts chasing her down the hall, banging on her door, etc. What was said in that meeting? How did the tension escalate to such a pitch so quickly? Since the author was present during this experience, why isn’t she more explicit?
Am I the only one disturbed by this? Is it unimportant? I realize that the point is Bolton’s extreme unfitness to be even a member of the human race, and I agree with that; and I hope the Senate comes to its senses over this and rejects his confirmation. (Doubt it.) But do you see a hole in the narrative? When making a case of this kind, details are important. What am I missing?