You are herecontent / Rove may be Bush's Montesinos

Rove may be Bush's Montesinos

Miami Herals

The problem with having a hatchet man is that sometimes he carries an ax that cuts both ways. Former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori discovered that the hard way. President Bush may be on the same learning curve.

When Fujimori was president during the 1990s, the debate in Peru was often whether he was the first or merely the second most important man in the country. The other person some considered even more powerful than the president was Vladimiro Montesinos.

Montesinos carried the title of intelligence advisor, an unpaid position in Fujimori's government. He did not let the lack of a paycheck or any designated responsibilities limit his ambition, however. He accumulated vast authority over the workings of the government because he was able, articulate and dedicated to constantly ingratiating himself to the president. He also was ruthless. Bribing congressmen and journalists was all in a day's work, and he has been accused of human-rights abuses, drug and arms trafficking and numerous other offenses.

Montesinos had at least two bizarre habits. First, he rarely appeared in public, which only added mystery to his aura of power. Second, he secretly videotaped his meetings so that those he bribed could be blackmailed if they did not hold up their end of the bargain. I met with him as U.S. ambassador on a few occasions, but always as part of a large group with one exception. Even though that meeting took place in the Minister of Health's office, he nonetheless brought along his video gear and clandestinely taped it.

The first anyone knew of the secret recordings was when a Peruvian television station obtained and broadcasted a leaked videotape of Montesinos bribing a congressman. After that revelation, things unraveled quickly for both Montesinos and Fujimori. When Fujimori tried to fire him, Montesinos at first defied him and then fled the country when the military supported the president.

A couple of months later, Fujimori, too, was forced to leave the county and faxed back his resignation. Montesinos was arrested in 2001 and returned to Peru to faces charges, while Fujimori has thus far successfully avoided extradition from Japan.

Dirty war

Montesinos remained powerful as long as he was useful to Fujimori. Protests and accusations from human-rights groups and the few journalists that withstood attempts to intimidate them were ignored by a complacent congress, a corrupt judiciary and a media that was largely co-opted. There was no outcry from the public to find out the truth about Montesinos because people were generally satisfied with Fujimori's success at taming rampant terrorism and inflation.

Karl Rove may turn out to be Bush's Montesinos. One book about Rove, by a journalist who has followed Rove for years, is entitled Bush's Brain for a reason. Using direct-mail techniques and character assassination, Rove has mastered the tactics of the dirty war that political campaigning has become.

Some might object to comparing Rove to Montesinos given the latter's criminal charges. We may never know the degree of Montesinos' guilt and the true scope of his crimes, however. After years of judicial proceedings, the best the Peruvian judicial system has been able to do is convict him on a few minor charges.

Docile congress

As for Rove, at this point it is clear that he discussed the identity of an undercover CIA officer with journalists. He did so in an attempt to discredit Joe Wilson, and it remains to be seen whether he committed a crime in that act or whether he subsequently perjured himself or obstructed justice. Wilson is a former U.S. ambassador who had the temerity to inform the American public that Bush used false information in a State of the Union address to justify his rush to war against Iraq. Congress has nonetheless taken no serious interest in examining Rove's actions.

A docile congress that is unwilling to be a check or balance on the potential abuse of power by the executive. A media more interested in access to high government officials than in honestly reporting what they are doing. A public so traumatized by the threat of terrorism that it is also indifferent. Peru and the United States have much in common. The only remaining question in either country is whether the judicial system is capable of justice.

Dennis Jett is the dean of the International Center at the University of Florida and a former U.S. ambassador to Peru and Mozambique.



Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld should be impeached and then arrested. Congressman Conyers, I know you read this site. I know you know in your heart that these people far exceed the moral AND legal test for impeachment. Why won't you stand up and say so? Why won't your fellow Dems stand up and say what we all know to be true?

You owe it to the American people, yourself and humanity to GO TO THE MAT and to do now. Shut down the governments business if that's what you have to do to move this forward and pound it into the American mind. These people are war criminals and traitors. If there is any possible way, you must stop them before they take us to war again, before they sell out our national security again. They have no right to do what they are doing. You must stop them. Only you and your fellow elected Democrats can. This is why the people elected you.

Start by simply saying what you believe: they have commited impeachable offences. And I promise you, in the end, not only will you know you've done the right thing, but politically you'll come out on top. Even the American people will come to know traitors and criminals in their midst if you show them often enough what they look like.

One minute I agree with you and the next I think..........Wait til after the elections in 2006. The Dems really need to have a majority before anything will be done.

Repubs won't come forward and be honest about all the laws that have been broken by this administration.

We must take back congress in 2006.

I don't necessarily believe all Republicans are not honest, look at the GOP Rep. who originally said "Freedom Fries" ... he changed his mind. Most Republicans suffer from party loyalty , not dis-honesty. Some of them are in the first stages of being de-programmed from cult-like Neocon propaganda, after all many of them ran on a pro-life platform, so they are probably very confused by W's lust for death now. These Neocons infiltrated the Republican Party and USED the Christian Right, they could have just as easily infiltrated the Democrat Party. Neoconism, by all appearances, seems to be a combination of Fascism and Zionism. Politics makes strange bedfellows. But in this case the Fascists and the Zionists want control of the same thing: the Middle East land and oil. From what I've read so far about John Conyers and Joe Wilson, they are very aware of these strange political bedfellows of the Neocons. It is their huge yet delicate task to pass this information on to the public. It is probably more a matter of timing of the 2006 elections , like you said , to get more Dems on board. I'm hoping the honest Republicans snap out of their party loyalty by then, and remember their Constitutional loyalty to Americans first. Our national security depends on impeaching these Neocon war criminals.

Republicans are drunk on power and oil.
There's vanishingly few good Republicans left in office-- i.e. Olympia Snow in Maine.
The only way to get ahead in Republicanville is to kiss the arse of DeLay and neoconism, since the neocons own the evote machines.

I don't know what the strategy will be for Independents (many who call themselves Independent are just liars because they don't want to admit to wives and family that they're hooked on Fox and emotionally addicted to neoconism-- in other words, they are neocons in disuguise), Greens, or Democrats.

Why hasn't there been a unified chorus coming from Greens, Democrats, and Independents about e-vote fraud coming up in 2006? For example: Why is everyone looking for the Dems to do something? And: heaven forbid, aren't Republican "moderates" also concerned-- or are there any Republican moderates left-- or are they extinct like the dodo?

I'll repeat the question: Why hasn't there been a unified chorus coming from Greens, Democrats, and Independents about e-vote fraud coming up in 2006?

After all, look what fraudulent elections got us...

Where are the Republican's that put Clinton's feet to the fire over the deficit. Clinton was the first President in 50 years to reduce the deficit, and balance the budget. Where are the Republican's who believe in smaller Government and a person's right to privacy. They all signed on the the Patriot Act and are pushing for it's renewel. Where are the Republican's who are against nation building and protecting the interests of America first. They all continue to support the war in Iraq. Where are the Republican's who were considered independent and moderate thinkers like John McCain. Despite his experiences in Vietnam and his treatment by Rove in the South Carolina primary, Has become one of Bush and the Neocons biggest supporters. The reality is there never has been a moderate Republican. Everything I mentioned was just smoke and mirrors, voo-doo economics, weapons of mass destraction. Republicans are finally being shown in their true light as the selfish, greedy, and power hungry bastards they always have been. So if your waiting for them to come around and help us, it's going to be a long wait.

The evidence is so stark, so compelling that to avoid being voted out in 2006 some in the GOP will break ranks. If the Dems push it out there those in the GOP will face a choice, admit the obvious or go down with the ship.

If you wait until 2006, what you will get in 2006 is another war (with Iran) and a repeat of what happened in 2002.

I totally, totally agree.

Conyers, if you read this site:
You're an upstanding guy and we need to hear TOUGH TALK from Dems. No more playing both sides.

Hoping for 2006 doesn't make much sense because the Republicans own the e-vote voting machines. Got it? They count the votes. Every Green, Independent, and Democrate will LOSE and lose hard in e-vote elections.

No more veiled politcal talk. You half to talk straight-- you have to use the words "impeachment", "war crimes", "STOP global warming NOW" and "learn from the stolen election in 2000, the stolen e-vote elections in 2004 and PREVENT stolen elections in 2006". Got it? You have to stand up now and fight our already hijacked democracy. The public is way ahead of you. When are you going to sense that we are in a SERIOUS crisis?

I want to know who fired, smeared, and trumped up charges on the other CIA officer who claimed Iraq's capablilites were nil. And how much more of the same behavior is going on in the CIA? What is our CIA like now? It's one thing to have it weakened but what is its purpose if the people who do their job are fired and smeared for doing it?

"We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq, and these are policies that we are going to keep in place." - Colin Powell, FEB 2001


Do you smell the Stasi in the air?

I found this in a Daily Koz posting in "Fitzgerald zeroes in on Rove"
What is the future of Fitzgerald. This country will break down if this case disappears that easily.

Rove v Fitzgerald (none / 0)

We have to have Fitz's back. His term for US Atty in Chicago expires in October and the news from Chicago is the Republicans there, along with Mayor Daly want Bush not to reappoint him. His term as SC also expires with the grand jury in October. His former boss, Comey, the only one with the authority to fire him is leaving for the private sector. Bush wants to replace him with Timothy Flanigan, a Federalist Society member, counsel for Tyco and lawyer who worked with Roberts on the SOCTUS case that won the election for Bush in 2000. Clearly, IMHO, this guy's MO is to fire Fitgerald for Rove and the BushCO team, burying the investigation. Arlen Specter needs to hear that an Archibald Cox maneuver won't be tolerated by the public. He needs to step up to the plate and not confirm this guy. People in PA, contact Specter, no to Timothy Flanigan.

Winning without Delay.

by ljm on Tue Aug 2nd, 2005 at 11:50:03 PDT
[ Parent ]

This is an interesting story. Who is Grover Norquist? He seems to have a lot of power for somebody who has not been elected to anything. One post said he belongs the the Heritage Foundation.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


Support This Site


Get free books and gear when you become a supporter.



Speaking Truth to Empire


Families United


Ray McGovern


Julie Varughese


Financial supporters of this site can choose to be listed here.



Ca-Dress Long Prom Dresses Canada
Ca Dress Long Prom Dresses on

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image.