Poor John, obviously an overpowering ego--just like Trump's, Is there anything worse than feeling (and being) supernumerary? Well, you can always pay an eager lawyer to try, try, try . . . to insert you into the limelight again.
5
Yet he won’t testify, it’s an “OH LOOK AT MOMENT” for Bolton who has always been starved for attention.
3
“Give me liberty or give my lawyer a call and ask him what the right thing to do is!”
3
First impeach Trump. Then prosecute Mulvaney, Giuliani and Sondman. Bolton's ruse is just more stalling, it's not needed for Trump, who admits corruption in the transcript of his conversation with Zelensky, and for Mulvaney, who is recorded as saying quid pro quo for personal gain is just business as usual in this White House. No need to wait any more.
6
This is ridiculous and behavior unbecoming of grown adults all the way around from the president on down. If you want a judge to rule on this then get a judge and get it in gear. It's a narrow question on a tight timeline. If the United States can declare war in a day, then legal minds ought to be able to prepare and resolve this in something under a week. This is exactly why half the population of this country is disgusted with our government. A bunch of dilly-dallying do nothings hiding behind words and rules. In real life this kind of dinking around isn't acceptable. Get a ruling, testify or shut up and go away.
7
If Bolton has any information, any at all, about this event he owes it to the country to speak out........
It may be good for Trump or bad but to play cute, cat and mouse, with this crisis is simply wrong.........
Patriotism should override any other personal or political considerations in this, an ever expanding Constitutional crisis.....
5
Given that the spineless, self-serving Republicans won't get rid of the most inept, corrupt and rule-of-law-killing president in our nation's history -- why the rush? Why not go to court, compel all these witnesses to testify? It might push the impeachment closer to the election, which would be a good thing. In the age of Trump's scandal-a-day, any impeachment now would be forgotten by 2020 and if the Republicans do nothing, Trump will turn it into vindication.
Just because he is an arrogant war monger with a giant ego doesn't mean he isn't driven by wounded pride and hatred. Trump humiliated a co-equal in vileness.He might want revenge. But it also could be a trap. Wanting to drag things out. And if he does testify might just say nothing really happened.
What a great country!
1
Bolton does not need a court order or permission to testify, and he knows it. It seems the real reason is he is afraid of Trump and his only way out is to say publicly "sorry, ring master, I had to."
No better than Ms. Lindsay Graham's position who won't read transcripts but still gives his absurd opinion based on ignorant nothingness.
3
Democrats have withdrawn a subpoena for Bolton's former deputy, Mr. Kupperman, and now indicate they will not even attempt to subpoena Bolton. That will just put off the question of whether a lawful subpoena must be obeyed by a potential witness. Trump's defense is based on telling subpoenaed witnesses not to appear for testimony. This has to be the first time in our history that a president has told witnesses openly to defy the law. These witnesses are necessary to prove the democrats' case for possible impeachment. And the president should be held accountable.
As much as I would like to see Trump impeached, I think it is just as important to have a court rule on this question. Trump will be gone eventually, one way or another. But perhaps future presidents trying to skirt justice will try to use the same tactics in defiance of the rule of law and our democracy.
Democrats should have this issue determined now, as expeditiously as possible, regardless of Bolton's testimony.
I think Bolton and his attorney are actually doing the country a public service by asking the court system to decide these questions of immunity, subpoenas, privilege. We need to hear from the Supreme Court. The House, claiming that all this silence is evidence for another Article of Impeachment- how easily the Senate can interpret silence as it chooses. We need facts.
Delaying tactics? If the House doesn’t demand it’s subpoenas be honored, especially in an Impeachment investigation, especially when the allegation is trading on national security issues, what will the next administration hide? The next department head?
And has anyone asked for, subpoenaed, any/all tape recordings of these calls? Transcripts? In this day and age? Heard by the very administration officials now being investigated? How is that in any way creating a reliable record of what our government officials are doing- in our name?
After this fiasco is over, we need some serious updating, reconsideration of how this government is running. For now, the courts are our best answer. Delay? We can’t afford not to- but then, delay, lack of desire to impeach, was the default position of Speaker Pelosi. Leverage. Interpreting silence, guesswork, implications...that’s what we’re getting? Quit playing games. Demand the courts speak. Quickly.
1
He needs to put country over party. Playing cute is so inappropriate at this dangerous point in our country's history. The house committee is correct. If they have something to say that is exonerating they'll say it. If not, their refusal implies guilt.
If Bolton believes there was a "drug deal" that was fundamentally wrong, then thank goodness he is the Patriot that so many have called him in the past. Clearly, a true Patriot will eventually speak up, whether inside or outside of the legal system, about something he believed to be so wrong and against our national interest. If he doesn't speak out, the only reasonable conclusion would be that he is complicit.
1
I got the impression Bolton wants to testify, but is saying, "do me this one thing, have a judge make me do it". He's trying to go the middle road by not defying Trump or crony Republicans, but giving explicit instructions to House Democrats on how to attain his testimony. It's a speed bump, but the House subpoena is a constitutional right while executive privilege is... just a privilege. No judge has turned down any of the subpoenas so far.
1
There’s something about this that makes it hard to wrap my head around. I’d hate to think this is the result of some miscommunication, yet if Bolton was truly motivated to testify, one would think he'd already have appeared. Especially as he wold have been behind closed doors.
1
What is Bolton's problem? It strikes me that he wants to be able to deny that he willingly helped a Republican president to be impeached. Patriotism never occurs at ones convenience. If he has something to say, he needs to say it.
2
The scariest scenario is that the court rules for the administration and it goes to the supreme court with two fresh trump appointees. Is what Bolton wants an imperial presidency where Congress cannot effectively impeach a president guilty of bribery?
1
Those who refuse to show up when subpoenaed are simply breaking the law.
Trump’s ultimate goal is to establish that he doesn’t have to obey the law. He is declaring that he has dictatorial powers, and that the rule of law does not apply to him.
The framers of our Constitution established the House of Representatives as a co-equal branch of government with powers of oversight over the executive branch for this very reason.
Trump claimed that there was an attempted coup in progress, and we all know how he projects everything that he is guilty of, and in this case, he and complicit Congress people are the ones who are attempting to overthrow the government and rule of law in America.
These are serious crimes.
They must pay a price for their betrayal of America.
3
Why is Bolton being so coy? I would like to see HIS tax returns to see if he needs the money. If he needs the money, he no doubt would like to return to Fox News with the excuse, "They MADE me testify!" Otherwise, if he doesn't need the money, he doesn't work for the government anymore, he probably has some type of pension, he's probably fixed for life and is in better financial shape than 99% of us. Let's hope he hasn't sold his soul to the Russians, like all the other Republicans.
1
John Bolton is a REPUBLICAN institutionalist. He values our current posture with a right wing Israeli regime and a troublesome Iran. He values unrestricted military spending and an updated nuclear arsenal. He may also favor deregulation and massive tax cuts at home. He no doubt fears a new Democratic administration that might go soft on his favored enemies.
John Bolton also has to run in Republican social and intellectual circles after Trump leaves the stage. So he’s conflicted. Never a friend to Democrats, he has to feel legally compelled to tell the damaging truth. Given his apparent disgust with Trump, I imagine he’s publicly on the edge but really, really wants to nail the orange one. He also wouldn’t mind being the center of national attention for several weeks, and maybe portrayed positively in the history books. He may also know of other damaging conversations stored away in the top secret server - he for sure would have had code word access. He also hates Russia and has to feel Trump is somehow compromised by Putin.
I agree with those who say the Dems should seek an expedited court ruling. Theoretically, that should take no more than a few weeks. Definitely not months. Bolton could make a limited proffer to Adam Schiff to show his good will and value. I think there’s at least a fifty percent chance Bolton makes an appearance before the impeachment proceedings are done.
"Mr. Cooper argued that if the House was serious about an inquiry, then Mr. Bolton would be a logical person to question."
Then:
""Only a court can decide in their case, Mr. Cooper added. “If the House chooses not to pursue through subpoena the testimony of Dr. Kupperman and Ambassador Bolton," he wrote, “let the record be clear: That is the House’s decision.”"
We need a stronger word than disingenuous here. Does he think that the House may not be serious? And let's be clear: the President has no legal power to compel Bolton not to testify. He is choosing to disregard a legitimate request for the flimsiest of reasons and the record IS clear. Lawyer Cooper knows that the courts will take a while to resolve this; he also knows that the ultimate resolution to a subpoena request will be that he has to obey; and I suspect that Bolton - although I disagree with him on almost everything since his time at the UN - is an honorable man and would tell the truth. I still remember those heady days of long ago where you could disagree with someone without assuming that they had dark motives.
This just seems odd to me. Bolton's attorney seems to be implying that Bolton would like to testify and has important stuff to say, but doesn't want to do it without a resolution to the previous lawsuit. However, if Bolton REALLY wanted to testify, why wouldn't he just do it and dare Trump's team to make the case in court that it was illegal when it seems like Trump has a losing hand on this?
Bolton has also been such a Neocon warrior that even if he hates Trump, I have a hard time imagining him willingly handing Democrats such a big victory. So, I'm left a bit suspicious of his and his attorney's motives here.
1587
@Hans
Above all, Bolton is a republican. I Think he is trying to tempt the Democrats to pursue legal means as a way of dragging out the process. Don’t take the bait.
250
@Hans , He wants maximum time in the sun.
42
I think it’s his way of asking for immunity
69
John Bolton is an
honorable man. One
may respectfully disagree
with some of his ideas
but I believe he has integrity.
I would hope that his sense
of “right and wrong” will
compel him to testify.
It is important to
know what transpired in
these meetings.
3
The brave public servants who've testified show something none of the current Republicans on the Hill, Trump cabinet and political appointees have demonstrated: a sense of their own responsibility to the United States.
Mr. Trump has always spoken (mostly erroneously) of his rights rather than his duties, and he's managed to recruit an administration who put him or their own agendas way before us, the Constitution, or federal law.
Every elected or appointed government employee takes an oath to the constitution, not to the president. Mr. Trump has never shown any grasp of that or any other Constitutional subtlety, but the 100=odd Republican attorneys in Congress should know better.
Let's hope Mr. Bolton, also an attorney (or at least a law school grad), remembers.
8
Now is the time for John Bolton to prove he is a patriot. He is good at talking the talk; now is the time he needs to walk the walk, or he will he is as much of a coward as Trump is.
8
It appears John Bolton is seeking attention again, by letting his lawyer, Charles Cooper, who represents him and his former deputy, Charles Kupperman, to suggest that he could reveal more than what House investigators know so far.
No doubt Bolton would be “an important witness in the impeachment inquiry.” Yet his lawyer “wants a court to rule on whether he should testify.”
Why does he want to create such a drama?
It’s true that Trump – backed by Justice Department – has blocked his former advisers and aides, like Don McGahn, who have been subpoenaed by the House, from testifying.
But why can’t he and Kupperman defy Trump’s instruction and testify?
Nine administration officials and civil servants loyal to the Constitution had defied the White House in recent weeks. They complied with the congressional subpoena and testified - without much ado. Bolton and Kupperman should do the same.
7
They merely are dangling bait. I would not trust Bolton or Cooper as far as I might throw them. Stay firm Rep. Schiff, et alia! Do not get caught up in this ploy.
4
First reaction: coward.
The real question is - will kowtowing to Bolton’s strategery and eventually hearing what he has to reveal change the minds of any of the senate jurors? I think not.
His hubris has cemented his legacy of unimportance.
Sweep him into the accumulating dustbin of the best tainted Trump toadies.
2020. Dump trump. Ditch Mitch. Can FLIM flam graham.
5
If John Bolton is not the whistle blower he should do the honorable thing and stop all these childish excuses, he acts tough but chickens out in the face of tyranny. Do the needful and show you have the principle of respect for the rule of law. He is experienced enough to know when a question from congress crosses into an a conflict zone. At least he is not claiming the dumb executive privilege.
2
How many people is it by now whom he's "never heard of"? These are people working at a high level in his administration. He hired them, and in many cases he's in fairly regular contact with them. He's sure they're "very fine people" (another phrase we've heard before, in disturbing contexts). But I guess they were all there to carry coffee.
Perhaps it'll be Giuliani's and Mulvaney's turn soon. When you sup with the devil you should bring a long spoon.
4
if he took his oath of office seriously, he'd walk in without an invitation and tell all.
6
If Bolton has something to say and he honestly cares about the future of our country, he should come forward and say it - not play coy games. Period, full stop, end of story. As it is, he’s showing himself to be the self-serving snake he’s always been. Here’s your chance to clear your reputation, sir - how about it?
6
Is he delaying until he gets his book finished? Telling his story before congress will cut into his book sales.
Coward.
5
Poor John R. Bolton. So many things to do, so little time to do them. First and foremost he must protect his rear end by keeping clear of the Trump-Barr-Mulvaney-Giuliani "drug deal" and "hand grenade", as he has so sound-bitingly put it. Then he must keep himself visible and in the news for his book deal., the cable news events, etc. The strategy to meet these goals seems to be trying to play both sides. So he seeks some rapproachment with the Democrats in the House by dangling little shiny objects before them, while at the same time keeping his Republican war-mongering far-right credentials by not running in and testifying pursuant to subpoena. He can easily get the better of the Occupant, his enablers, and his fringe crown of chicken-hawks and the like, but Adam Schiff is so beyond his reach.
5
Reads to me like "Hey, don't forget me! Look at me! I'm important! But first you have to give me legal cover, because I'm afraid of taking responsibility for my own actions in aiding and abetting an idiotic and corrupt president."
6
If Bolton really was the patriot he pretends to be, he wouldn't need a court to "direct" him to testify. He'd do it willingly. Yet another Trump administration liar and coward.
8
Put up or shut up cowards.
Bolton and Kupperman are playing a cowards game. They know they should show up because it is the right thing to do but they want to have a veil so they can go on associating with other "conservatives" in future dealings.
7
Please note the translation of Bolton's lawyer's remarks: "I know many things you want to hear. I am important to you. You want to make me cooperative and happy -- and I am in deep, deep poo thanks to my own intransigent and anti-everybody else nationalism which I am afraid is about to come home to roost. MAKE ME A DEAL 'cause I don't want to go to jail." Yup, yes indeedy. Suddenly the moustache looks not only overgrown but droopy.
6
Bolton was invited. He refused to show. If he truly thought it was important and he was truly doing his duty, he would have appeared like Yovonovich, Nill and Vindman.
6
Bolton claims he has important information related to the impeachment but won’t talk unless a judge says he can.
Nobody, it seems, has said he cannot.
Is this:
The voice of a guy who has the goods on Trump who is afraid of being caught by the Organization’s lawyers?
Or;
A plant - a still-loyal Trumpsnista who has been prepped by Giuliani to let go “on cross-examination” with a barrage of claims that Obama-associated Clinton (why her name is suddenly appearing in Trump supporters’ mouths seems to be based on the theory a good many voters feel, like Vladimir Putin, that she is the Ultimate Enemy - possibly true in Putin’s case), and Biden are one in the same.
It is interesting the number of white folks still upset their head of state was black, and anyone connected to him therefore evil.
Just as the number of men who seem to think the country’s image would be “damaged” if represented by a woman.
Talk about backwards thinking.
3
Hates being left out of the game of kick ball.
3
Trump is terrible. Period. He has created nothing but chaos. He must be impeached as soon as possible.
4
Does he know about relevant meeting that the public should know about? Of course he does, he's seen this entire scandal from the inside. Will he be entirely forthcoming and honest about the events he's seen? Well, that is entirely open for debate.
Even if he did provide insightful testimony and undeniable evidence of conspiracy, would it change the vote's of anyone in the US Senate? I think this is highly doubtful. The GOP isn't lock-step with Trump because they believe him, they know he's an idiot that criminally abused his power, they are with him because they are terrified of him and his fanatically loyal base (and nothing Mr. Bolton says will change their mind's).
Delaying the impeachment proceedings to accommodate Mr. Bolton's need for judicial cover would be a gamble. You'd be betting on the courts to rule in your favor, for that trial to be quick, for Mr. Bolton to be honest and able to convey the gravity of what he saw, and finally you'd be betting on the GOP to have some kind of moral epiphany and acknowledge that they put a monster in the White House.
That's a lot to bet on when the state of your democracy is on the table.
3
Dear Mr Bolten, we don't need your testimony. Real patriots have stepped up and had the courage to testify. And, because you're showing your lack of concern for our national security, I will never purchase your upcoming book.
6
A person who hides behind a lawyers brief when Democracy is threatened could be called a coward!
6
As I read through the comments a thought came to mind: what if Bolton’s statements /testimony/knowledge is that “there was NO illegal ask”? What then?
1
Then he should be happy to step up and say it
3
Only one violation of law here, ignoring subpoena. The other choice violates only political ideology. He is a coward and scofflaw who breaks his oath office just like every other Republican.
3
The comments and the article raise the question of the Congress's power to compel testimony in an impeachment proceeding. Is there a question about this? Bring on the lawyers NYT.
2
SHAME on Bolton and his lawyer for needing a court to define patriotism. COWARDS! These spineless creatures with no moral compass need to fade away into oblivion as quickly as possible.
4
What kind of game is Bolton playing?
I think Bolton has figured out Trump as an all roar and no bite President. Bolton realizes other foreign leaders now see Trump the same way and will take full advantage in places like North Korea, China, Syria, Turkey, and Iraq. Bolton realizes that 5 more years of Trump ineffective foreign policy will bolster and strengthen regimes he hates. Couple that with the demeaning way Trump treated him and Bolton's reputation for vindictiveness, Bolton could end up being a very damning witness.
2
Looks like a publicity stunt. If Bolton cared anything about his country, he would not be playing this RogerStoneEsque game.
4
Bolton needs to write a book and make a lot of money. Because if he outs Trump he will lose the support of Republican donors to his PAC.
1
Recent history with the GOP says this is likely a sucker punch from Bolton, aimed at the heart of democracy
2
Bolton's testimony could be a game changer and a nail in Trump's coffin that only a mental and moral midget could possibly ignore.
So come on, Democrats ... issue him a subpoena. He is practically begging you to.
Then go to court and plead with the court to decide on this urgent matter NOW.
I mean trial judges decide motions in the course of a trial and don't delay the trial for months and months and months. Why can't the court treat these proceedings the way a trial judge would?
It sounds like Mr. Bolton would like Congress to "do him a favor".
2
Can someone please make sure I'm right?
Can someone else please look up the National Securities Act,
Sec 503 [50 U.S.C SS 413b]
The part that begins
(a) The president may not authorize the covert act...
I found it here:
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/ic-legal-reference-book/national-security-act-of-1947
When I read it, it sounds like the president must file documentation with Congress if he feels a "covert act" (which is what this Guiliani side investigation was, right?) needed to be done. And if anyone was involved, or had info, they needed to file reports. Wouldn't this, then, apply to Bolton as the National Security Advisor at the time?
I'm not a pro at reading this stuff, so if someone would like to forward that to his attorney, which is on the letterhead in the article, if I'm right, or even just for HIM to read, then maybe it will give him a reason to testify. Maybe?
2
Bolton is a coward. If he cared about our country he would testify before Congress and tell the truth about what he knows.
I'm not surprised.
2
The court of public opinion wants John Bolton to spill his guts. Good enough?
2
Well, of course, Bolton has many things to say. He will just do it on Fox or write a book, like Condi Rice, and make some money out of it. Love of country? The truth? The rule of law? Patriotism? Doing one's duty?
All for suckers and losers. Not for manly chicken hawks who had no such reservations about going to war for nothing.
3
Bolton is a right wing neocon republican. I would not trust him as far as Trump could throw him.
3
White House staff present and former: “Nobody here but us chickens!”
1
If JB were a patriot he’d testify
He just doesn’t want to give away the hot hot stuff in his book
1
A patriot would testify. If you and exonerate the Prez, do so.
Chuck Schumer needs to explain to Bolton that he will never be confirmed again if he doesn't quit playing coy
1
John Bolton allegedly compared Ukraine as a “drug deal”
1
Mr. Bolton, step up and fulfill your duty as a patriot! Trump is the real hand grenade and you know it.
2
Ok, what game is this wannabe Bolton playing now? To him, it seems that this is all a big game and he wants to be certain that John Bolton comes out a winner.
1
Now if the average God-Fearing, Tax Paying American citizen "skipped a deposition", she would be dragged in manacles into a jail cell.
Now today, in our Godless, lawless Trump Administration, dozens of light weight, in competent, inexperienced administration officials disregard on Congressional subpoena and our spineless Democrats shrug it off.
2
To expect someone like John Bolton to even think about putting country over self is "pie in the sky" thinking. All the legalistic chatter, looking for honorable behavior for one of Bolton's ilk, is nothing but insane conversation at a Mad Hatter's tea party.
13
That Bolton, of all people, is suddenly circumspect is amusing.
7
Seems quite obvious that Founding Fathers couldn't imagine a deeply corrupt grifter would ever be President.
Times have changed and here we are...President a compulsive liar...
Republicans and base support persists...
Stunning.
10
Don’t take the bait. We’re talking about John Bolton here. This arrogant, immoral, neo-con idealogue is going to hand the Democrats a huge gift? Nah, I don’t think so. He should not be given a platform.
13
This tells me Bolton has something to add but has legit executive privilege concerns to iron out in the courts
3
A film suggestion for John Bolton: Do The Right Thing.
5
Why is Bolton's lawyer putting out bait for?
5
Who would have ever thought that thundering John Bolton would become the avenging angel in this long drawn out tragi-comic melodrama. Message to Bannon, Miller, Trump, et al., “Be careful what you wish for . . . “
6
For Trump and the Republicans the Jig Is Up..
6
Bolton,and Kupperman want so badly to testify that they have to wait for a Federal Judge to OK it! Sounds like a fishy set up for the Democrats to me.
7
Signalling for a deal.
7
Here is Bolton's chance to prove how patriotic he is.
6
Bolton is about as illegitimate a "witness" as one could cite. He has a score to settle with Trump and is otherwise a life-time government bureaucrat with really bad teeth. His real calling is as a car wash attendant or perhaps a high school gym teacher...
1
This guy has a book to sell, about to be released. If there is anyone who thinks this is more than a PR stunt, Bolton will also be happy to sell you a bridge to Brooklyn.
5
Schiff and the Democrats’ hopeful view of Bolton: “the enemy of me enemy is my friend.” Seems risky, like accepting a ride across the river on the back of a wolf.
6
What kind of upside down world do we live in? We've fallen so far that Bolton seems like the voice of reason. I'm terrified of what this means for the country.
7
So Presidential wrongdoing can be hidden by some confidentiality thing? Ha ha! Riiight! Good luck with that one, Don.
5
Bolton-
Put up or shut up.
If you know of a crime, you should speak up.
If your pres is innocent you should speak up.
Trying to sell a few more books?
15
Sorry, John, others have copped to it, and quite frankly, go back to writing your memoirs, we don’t need you already.
4
Ahaha. Now that the House doesn't need to hear from Bolton, he is struggling to stay relevant. I bet he testifies anyway, without a subpoena, just so he can stay in the news.
6
If Bolton truly wanted to testify and further enlighten our nation about Trump's corrupt foreign policy practices he wouldn't be playing the subpoena game with the House Intelligence committee. Chairman Schiff, who has stated the committee would welcome Bolton's voluntary testimony, has also made clear the committee will no longer engage in "rope-a-dope" practices by federal officials seeking to entangle the investigation in long court battles. I think that is wise and it has not prevented the committees from obtaining important and damning evidence. Bolton is a coward trying to play the situation both ways. He doesn't have once ounce of the courage or ethic of Vindman, Yovanovitch, William Taylor, Fiona Hill and others who have come forward to testify despite Trump's searing insults and threats. They are true patriots. Bolton ought to either step up to the plate and testify or go home and write his tell all book like so many other former Trump officials who just can't seem to acknowledge the fact that Trump is a fraud, an "emperor with no clothes" who poses a real threat to our national security and our republic – and do something about it.
15
Bolton seems to be begging to testify before Congress, dangling tantalizing hints that he can provide information on relevant face-to-face conversations with Trump.
His subpoena has been withdrawn. He is not being asked to come forward. Yet still, he discusses getting a court's authorization to testify. He's dying to come forward, with a permission slip.
That is no longer relevant. If he wants to come forward, he can, on his own free will.
Bolton is a very conservative, hawkish Republican, with a grievance about Giuliani at the moment. He loyally served Trump, and has clearly been a right wing person of influence for some time.
It's not certain that any comments he would make--where he disagreed with Trump, and where he heartily supported him--would enlighten this impeachment investigation.
5
Why is there even such a thing as "Executive Privilege" except in the most sensitive instances of national security? Aren't the the president and his staff working for the people? Aren't we paying them to do our work of running the nation? Doesn't their "work product" belong to us?
If these people are upright and honest, and not doing anything illegal or scandalous, then why should it have to be hidden away from the people's scrutiny by spurious claims of "executive privilege"?
9
So when exactly did these Ultra Conservatives, these toss the book at the jay-walkers, suddenly lose their alleged moral compasses?
Did they leave them in the limos and chartered planes? In the overheads, in between the seats? Left them in the restrooms of those dark paneled, scotch and cigar bars, the ones populated by mostly white males?
Is there a Lost and Found dept someplace with boxes of Conservative Republican, white-Male's, Moral Compasses? Must be.
Guys who revile and denigrate the Judicial system when its applied in their general direction - now need to have their hand held to do the right thing? "Come on little boy, don't be scared, jump right up into the big-boy seat and tell the truth." (ice cream to follow)
What a disgrace the whole of the Conservative, Republican Clan is now. That they have become such lap-dogs to of all people Donald Trump!
Donald Trump people! Donald Trump of all the potential potentates that could have come along, its Trump that made these chest-thumping law and order tough-guys crawl.
14
Bolton has been a well-known trouble maker in D.C. for years and who recommended him to be the NSC adviser to Trump? A notorious guy since his years at the AEI.
6
The man comes in as the biggest nothing that ever existed, just behind Mr. Trump.
Nothing from nothing leaves nothing.
MB
5
He's begging the Democrats to take him to court! Don't do it. If he fails to answer a subpoena, can the House Sergeant at Arms go get him?
Yeah, you're some patriot, Mr Bolton.
12
Why does John Bolton need a clearance from Court, to testify? Is he subject to a Non Disclosure agreement with the WH? Unclear whether that is the case. Previously, Bolton has said, he would not testify voluntarily. But, would do so under a Subpoena.
Possibly, Bolton is trying to draw the attention of the president, while claiming he has relevant information which the Impeachment Investigation does not. Or, he is on a marketing campaign, in preparation to sell his book.
No matter what Bolton is saying or thinking, he has a lot to learn from those patriotic witnesses who have come forward. They did not feel the need to seek clearance or permission from any source. Bolton just lacks that sense of duty and patriotism.
9
If Bolton was a real patriot, he would testify without a subpoena. I suspect that he doesn't want to do it, as it will blow the premise of his new book....I don't know for sure, but if I was a person in power, I think I would do the "right thing" to preserve my country....
9
Bolton’s not going to ‘tell all’...you’ll have to wait for his book for that.
7
Seems like Bolton has a book in the works he wishes to sell. And this is just an effort on his part to make himself as important and as relevant as possible in anticipation of the release of his upcoming book. At this juncture it seems that Bolton's only interested in book sales and $$$.
5
Spineless of John Bolton, asking a court to decide is slow walking this disaster. he knows better, but sold his soul and the country's when hitched his dingy to the bloated mess that is this presidency.
10
Bolton and his lawyers claim Bolton needs authoriization from the courts to tell about his involvement in the Ukraine scandal. But I am confident he and his lawyers won't need court approval to tell about the Ukraine scandal when he publishes his tell-all book next year.
8
Please, Bolton is like a guy hoping his friends to hold him back while pretends he wants to fight someone.
9
Bolton, this is your last chance to tell the truth, after all those lies about WMD's.
9
Here's Bolton's chance to get back at his ex-boss and the way he was treated. Testify, Mr. Bolton. The Country will owe you big time.
1
Very simple solution. Do what’s best for the country. No excuses. No looking out for yourself. Do what is right. Testify.
10
If Bolton receives a subpoena to appear and testify and he defies it, he can be held in Contempt of Congress.
The Supreme Court enacted law this many years ago and it is a jail-able offense.
If he is in contempt, then arrest him, and Lock Him Up!
7
Bolton needs a court order to tell the truth ?
5
It's interesting how full of bravado these neocons are until they actually have to sacrifice something. C'mon John, if you're such an uber-patriot, prove it by having the courage to tell Congress what you know. Otherwise, stop dripping this stuff out through your lawyer.
6
I am wondering if Bolton is “Anonymous.”
5
Maybe we have found Anonymous.
2
Do the right thing, John Bolton. You have had no hesitancy sending our young people to war; now, it's your turn to stand up for your country.
7
"his lawyer wants a court to rule on whether he should testify"
Why such niceties, kick his door down and unilaterally drag him into the hearing, and if he doesn't give straight answers then water board him ha ha congress should exercise a little sovereignty ha ha
3
No writer of drama nor comedy could possibly invent the bizarre reality and the whiplash twists of these times. -C
2
Why does this ridiculous judge believe that he can slow walk an impeachment related decision. He’s a disgrace.
1
I suspect this is part of Bolton's book promotion tour.
3
You could almost sing the song from Sound of Music to this headline: These are a few of my relevant things … When the dog bites When the bee stings etc.
2
I predict that he’ll testify that Rudy is the bad guy and that Trump was ignorant of the issues involved. He’ll portray Trump as the guy who didn’t understand the nuances and illegalities of the situation. As in the past, someone is thrown under the bus and Trump escapes, ignorant and blameless.
5
This is ridiculous. Bolton should do what is right for the country, whether his information would condemn or acquit Trump, we need to know. Testify, please, sir!
2
If Bolton was a true American patriot, he would testify immediately. Period.
4
Bolton, Mattis, Kelly, McMaster, Tillerson knew how inept, inchoreant, dangerous,and lawless Trump is.Why don't they take advantage of the impeachment hearing and offer to testify? Tell us what they witnessed first hand, and why he must be impeached,convicted, and removed.
Why are they holding back?
What are they afraid of?
Did Trump forced all of them to sign NDA? I can't imagine Mattis,Kelly or Tillerson would sign such a humiliating paper to join his cabinet.
4
Is this real, or just a moment? Is he sincere, or just dishing out fodder for a future book deal? I real don’t trust anyone in this administration as far as I can spit.
4
With the absolute impotence of the Congress in the face of the child president, what are we going to face when the republicans elect someone savvy and utterly ruthless like an Erdogan type?
We won't be able to stop him.
3
If you would've told me in 2004 that in 15 years John Bolton might play a critical role in bringing down a Republican government I would've laughed in your face.
1
True patriots just tell the truth. If Bolton is innocent, he should just testify for the good of the country.
4
Give us a break;
Bolton is a fake patriot what likes to sell a book.
Please nobody should buy this book from him.
He is a corrupt GOP politician what has no friends anymore.
I'm sure he doesn't ask the court if he can publish his book??
Only tells us the truth when we pay for his book.
Forget him and never mention his name again.
3
Trump today bragging that the witnesses so far don't even have first hand knowledge....of course the testimonies so far have been extremely and professional from significant witnesses. The case for impeachment is compelling.
But Trump blocking White House witnesses from the inquiry....how does that help his case? The witnesses involved in this conspiracy are not being allowed to testify. Subpoenas being ignored is obstruction of justice. Refusing to testify suggests guilt. This President, Mulvaney, Pompeo, Giuliani are all disgusting liars. The whole world knows this.
3
Rather than awaiting the over of a court order, Bolton should stand up & testify like a patriot...be hero life’s short.
This is not some a noble legal stand on Bolton's part. It is a warning. Bolton could have testified today and there would have been no putting the genie back in the bottle. What he did instead was make it clear he has the goods and that he WILL testify if need be. The tease that he knows even more than already revealed is notice to the Republicans in both chambers of Congress that they don't want this to go any further, lest they end up having to make a no-win choice between disregarding damning evidence or impeachment. He's giving the Republicans an out...What will they do with it?
4
Bolton should be a patriot instead of a tease, and testify. Plain and simple. He knows who and what Trump is, and he must speak up,
I don't trust Bolton. I fear he will prove to be another Barr.
2
It's a trap! Don't bite down!
Maybe he wants his gig back at Fox..... Don't fully grok this one!
1
"Who woulda thunk it?"
Perhaps Bolton, for all his hawkishness, for all his war-mongering, his naked pursuit of power fir himself and this nation...
...may be the one who provides the key that opens the door to all of the manipulations and machinations of this President and his administration?
As much as I have disdained Bolton, for years, he may actually be trying to do "the right thing."
I cannot fault him for wanting legal cover...and I never imagined I would be writing these words!
1
It is now clear that Mulvaney, Sondland, and Guiliani were involved in a rogue operation.
Like the patriot Ollie North, they were acting in the interests of the Fatherland.
Unfortunately Herr Trump was wholly unaware that the three had set up an extortion scheme against our dear ally the Ukraine.
This disloyal trio risked the long term security interests of the Fatherland,
allowing the Russians to remain in Crimea and advance in the Donbas region.
Had Herr Trump known he would have halted the criminal bribery and racketeering immediately.
He had no idea that funding for Javelin missiles had been held up.
And once the transcript is released,
you will find he NEVER EVER used the word corruption.
3
I think Bolton should NOT be trusted. I also think he’s not employed by the US Government anymore so he doesn’t need a court order to compel him to testify. That to me sounds like legal maneuvering or perhaps delay tactics. Either way Bolton is being shady & shouldn’t be trusted.
5
One thing this article doesn't address is when we can expect a decision from the court. Isn't it traditional for courts to expedite time sensitive matters?
I've never liked John Bolton, to put it mildly, but I have thought that he is an ideologue who actually believes his own rhetoric, rather than a slimy hustler like Dick Cheney. You don't have to follow the money to find out what Bolton's up to. He's what he is.
That said, why doesn't this "patriot" stand up and do the right thing. Even if it gives the Democrats something they want, he knows what's at stake from a national security perspective if Trump is allowed to get away with his shenanigans.
6
This entire process is playing out as two sides with different sets of rules. Trump with power of Executive, seemingly unchallenged. Dems trying to find a hand hold but groping, unable to enforce subpoena power granted by The Constitution....
There it it is.
Aggressive prosecution of a corrupt criminal enterprise of Trump and his minions is only option and Dems dither.
Many still hope that Justice may be served... but despair at Dems languid approach.
1
The dude’s a fraud - always has been, always will be. If he had any convictions, his transcript would have been released yesterday.
4
"whether he should testify..." So answering subpoenas is now optional?
7
The House shouldn't legitimize Bolton with his presence under any circumstance.
He was in a position to do something about the QPQ and didn't when it was happening so why validate his ineptness with his testimony now.
Looks like the House has enough validation of the QPQ with honest and eager Patriots giving their side of the matter.
3
The House Impeachment Committee needs to hear from John Bolton! Why can’t the court speed up it's decision on whether or not Bolton is required to testify? What is the hold up?
3
Bolton is trying to find a way for The House to depose him. Give Cooper a call and ask if a federal district court judge's ruling is enough, despite the opportunity for the White House to appeal. The letter leaves little wiggle room. He wants to testify.
Why else would the letter be sent?
1
Given what Bolton knows, as teased by his lawyer, let us imagine Bolton's options:
If he testifies -
1. He gets to be the patriot who tells the country the truth about a dangerously unfit president.
2. He gets to be the villain who breaks the Republican party perhaps forever.
3. He gets his revenge on the largest possible stage, in the most dramatic of political events perhaps ever in the country's history.
If he doesn't testify -
1. He gets to be the unpatriotic coward who has betrayed his county to a dangerously unfit president.
2. He gets to be the stalwart who remains faithful to the party whose ideology he favors.
3. He doesn't get the revenge that he could have had.
What options this man has!
4
It will be a grave mistake if the house does not have Bolton testify.
1
It really does seem to me, that though he's chomping at the bit to testify, his attorney is being overly cautious, and Bolton is giving his attorney too much deference.
Why can't the courts expedite this?
1
Bolton's attorney's teasing come-on that Bolton knows about "many relevant meetings" is embarrassing. I don't think he has any intention of testifying - that would help the Democrats. So I hope Democrats won't waste their time bringing the matter to court. Fact is, if he doesn't testify he'll remain lumped in with the miscreants that make up the Trumpist dirty tricks squad. And maybe that's the appropriate place for him.
2
Bolton should testify, without going to court, with the understanding the New Democratic President will issue him a pardon.
I still don't understand Bolton's end game. What exactly is he trying to accomplish, to what end, and for the betterment of whom - himself, the president, the country, democracy?
I never thought of him as being some kind of showboating kind of dude, but this toying with the House impeachment investigators of having “many relevant meetings and conversations” but then suddenly standing behind ceremony or possible court of law and refusing to say any more until or should a court rules, is plain ridiculous.
I seriously question what he wishes to accomplish.
I would think, I would hope his first obligation would be to this country rather than the boy president.
Besides, Trump dumped him as national security advisor. Squawking about relevant meetings and conversations to the investigators is a brilliant pay back.
Since when is abuse of power a confidential issue and privilege communication that is sacred?
4
I still don't understand Bolton's end game. What exactly is he trying to accomplish, to what end, and for the betterment of whom - himself, the president, the country, democracy?
I never thought of him as being some kind of showboating kind of dude, but this toying with the House impeachment investigators of having “many relevant meetings and conversations” but then suddenly standing behind ceremony or possible court of law and refusing to say any more until or should a court rules, is plain ridiculous.
I seriously question what he wishes to accomplish.
I would think, I would hope his first obligation would be to this country rather than the boy president.
Besides, Trump dumped him as national security advisor. Squawking about relevant meetings and conversations to the investigators is a brilliant pay back.
Since when is abuse of power a confidential issue and privilege communication that is sacred?
1
Bolton has openly sent a message that he knows relevant stuff Congress has not yet heard? It seems he’s all but asking for an appearance if Congress will ask a court to rule on a subpoena. Why won’t they take this up?
4
I know SCOTUS wants to appear apolitical and above the political fray, but I would implore the Dems to dust off Article III and petition the high court for an expedited ruling -
"The court shall have original jurisdiction in all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party."
4
A Congressional subpoena should be enough to cover any concerns Bolton may have. This going to court if he receives a subpoena is less than courageous.
It's a Congressional impeachment inquiry. Bolton appears to have been in the thick of it even inducing his resignation.
For Christ sake this country is being dragged through the mud with this President and his shenanigans. Just go and testify to the other equal branch of government. Tell the truth enough hiding from the truth. Time to be patriotic now.
5
Irony, who could have imagined the possibility of Bolton bringing down Trump. Wouldn't that be something for the history books.
3
A GOP delay tactic pure and simple. If Bolton has something to say he should say it without the political drama of a "big reveal". There is enough evidence without him.
2
So if I'm Trump I might say, "What? I'm not allowed to do that?
Sorry. It won't happen again.
2
So John Bolton, the Hawk’s Hawk, even though he has not been accused of anything in this impeachment inquiry, seems to have a well-defined legal strategy to get him through someone else’s crisis: make himself seem as important as possible: “No, no! I couldn’t possibly testify without either the President’s OK or a Court’s compulsion. You see, I am far more important than any personal lawyer to the President and so I need my very own court ruling to do the right thing, even as our democracy falls apart around me.”
Isn’t it ironic that a man who sets himself up as the One, a ridiculous Paladin with a sillier moustache that could have co-starred in The Holy Grail, who would vanquish America’s enemies and a few million bystanders in a pre-emptive ball of fire, now withholds the information that he says only he has and will not bear anodic witness unless Congress will prompt a court to establish some legal precedent that he probably hopes would carry his name.
Just another patriot, I guess, like so many of the rest, stars on their shoulders, flag pins in their lapels, god on their lips and a finger on the button, selflessly putting the nation’s needs first.
2
During the impeachment inquiry of Richard Nixon in 1973-1974, the Supreme Court compelled him to release tapes of his conversations which had been subpoenaed by Congress and which he had refused to provide. Why is this not considered precedence for the current subpoena tug of war between Congress and the White House?
2
I feel a little queasy feeling that John Bolton -- the man who would calmly order the starvation of my friends in Cuba -- will do the right thing.
But then again, he's a "counter-puncher," like Don Jr. says his dad is.
Is this the twilight zone, or should we learn a lesson from this?
1
Just send him a subpoena and let's Trump looking for a court order forbidding his testimony...
1
If Bolton knows of wrongdoing it is completely wrong not to report it. Waiting for a court decision sounds ridiculous to me. If he has any self respect he will come forward and testify.
4
Bolton is no longer in his job, so please help me understand why he can't decide to testify on his own accord and not by what the WH wants him to do or not do...why should he not testify and do his duty for America and stop this nonsense.
2
This smells like catfish bait gone bad. John Bolton is a grown-up, and he is perfectly capable of testifying without some court order compelling him to do so. He's either a patriot or he is a disgrace who has personally witnessed Trump commit high crimes and misdemeanors but is too cowardly and selfish to come forward. If he wants his legacy to be enshrined as one of the many Trump lackeys who aided and abetted in the destruction of our democracy and the rule of law, so be it. We should NOT chase after him.
2
Investigators and other people of Congress, on both sides of the aisle in the House and Senate, must do their duty in protecting the institution they have obligated themselves to preserve through oath. That the president has sold out national security, among other numerous treasonous acts, to promote his political well-being is an affront to our identity re what we were founded upon. Bolton, though a hawk, has a chance to redeem himself; I hope he does, but I'm skeptical.
1
John Bolton's testimony is paramount if we want Republicans to seriously consider impeachment. Bolton testifying could nullify the Republican arguments that there is "no direct link to the President" or that Mulvaney, Sondland and Guiliani are rogue players. It sounds like Bolton would not only corroborate existing testimony, but he also has new evidence. That additional evidence must be important or why else would the lawyers highlight it?
I also think Bolton could sway Republican voters in ways that no other witness could. People know him not just from the WH, but also from Fox. He's a big name in conservative circles. His words carry a lot of weight and not just because of his work with this President.
Also, I can't stop thinking about the timing of Bolton's resignation and whether or not it's all tied up in this. He resigned shortly after Sondland explicitly tied the aid to the Biden investigation, yet before the aid was released. I'd like to know if the Ukraine/quid pro quo played any part in Bolton's resignation.
I'll be disappointed in the House if they walk away from this.
2
Note to Adam Schiff: Please subpoena Bolton. He wants to talk, but he needs a bit of political cover. We need to hear him, you need to hear him; and all America needs to both see and hear from him. His testimony may be what it takes to get Mitch McConnell and his Republican Senate finally to abandon Trump and try to save themselves and the nation.
5
Too late never happen.
Show up to testify then. Executive branch can file in court just as well as the legislative branch.
I've flip flopped here a bit. This impeachment is important and needs to be done because it's the right thing to do. But , since the Senate is going to ignore facts and acquit regardless - this effort needs to be timing sensitive to the election of a new president.
Ie, the courts are to be avoided where possible. Eventually any court case will go to the Supremes. Where this criminals appointees will repay their appointment debts.
2
I don't understand why the court was available to rule immediately to elect George W. Bush, and isn't available to decide this urgent matter now.
2
Bolton should testify precisely because his lawyer says this “.. “Here, unlike McGahn, information concerning national security and foreign affairs is at the heart of the committees’ impeachment inquiry, and it is difficult to imagine any question that the committees might put to” Mr. Kupperman or Mr. Bolton “that would not implicate these sensitive areas,”. There can be no implication that these areas are fully subjected to procedural considerations. Bolton and Kupperman have a clear moral obligation to obey their oath of office : to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
The courts are worthless because they cannot decide these cases in a timely manner. Whoever loses just keeps on appealing and appealing. A similar case relating to a specific testimony that the Republican controlled House demanded of Eric Holder was not settled until Obama left office thus rendering the issue moot. These people cannot be allowed to delay an impeachment process by using a legal system that is becoming more and more dysfunctional and partisan. Bolton is a private citizen who could testify if he really wanted and do this within limits of legitimate nation security discretion. What would Trump do? Have him arrested for cooperating with Congress?
1
A court will not bar Bolton from testifying unless there is a national security reason involved. Bolton would know if one were involved.
He’s stalling for time and will not offer anything relevant. He’s only trying to disrupt the Democrats momentum.
The question of Amb.Bolton testifying or not testifying should not be a legal issue. If the scandal at issue is a genuine threat to national security , and ultimately national interest, for which he left his critical post in the Trump’s administration, then it is a MORAL issue. Not just a legal one. Both in terms of his own personal knowledge and integrity, he has been described by corroborated witnesses as being extremely scandalised by what was happening about the Ukrainian affair. A man of his experience would not have left his critical position if it were just a difference of opinion or views with the other participants. He left because he saw something morally, politically and legally wrong. So, his testimony CANNOT be one of procedural propriety. If Amb.Bolton thinks he ought to hide behind a court ruling about whether he should or should not testify, regardless of the severity of the case, then he too has exposed the fact that all those who deal with Trump eventually lose their moral compasses. This incipient decadence personalised and perpetrated by Trump should be enough to remove him from public life. There are constitutional provisions for doing so and it should be followed through forthwith. For that Amb.Bolton should reveal all he knows, without any court ruling one way or another.
Lest anyone forget, Bolton shares responsibility for the United States participation in the illegal and amoral Iraq War, and will forever be an unindicted war criminal.
If Bolton had a measure of integrity and was the patriot he purported to be he would want to testify.
Let Bolton return to being a NRA pitch man. It’s more his speed.
2
Doesn't anyone really get this? Bolton has become just another trump lap dog. By dangling all these "meetings," even if the court holds the Congressional subpoena takes precedence, that will be appealed -- which will take months of delay. Then all GOP lapdogs will say House Judiciary doesn't have all the facts. Dems have to see through thi.
1
Best guess is that Bolton can give the co-conspirators names for this shake-down, namely Pence, Mulvaney, Giuliani, Sondland and Barr.
1
Bolton is just holding out for a spot on Dancing With the Stars.
1
@tom: Hahahahaha. Thanks for a bit of levity. And yet......maybe.....?
How ironic would it be if one of our staunchest warmongers was to bust the utter criminality of the Trump administration.
Bolton has earned some very bad karma.
If he helps oust Trump, he earns some very good karma.
Tell the truth and shame the devil, John!!!!
1
Bolton seems to waiting for a quid pro quo. It seems he knows all about them.
1
Its starting to look like the House impeachment investigators have smelt a rat!
2
Mr. Bolton's playing coy;
he is such a clever boy.
Does he know enough to harm,
or is he just full of smarm?
Guess we'll never know, unless
he decides to up and 'fess.
3
Bolton’s lawyer wants a court to decide whether Bolton must comply with the subpoena? Solution: Let Bolton, not Congress or the Trump administration, file the action to determine whether he must comply. Then, once the judge rules in Congress’s favor, it is Bolton’s choice to appeal. From the way his lawyer talks, however, that is unlikely.
Ignore congressional subpoena, throw him jail until he complies. It’s that simple.
3
If Bolton were an honorable man, he would testify without waiting for a court to rule whether a congressionalLT issued subpoena was “legal.”
5
Bolton did not show up.
Then Bolton's attorney writes this "tantalizing " letter?
Why? Is it because Bolton wants to testify, if only compelled by court order, thus remaining a loyal Republican?
You'd think if Bolton did not want to testify, Charles J. Cooper would be taciturn.
The reason for aid to Ukraine was to thwart the Russians. If Ukraine has a conflict, or if there is a critical mass of evidence of Trump harming Ukraine, then Bolton the hawk and peremptory conservative will go down on the wrong side of history.
Go ahead John and do the wrong thing. Then all the bluster passing through your mustache all these years would have been for nothing save self-denigration.
1
What a tough guy.
3
A true Patriot would be sprinting to the House Intelligence Committee’s S.C.I.F....without any conditions!
11
DJT is about to realize that you cannot get away with running the executive branch of the US government with the same ethical standards as running the Trump family real estate business.
8
I'm not a lawyer, but this all just sounds like a stall and a carrot. What is he afraid the president could do to him? Other, more patriotic public servants, have come forward, defying Trump and testified. They have more to lose than Bolton as they are living on a salary and won't be getting a job at FOX etc.
Bolton is a life-long warmonger, but when it comes to having the guts to testify, seems like he lacks it.
8
He actually has little to fear from testifying if his attorney gives him a simple but well-reasoned legal memo explaining why he is under no legal obligation NOT to testify but under a serious obligation to testify.
JB's trying to play both sides of the street... If he loves America, he would show up without even so much as an invitation.
We'll interview him in jail.
4
I'm stunned by the tone-deaf comments here decrying Bolton's efforts to be subpoenaed.
Don't any of you understand the long game here?
He wants to work again. His prospects improve if he is seen to resist until compelled by judicial ruling
How hard it is to "get" that?
Criminy ...
1
@Barry C He's 70 years old. It's ok if he retires.
1
The Dems’ rush to get this investigation over with feels just like the GOP’s hurry to get the Kavanaugh investigation over with. They should have been committed to hearing ALL the evidence in closed-door sessions BEFORE releasing any transcripts — including testimony from Bolton. They should have issued subpoenas to everyone involved and done whatever was needed, including waiting for court decisions, to gather all the facts. But they didn’t. The idea that not being given evidence itself becomes evidence of obstruction doesn’t hold water when they haven’t done all they can to get that evidence. As a result, their rush to get the investigation over with smacks of politics. The American people deserve to know all that is knowable about this situation, including anything that might exonerate Trump, should such evidence exist. Instead, it seems like they only want to present enough information to convince themselves, knowing that the Senate will back Trump anyway. And yeah - without ALL the information, the Senate is a lot more likely to back Trump. I don’t see the logic of their approach, and I don’t like it. The way things are going, it seems like they are less interested in revealing the whole truth than they are in staging a quick political sideshow before their long holiday break begins.
2
@David D.:
The American people will view, first-hand, next week, when the hearings become public. That's the plan, as Americans like the TV experience. If those called attempt to enforce the resistance to subpoenas through the courts, it would be a monumental delay; prosecutors don't have the time. Further, the lack of acknowledgement of the subpoenas puts those being called into jeopardy: those that have been called and refuse are assumed to have zero evidence of Trump's innocence and will be held in contempt, though not in the short-term.
2
Then why has Bolton NOT been subpoenaed? The Dems DO have the time. There is no clock running out except the political one of their own making. As for TV watching, this isn’t Watergate in the 70s. We have Fox News now. Some will watch, some won’t. But many who do will see the proceedings through a very distorted lens. Think the American people can discern truth from fiction? I don’t. Which is why Trump won the last election — and is likely to win the next one.
At least a fair chance Bolton would have no problem if Trump Goes down.
But he wants the cover of the system protecting him by forcing his testimony.
Then he will likely have a future in whatever is left of the GOP, and he can get another show on FOX.
6
What am I missing here? Congress has the power to hold a person in contempt of Congress, a misdemeanor punishable by a $1000 fine and up to 12 months imprisonment. Why doesn't it arrest every one of these people who defies a subpoena? If Congress doesn't have the power to enforce its investigation, then what's the point of even having a proceeding called an impeachment? How can a president claim that he's the one to determine who can testify against him in his own trial? It would be tantamount to allowing a mobster to vet the list of witnesses against him at trial. I'm not a lawyer, so help me out on this one.
6
@Bill McGrath:
Dems have acknowledged that there is no time to hold people in contempt as court rulings could take months. They have enough evidence from those who have already spilled the beans.
Do they? Enough evidence to convince whom? Themselves? The Senate? The American people? Which people? The Dems are rushing this investigation for no reason other than political expediency and a desire to be home for the holidays and hit the campaign trail fresh after Jan. 1. It’s a big mistake, in my opinion. The American people deserve to hear ALL the evidence. Not just the tidbits the Dems think are enough to win impeachment in the House. It’s almost like they don’t even care to see Trump removed, like they don’t care whether they convince Americans that Trump broke the law.
I thought withholding evidence was crime in itself, but then I'm just one of the little people subject to those laws.
180
@Rick - I'm with you there. So many people choosing not to testify, or the President ordering them not to. There needs to be a resolution of this, and if it means imprisoning those refusing to appear until the Supreme Court rules, then so be it. I don't believe that the President has the power to intervene in his own impeachment proceedings.
1
John Bolton has long been one of many championing the theory of a strong “unitary executive.” That is, an office of the president with limitless power, accountable to no one. Now, he is caught in a trap of his own making.
If he defies the president and testifies before the House, he will acknowledge the coequal power of the Congress and undercut the theory of the unitary executive. Conversely, if he obeys the president and refuses to testify, he will enable what he clearly sees as the president’s abuse of power.
Either way, he loses credibility and stature. If he undercuts the theory of the unitary executive, he will be a disloyal pariah among movement conservatives. If he withholds testimony from Congress, he will be seen as a disloyal American by everyone else.
So, he is turning to the third coequal branch of the government to bail him out of his conundrum so he can save face and maintain his stature. The validity of the theory of the unitary executive may finally be debunked by the court, but he would not be the one to do it.
The beauty of the House not taking the bait and waiting for a court decision is that moving forward without Bolton and his deputy proves the coequal power of Congress and debunks the unitary executive simply by the gentle force of their unstoppable process. This forces Bolton to make a choice: defend the country, or defend a failed ideology. We can all hope he will chose to defend his country.
8
At the impeachment trial in front of the Senate, the house managers should call all these recalcitrant witnesses to testify including Bolton, Mulvaney etc. Judge Roberts will be presiding and he can quickly dispense with these bogus claims of absolute privilege. I believe he will if he wants to protect his historical legacy. Granted we won’t know what They will say beforehand but chances are it won’t be good for Trump. I think this is the only way to guarantee the American people hear the full story.
2
It's very interesting that Bolton's lawyer has dangled these potential revelations before lawmakers and the public. He certainly would not have done this if Bolton flat-out didn't want to testify. He must want to, but with legal cover.
4
Uh, guys (Bolton and his lawyers): what do you want the House to do if you're waiting for a court decision? The House doesn't have any more time to fritter away waiting for stuff to dribble through the courts. You think a decision would come faster if they went to a judge and said, "Look, hurry it up, please. John Bolton has some tasty tidbits to tell us when you're done"?
Honestly, this one stumps me. What's the point at tantalizing the House if it can't do anything about the reason for delaying testifying within the time frame it has to work within?
Trump dumped Bolton, so the ambassador should very much like to help Trump get dumped in return. What's stopping him? Testifying at the impeachment hearing would seem the perfect platform to launch a retaliatory strike.
I'm guessing the problem is with the oath he would have to take at the hearing. If he is forced to tell "the whole truth", his upcoming memoir will have little new to offer the reading public.
Sounds like Bolton is looking for immunity.
He will not get it.
If you're going to do this right, let him negotiate with a prosecutor for immunity. Let him offer a proffer (I think that's the term) to what he would testify to. Let the prosecutor decide whether or not it's worth offering immunity for. Too bad that's not going to happen with Bill Barr's so-called Justice Department.
You're going to have to hang it out there it you really want to do the right thing, Bolton.
You won't. You only want something for nothing, which is all you've got.
I think Bolton will look good in orange more so than the rest of them that aren't testifying.
2
As a patriot John Bolton should either publish his knowledge, endorse Ms. Hills testimony, or testify.
I sadly suspect he wants to have it both ways... appear to be willing to talk but thwarted, and remain employable/electable by the far right.
So much for Be Best.
5
If he knew about this and didn't say anything then he is complicit. Forget about his testimony and gather the evidence against him.
2
By the time Bolton’s book comes out, it’ll be way too late.
3
John Bolton = Lucy holding the football.
American people = Charlie Brown
John Bolton should just testify. Stop being coy and just do it. Fiona Hill didn't have a problem coming forward. Neither did Maria Yovanovich. I'm just baffled why he even needs an invitation (supoena) to come.
10
Am I reading correctly that Bolton is actually tempting a subpoena because he'd love to burn Trump, yet wants to appear hard to get?
7
House Dems don’t need Bolton to clear the impeachment hurdle. Bolton’s place might be better served in the Senate trial anyway.
1
Bolton is too clever by half. It’s going to be crowed under that bus with Bolton, Giuliani, pompeo and whoever else trump can think of trying to save himself. I wouldn’t doubt Eric and Donnie jr will be under there as well. Trump only is loyal to himself.
7
Sorry, but all of these people work for us, so it’s not the president’s information — it’s ours!
9
It is likely that Bolton’s highly anticipated testimony would be like the Mueller report and everything else presented so far . Lots of smoke but nothing to hang a criminal case or impeachable offense on. He is in this for his own glory and his lawyer is baiting the press and Democrats.
2
Couldn't disagree more. Testimony has come from numerous high level sources that confirm Trump held US military aid ransom for damaging a political opponent.
2
Bolton, never a man to understate his knowledge as he sees it is basically Trump with a brain but like him, no insight. He'll wait until he figures out which way the wind blows, then pivot in that direction to advance his career.
5
Say what you will. This President has made 'obstruction of justice' to an art. The House gets testimony from people in the 2nd tier and the White House stops anyone in the 1st tier from testifying either by threats or challenging it in court. Then the White House disdains testimony as heresay. About time the Democrats got smarter and get the big fish in the net. Otherwise, we are going to see a Trump 2020.
4
Why does he need to a court to rule on testifying? That's exactly what the president wants him to do. The fact is that he's just not going to agree to accommodate Democrats in any way. He is still putting politics over his country. So what is worse when you know the president is abusing his power and do nothing. When you know that Kurds died and are dying due to his insanity and you do nothing. I'm pretty sure that if I just stand and watch while somebody kills somebody else that I'm going to jail. But this guy will write a book and be on Fox News and we will all get a lesson on how powerful people rarely pay for their crimes.
6
Bolton probably doesn’t want to testify for fear that divulging secrets now will hurt his tell all book sales.
2
Quit stonewalling. The public has a right to know what crimes are committed.
6
Trump was only trying to get corroboration from the Ukraine regarding an accusation that was going around that the Biden son had carried out a large questionable capital transaction in the Ukraine. Trump was not trying to get the Ukraine to make anything up or violate any laws or norms. The U.S. does this all the time, but through the IRS or the State Department or through other agencies, not usually directly by a President. If the Biden boy had committed a business impropriety or had broken a law, then the Democratic party might well have proceeded ahead with its primary contest as solid as can be instead of risking a scandal arising after choosing Joe Biden to run in the fall. It seems to be twisting things to reduce Trump's motives to positioning himself better for the 2020 contest. What could have been better than having a vulnerability that he might be able to beat Joe Biden with? The President had a right and even an obligation to cause the Biden son's Ukrainian transactions transparent. I do not understand why Trump had to threaten the Ukrainian president in order to find out the details of the Biden business in the Ukraine. He did not have to and could even have used his Attorney General contacting the Ukrainian counterpart to find out what he wanted to know. I think Trump may have purposely caused this hullabaloo because that is all that he is being hit with and it is totally a big nothing. What does Trump call it? Perfect!
Bolton is challenging what Barr has conceded is the overall “powers of the presidency” which, in Barr’s mind, encompasses more than anything we have thought of as compatible with American politics. Are we a dictatorship or are we a republic with free elections?
Never in my lifetime would I have expected Americans to defend a dictatorship over democracy but here we are folks. It comes down to this moment in time. The Republican Party, the party of my grandparents, is full on for a dictatorship. We are fighting for our very lives if we believe in democracy.
278
@Anonymous
On an entirely different topic, how are the book sales going?
5
@Anonymous
Do you remember when we defended torture a few years back?
2
@Anonymous America hasn't been a democracy since at least the time those in charge killed JFK.
2
Frankly, it's great if Bolton (and others) want a court to rule.
The DC District Court will almost certainly rule to testify. Same with Appellate Court for DC Circuit and SCOTUS.
What is so great is that every day that this is in the public consciousness, this is free negative advertising for the Democrats for 2020. This obstruction is like what the GOP with the government shutdown last year is the sort of negative press which does not help them.
I can't help but be reminded of Watergate which was so ironic. In 1972, Nixon won by a landslide, but his own paranoia caused his flunkies to break into the DNC all on their own in June 1972. The news of the break-in was bad enough, but Nixon's obstruction is what did him in. Worse for Nixon, beginning in May 1973 with Sam Ervin looking like a Grumpy Grandpa, the day after day of Senate hearings live on TV on all the networks just was a gradual slow execution of the Nixon Administration. With Ford - the never-elected president - taking office and promptly pardoning Nixon, the 1976 for Carter was easy to see. America really DID want to drain the swamp, so to speak, so Carter - a decent man with a clean and good background and WHO WAS NOT FROM WASHINGTON overcame prejudice of Southerners to become the first Southern president since the Civil War.
Well, the same thing is happening... The hardcore MAGA-hatters will never change, but the independents will get fed-up and vacate the GOP... Just like in 1976.
2
From an employment law perspective, we already have seen several current employees step forward and testify, contrary to the White House counsel's legal direction, yet none have been charged with insubordination and no effort has been made to enjoin their appearance in the House proceedings. At this point, any action by the White House is too late under basic waiver and estoppel theories, and, in any event, the sweeping prohibition by counsel was an unreasonable, arbitrary rule unlikely to support any disciplinary action. If the House committee believes it has enough, I trust that judgment. No need for continued game playing. If Bolton wants to be clear about his own place in the history of this moment, and avoid possible legal jeopardy for his possible complicity in covering up or condoning a crime, he should step forward, drop the pretense of wanting legal clearance to speak, and do his duty as a now private citizen. It is easy enough to say he will comply with a subpoena. The current path offers no excuse nor a defense in a later prosecution.
4
The cowardice of John Bolton and others is staggering. No wonder Boomers are vilified. There is no so-called executive immunity for former employees. There are zero legal consequences for testifying. Democrats can move forward and Bolton can write his book. History as never going to look kindly on him anyway.
5
Who knows? Maybe Bolton is playing hard to get, increasing the interest in, and weight given to, his testimony... Then, when he finally shows up, he ends up spouting some Trump Party Line statement that "exonerates" the president.
5
Bolton wants to speak. The House must allow it. His testimony may tie Mr. Trump to the smoking gun.
The House is not stopping Bolton from testifying, Trump is. Please follow the story.
1
Is Bolton a mouse or a man? Is he a patriot or a Trump toady? Telling Congress they have to wait months for a court to tell him whether it's ok to testify answers those questions?
5
I bet he know a lot and his ego wants him to talk. I'm afraid if he doesn't talk soon he'll be irrelevant. I'm sure that would really bother him.
2
This "teaser" from Bolton's lawyer is fodder for all of us. Enough. When will these people do the right thing and step up to help the country?
At this point all the lawyers are making bank while the rest of us are left blowing in the wind.
Just do the right thing.
10
Bolton. Another day, another exiled former admin official attempting to launder what's left of his reputation. But even now, even on the outside, even after being toyed with, circumvented, ignored, mocked, then straightforwardly humiliated by Trump, Bolton, like his fellow exiles, still doesn't have the guts and integrity to simply do what's right.
13
Trumps M.O. is to shift blame and it often does not matter if it is a perceived foe, or someone faithful, like Mulvaney.
Anyone and everyone will go down before Trump if he can help it.
Bolton would be smart to get his story out there in advance.
8
Hopefully Bolton’s motivation is to tell the truth, and not lead on a wild goose chase with old newspaper clippings and unsubstantiated “interviews” as has happened before. Hoping Bolton’s firing makes him realize he’s nothing to lose.
5
Probably irrelevant since the Dems won’t wait. Only hour is a direct-to-Supreme Court fast track, but haven’t heard a peep of that happening.
Whatever Bolton is up to, it isn't helping the Dems impeach Trump. He should testify without a subpoena if he really has something to say. Otherwise Dems should assume he's just blowing smoke and delaying the game.
13
Best (uneducated of course) is a "doctor ordered" resignation due to health problems. Problems too serious to even face trial.
2
Why not let him talk? Why does court have to rule whether he can talk?
I’m no fan of Trump but this is already beginning to bore me. Knowing the Senate will never vote to impeach is making this seem a big waste of time.
2
@Lonnie
So I guess the secret is to commit boring crimes, so people lose interest, and you can get away with it. Great.
@Lonnie
Not to me, or millions of other Americans. I want to hear the testimony of these officials. If you are bored with it, don’t turn your tv on. If you already know it all, don’t watch.
@Lonnie
If you're bored, go back to sleep. Some of care about our democracy.
Go ahead, ignore a congressional subpoena, get charged with conspiracy to obstruct justice. By the way you cannot profit from a book deal about a crime you committed.
10
@Paulie I don’t believe the House Committee to Impeach has subpoenaed Bolton.
I would hope Bolton has a conscience. This cannot be about party loyalty, it's more serious than politics and each and every person who has something to add, should stand and be counted. This is no time for cowards.
Why not testify? Obviously, Bolton already felt this bribery was akin to a 'drug deal'.
Everyone knows the bribery occurred or they're in a coma. The games that are going on to protect Trump from taking responsibility for bribing Zelensky is an embarrassment in the world.
I would hope all people who have information to share would stand up for our country, it's the constitution and testifies. That's what I assume our Forefathers wanted and why they created Impeachment and it's an inquiry.
Don't 2nd guess the constitution, it's more powerful than any political party or president because it was meant to be.
9
Bolton is not ready to retire. Yes, he was fired by Trump, but there’s still a wealth of jobs available for which he has the credentials. However, his policy views are much more suited to right-leaning think tanks, news programs and other opportunities.
By leaving the decision up to the courts, he can still be the Republican hawk and testify because the court ordered him to do so.
On the other hand, I could be all wrong. Instead, he may have made some kind of peace (irony noted) with Trump. And this is a ruse to delay the impeachment proceedings.
Bolton’s attorney’s letter is certainly tantalizing. It’s almost begging the House to turn to the judicial branch. Since Pelosi and Schiff have indicated they want this phase of the impeachment to wrap up quickly, putting the testimony question before a judge would work against that goal.
Either way, Bolton is not doing this for love of country or respect for the Constitution. Just like Trump, he’s looking out for himself.
7
Incredible how many GOP folks in congress are still clamoring for the opportunity to question the "whistleblower", and claiming that the call "transcript" (which explicitly states on the very first page that it is NOT a verbatim transcript). We're light-years beyond those two things folks, they don't matter anymore.
I would like to see, however, the verbatim transcript (if it exists) which was allegedly put in the super-secret vault.
6
@J Darby
Meant to say "claiming that the call 'transcript' (which explicitly states on the very first page that it is NOT a verbatim transcript) exonerates trump.
1
Did the architects ask the public-the actual stakeholders-for the public's input when the models were being built?
My first thought was that investigators withdrew their subpoena because they feared losing in court - and that would give cover for so many other potential witnesses to not testify. Even if there's a good chance courts would rule to enforce the subpoena, it's just not worth the risk for a couple of witnesses unless they are really that critical. There might be enough compelling testimony from the parade of others who do show up.
There is a valid reason for executive privilege and with Bolton being such a close adviser he might prevail in court. If Bolton really wanted to testify though, he could do so and only refrain if Trump formally claimed executive privilege and filed a court case.
1
Hopefully everyone retains their integrity and do the right thing with regard to the Truth. If not, Trump will guide people to a place ruinous in their History.
2
If Bolton had anything to say that would help Trump, they would send him in a limousine. This info makes it seem like he really wants to testify. Might be worth waiting a bit for the courts to step in.
The flip side of the pancake says Bolton has no reason not to testify other than burnishing his Fox credentials. Impeachment will be in the Senate before a Court rules with appeals certain. He could have a star ...
1
Indeed. His lawyer wants to make sure whose side the current DOJ is on.
Sounds like Bolton just wants to be in the news. If he had the national interest in mind, he would testify and tell the truth.
7
As someone else on here succinctly said already: show up or shut up. Enough is enough.
12
Mr. Bolton, if you have something to say, man up and say it. Don't wait for a court to drag it out of you. Either you have the courage of your convictions or you don't. Which is it?
12
Testifying or not testifying is not as binary a choice as it might seem. Should Bolton testify, Republicans will no doubt object to certain questions based on assertions of executive and/or attorney-client privilege.
A court ruling that outlines which evidence is privileged and which is not would be useful for Bolton in testifying and useful to the committee both in investigating the matter and in presenting its case to the Senate. It might even foreclose objections from the president's lawyers in the Senate trial.
2
We knew Bolton would have something interesting to say about this. He was fired (or resigned?) on the same day Schiff sent a letter to Maguire demanding information on the whistleblower complaint. Bolton's "hand grenade" and "drug deal" comments are already among the most quotable remarks to emerge from this saga, and he hasn't even testified. Why wait for the court to weigh in? Several current and former members of the administration have already testified despite White House edicts. Are they braver than Bolton?
3
Bolton is not ready to retire. Yes, he was fired by Trump, but there’s still a wealth of jobs available for which he has the credentials. However, his policy views are much more suited to right-leaning think tanks, news programs and other opportunities.
By leaving the decision up to the courts, he can still be the Republican hawk and testify because the court ordered him to do so.
On the other hand, I could be all wrong. Instead, he may have made some kind of peace (irony noted) with Trump. And this is a ruse to delay the impeachment proceedings.
Bolton’s attorney’s letter is certainly tantalizing. It’s almost begging the House to turn to the judicial branch. Since Pelosi and Schiff have indicated they want this phase of the impeachment to wrap up quickly, putting the testimony question before a judge would work against that goal.
Either way, Bolton is not doing this for love of country or respect for the Constitution. Just like Trump, he’s looking out for himself.
3
Bolton is not ready to retire. Yes, he was fired by Trump, but there’s still a wealth of jobs available for which he has the credentials. However, his policy views are much more suited to right-leaning think tanks, news programs and other opportunities.
By leaving the decision up to the courts, he can still be the Republican hawk and testify because the court ordered him to do so.
On the other hand, I could be all wrong. Instead, he may have made some kind of peace (irony noted) with Trump. And this is a ruse to delay the impeachment proceedings.
Bolton’s attorney’s letter is certainly tantalizing. It’s almost begging the House to turn to the judicial branch. Since Pelosi and Schiff have indicated they want this phase of the impeachment to wrap up quickly, putting the testimony question before a judge would work against that goal.
Either way, Bolton is not doing this for love of country or respect for the Constitution. Just like Trump, he’s looking out for himself.
I don't trust Bolton. It may be a way to get the courts to rule against him testifying. SCOTUS is packed with politics.
3
Quite the dilemma for Mr. Bolton. As a conservative he doesn't want to help the Democrats, but it's obvious he was outraged by the arrogant lawlessness of Trump and his shadow State Dept. led by Rudy "Hand Grenade" Giuliani--the once respected prosecutor and NYC Mayor, who sold out to the dark side.
6
If you are a deep state proponent and Bolton one of the leaders of some of the worst warmongering policy's in our history takes down Trump even if you hate Trump you have to wonder? IS the military- industrial complex that much in charge.
2
Come on, Mr. Bolton. Do what is best for your country.
3
I genuinely don't understand this. He is no longer employed by the administration. The Supreme Court has been clear through precedent that Congress has the power to issue subpoenas, and to hold individuals in contempt of Congress (although without an outside institution, that may have no practical effect on a person who refuses to comply with a subpoena). So it seems fairly clear that if he is subpoened, he shoud and he can appear; that said, nothing will happen if he doesn't. On the other hand, if he is requested to appear, he could appear, but there's no the same obligation. I may be missing something, but what is there to decide? It's not as if there haven't been such issues in the past that have been settled by the Court.
4
I think it’s because he has access to sensitive information and could put country or people at risk if they were to become public.
1
Whether or not Bolton has been subpoenaed, I just don't get this issue about check legality. If the Congress wants testimony, then that should be it. I haven't heard of anything like this legality checking before Trump's twisted times, so I'm just wondering why all of it is happening now. It would seem general knowledge by now that privilege itself is forfeited when discussions are in connection with a crime. But I still think the Democrats have been wise merely to go onward and chalk up delay to further evidence of obstruction. That move will put a consequence on the whole matter, in any case, as we move on to highlight Trump's hideousness and work toward getting rid of him.
5
Many of the comments seem to miss the point and some are being seduced by back-and-forth of legal wranglings. Executive privilege is one thing, refusing to honor a subpoena is quite another. He should be compelled to appear, and if he chooses to answer specific questions or any and all questions by appealing to Executive Privilege, then all can see the stonewalling and cover-up as its happening, and exactly what the executive branch is trying to hide. Refusing to honor a subpoena should not be an option.
11
In general, privilege does not apply to future crimes. What Trump was contemplating may well constitute bribery and/or extortion. As such, Mr Cooper should advise his client to appear, either voluntarily or pursuant to subpoena.
2
I would always, faced with questioning in any event, simply tell the truth. Mostly to anyone, but always in a legal situation. Understandably classified national security details should be on the down-low but still on the record.
"Power knows the truth already, and is busy concealing it".
-Noam Chomsky
People will see different nuances and add fierce convictions to a narrative but the truthful details emerge if allowed to. Legal, ethical and moral comes out in the wash if people speak honestly and directly.
It never ends well to lie when many people were witnesses.
It is unconscionable to refuse to testify. Obstruction of Justice. Contemptible.
Here is the thing. There is no legal real obstacle to Bolton or any other of the refuse to testify folks. They would never be prosecuted for telling the truth as they saw it. They would never historically be ill-thought of for telling a truth.
Anyone who testifies in this Trump Impeachment Inquiry would be an accuser, a defender, a non-partisan neutral witness, a co-conspirator or an underling/subordinate.
None should be silenced or fearful of talking.
If you are ordered not to testify by the Trump administration
it is adding on incriminating contempt and obstruction indictments for the White House and Justice Department.
It could also be labeled "collusion".
6
Every Presidential Administration from time to time withholds testimony or documents so as to uphold its own interpretation of Executive Privilege. Since when is that practice evidence of obstruction of justice? In essence the House majority is claiming “obstruction of justice” in the mere assertion of the Privilege. Ours is not a Parliamentary democracy. The Executive is not subordinate to the Legislature. They are both co-equal branches, and therefore both branches retain a constitutional right to make their case before a Judge before having to acquiesce to the demands of the other when the prerogatives of one are under threat by the attempted actions of the other. Moreover, as to the underlying issues manifest in the Ukraine controversy, the House majority seems to have forgotten that every President has the authority to fire any Ambassador for any reason and at any time. They serve at his leisure. Presidents furthermore are never bound to maintain, or even to dignify, the consensus foreign policy opinion of the State Department bureaucracy, no matter how expert the bureaucrats may be. If a President is wrongheaded in firing the long standing US Ambassador to the Ukraine, or in allowing his surrogates to undermine her for selfish, political purposes, then the solution is to vote him out of office. Regardless, it is not a high crime or misdemeanor for him to exercise the authority vested by the Constitution in his office even if he does so in a callous or inept manner.
@Michael: Executive privilege is obstruction of justice when a a crime has been committed and firing an ambassador is abuse of power when she refuses to keep silent about corruption.
2
Have prior administrations held up witnesses from appearing outright? Methinks not. Your argument holds no water.
2
Simple solution, happens all the time:
Convene an appropriate court and demand an expedited ruling. Two weeks, tops.
153
@Timothy Samara They can demand all they want, but the Court drags its feet for months. Ex - the House lawsuit for Trump's tax returns and the Appeals court decision on Obamacare. Both were heard in early July and still we wait - 4 months and counting. Cooper knows that pursing a court ruling would delay the matter until next March or April earliest.
10
@Timothy Samara
Alas, the courts, not the parties, call the tune.
8
@Timothy Samara It's a waste of SCOTUS and our Nation's time and resource to be involved in partisan identity second rate political drama. They should distance themselves as much a possible from anything involving this hack job impeachment effort and make everyone involved go through usual tedious process.
3
I have read that Bolton would testify that Giulani, Sondland and Mulvaney were the rogue group that were doing Trump a disservice. So although Bolton has additional info about meetings, calls, etc, it does not sound like he will actually provide any exoneration of Trump. He will merely add to the new GOP strategy which Trump himself seemed to hint at today..i.e. that there is no evidence that he, the president, was the person pushing all this. He's throwing his teammates under the bus, one by one.
8
Love how they’ve called Bolton’s bluff. He doesn’t work there any more. He is free to testify if he wants to.
5
It is far more important to hear Bolton’s testimony than it is to complete these proceedings this year. If his testimony is not pursued Trump and his GOP lackeys will pull a reverse Schiff: Schiff asserts that any witness who‘s testimony is blocked must be construed as obstruction and detrimental to Trump; if Bolton has relevant testimony and Democrats do not subpoena him Trump will argue that the Democrats are afraid of exculpatory evidence and the GOP will echo him ad nauseum.
If the subpoena is contested and expedited resolution is not granted by the courts a decision to forego Bolton’s testimony can be made at that future time.
1
Are these things Bolton knows helpful to Trump and gang? Or are they in addition to the information the witnesses to date have testified to? He doesn't say.
The Republicans are turning subpoenas into jokes. It’s time to enforce them and throw non-compliers in jail. Then let the courts decide if a president, who is obstructing justice as he’s investigated, is above the law. Since we were founded on Rule of Law and no one being above the law, Dems should win. Even in a Roberts court.
5
I disagree with all of you. I think Bolton is playing the ultimate Washington power politics game. He is up for bid: trump can bid Secretary of State and trump didn't do it for a venal reason. What can the House bid? No jail time? not in the current state of affairs.
IMHO if he loves America, and don't all chickenhawks claim the ultimate love of country? He should come forward and fully testify without regard for the consequences.
7
It seems like Bolton is dying to testify. His lawyer writes an intriguing letter which almost screams do let me tell all. He just wants the court's excuse. This Ukraine issue probably really irked Bolton, but perhaps not as much as the fact his advice wasn't taken. Now he wants to rant all over those who usurped his fiefdom. I don't give Bolton any kudos for being a good guy. He's in it for revenge, ego, whatever. But it sure would be interesting to hear what he has to talk about.
11
@Hans, You’re right. Suspicious indeed. In my opinion this dance boils down to: Bolton’s gargantuan Ego. He is determined to control the show and make himself the star. I have zero admiration for this obvious manipulation. We must not forget Bolton’s track record. Again, his Ego. Big. Very.
7
I think the Democrats are playing it right . I don’t think Bolton can be trusted . That’s just my inkling.
14
The concept of Bolton testifying is an exercise in legal maneuvering. If he wanted to testify at all, he would have freely added his voice to those of the the brave, patriotic voices from whom we have already heard so much credible testimony that is damaging to Trump, et. al. (Kent, Hill, Vindman, and Taylor.) Bolton's current foray into the impeachment proceedings is widely viewed as a means of advancing the attraction of his forthcoming tell-all book.
A tiger doesn't change it's stripes. This gentleman is a 'known quantity.' Expect nothing from him that advances the accuracy and efficaciousness of the impeachment inquiry in the House.
13
@Will
I get the feeling that he wants to testify, but he wants to be able to say that he was compelled to do so, so that he can save face as a conservative voice for his career. He probably wants to be subpoenaed.
1
I know the dems in the house don't want to wait too long, but I think they should try on this one. Unlike Mike, I think they are likely to get a favorable ruling. They should try very hard to push the courts along quickly for the first ruling. That may be enough to get Bolton to testify. It would show independents and republicans that the house is trying to get the best available evidence, even if they don't succeed. This certainly is a pose by Bolton and his deputy. Since they are no longer part of the administration they could testify without any real legal jeopardy, especially if they are subpoenaed.
4
Although I do not agree with the policies of Mr. Bolton, I hope he would become the patriot he claims to be and come forward on request/subpoena of the Congress, regardless of what his former boss might say. His teasing the House and the rest of America with his deferral to the possible future decision of a judge does nothing to advance the search for the truth of the doings of the president, which should take precedence at this time.d
6
Bolton is a patriot? By what definition of patriot?
Two points:
1. This seems like a trap Bolton has set out for the democrats. Not sure how the trap is sprung or what happens but I think it would be wise to avoid it altogether.
2. Do we really need his testimony at this point? I think there is enough factual information to impeach. You have multiple corroborating sources.
11
If executive privilege precludes Congress from questioning top members of the administration, how can the standard of evidence require someone with "first-hand knowledge"for driving the impeachment inquiry into "high crimes and misdemeanors"? I am no constitutional lawyer, but how does one reconcile the two? My guess is the investigation must take precedence if it moves to stage of actually drawing up the articles of impeachment.
2
I do not quite understand Mr. Boltons lawyer. Any national security concerns are mute since trump already released the transcripts from "the" phone call. Everything has been aired already and his client could do what witnesses have done in the past just state that they could not answer a question because of security concerns. This is a bogus excuse.
6
All these West Point and Harvard graduates who are not able to think for themselves and seemingly cannot tell the difference between "right from wrong." John Bolton closed down a meeting because he knew it was taking an illegal turn. If Bolton was aware of the unprecedented attempt by a President of the United States to use Congressionally appropriated funds to shakedown and bribe the elected President of the Ukraine to engage his government's resources to smear Trump's own political rival, he should testify under oath and just tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Bolton, the neocon, has bravely attacked the United Nations and volunteered to send other people's children off to fight and die in foreign lands to remake the Middle East into his vision of the place he wanted it to become.
Now, he can't summon the courage to face a few questions from the representatives of the same people who are just doing their jobs to support and defend the Constitution of the United States? On more than one occasion, he took the same oath, and now he needs a judge to tell him what to do?
Harvard and other elite schools need to revise their curricula, and require satisfactory scores by prospective graduates on a true/false exam on right and wrong before granting them degrees.
7
While I don't agree with Bolton's hawkish stance toward almost all foreign policy, we have all heard that he is a patriot. Do patriots need to ask a judge whether to expose actions by an unhinged President to act against the country's national security interests? I think not.
5
If this scheme had played out, suspension of aid would have been followed by a public smear of Biden and then restoration of aid. And it would have been obvious to countless Americans an Ukrainians. Forest for the trees, guys. Big to do over a scheme that was doomed to failure or never happened. Those are the only two possibilities. A nation in turmoil. A nation utterly lacking in common sense.
1
@michjas Are you suggesting that we should allow a president to run foreign policy through a private citizen, hold up desperately needed, Congressionally appropriated, military aid, solicit foreign help in our elections, attempt to extort a bribe, and obstruct justice to try to cover all that up--just because you don't think it will affect too many votes?
We have laws for a reason.
It certainly seems like they are fishing for something, but are simply not good enough fishermen.
Is there any reason why they can't supply questions even if they are not sure they can supply answers?
It sounds like they don't want the House to wrap things up until they have their day to speak.
Honestly, Bolton should just go for it.
1
Nothing to be lost by issuing a subpoena. I'm thinking the Court will order him to testify. His inside knowledge is such that his testimony could be the end all that ends all....all of Trump's presidency, that is.
Bolton is and has been aware of the potential for his ideas to push others to what many think are extreme. But here he may be not taking this course of action due to “protecting Pres. Trump, but of asserting the place the White House has in our constitution. The highly unusual public airing of Bolton’s position by his attorneys suggests this is about constitutional law, as Bolton certainly asked questions that are restricted from bring forth national secrets. AFTER ALL, THE IMPEACHMENT IS ABOUT ILLEGAL ACTIVITY, FIRST DETERMINED BY INVESTIGATIONS.....AND JUDGES RESTRICT TESTIMONY ALL THE TIME!!
1
All the subpoenas just being ignored?
Bolton made it clear yesterday through his lawyer that if he received a subpoena he would challenge it in court. The House decided to ignore him and not compel him with a subpoena just move ahead with public hearings and impeachment.
Why is it that Steve Bannon testified in the trial of Roger Stone? He said he was compelled because of a subpoena. If we received subpoena's would we not be compelled with the threat of arrest if we chose not to submit to a subpoenas?
Wasn't Susan McDougal arrested and served jail time for not complying to a subpoena?
28
@jeansch Right! I say we all ignore subpoenas from now on and when we face the judge, say, "Trump showed us we could." How well would that go over?
1
If the Democrats aren’t going to vigorously enforce the subpoenas, these proceedings are/will be a joke. Grow a backbone Democrats!!!
1
If the House does not think they have a case they should not have started it. The darn sure better take it to court because Trump will use it if not.
""...Only a court can decide in their case, Mr. Cooper added. “If the House chooses not to pursue through subpoena the testimony of Dr. Kupperman and Ambassador Bolton," he wrote, “let the record be clear: That is the House’s decision.”
1
So Bolton is so “deeply disturbed” by the Ukraine quid pro quo that he’s waited months to meekly hint that he’s somewhat unhappy, then hold the information close to the breast in order to sell a book next year? Like all former cabinet officials, Bolton, Tillerson, Sessions — everyone who worked in the White House since January 20, 2017 who questioned Trump’s mental and emotional ability to hold office — should come forward en masse and tell everything they know. Do it in an op-ed in The Times, appear before the House Intelligence Committee, anything! To hide firsthand information about the worst president in American history is the opposite of patriotism. Their silence is deafening, their complicity is galling. We need patriots, not nebbishes.
36
@H. Clark The House so badly wants to keep this simple for the American people, so we can 'understand it' that they're sticking to only obstruction & the Ukraine charges. I SO want to see them try him for being mentally unfit! In fact, they do physical exam prior to taking office, and they really should do mental health exams too. Those are even MORE important. Congress doesn't listen to OUR advice though. I've suggested this time & again!
2
Just more evidence that the U.S. is an “over-lawyered” country. This is clearly just more obstruction of Congress and the lawful process,
21
It was my belief (from following the legal diatribe in the news) that the privilege only could apply to someone CURRENTLY working for the executive branch. Since he was "fired" his obligations are no long operative. That would go for ALL the no-longer-working-for-DJT group of witnesses refusing to testify. The Constitution gives the House (which is BTW composed of both political parties) the authority to call all relevant witnesses to come forth. They can say their say publicly or in closed session if they wish, but this was supposed to be indisputable. Nixon was a smart cookie, and knew when a crime was a crime. But according to all (accurate) accounts Trump not only can't make the distinction, but is also a serious and ongoing threat to our national security, and IMHO the 25th Amendment should have been exercised a long time ago. The GOP has to answer the question however distasteful it may be to the "base" (or Kellyann Conway)-
is he or is he not a Russian Agent? I don't have to think about it since Flynn was directed to lift the sanctions on their economy from day one. Three Long Years, over One Thousand Days and counting- when is a "win" not a win? When do we grant ourselves the "freedom" to fire an unqualified public employee? "Russia, if you're listening..." Yeah, well they're doing a lot more than that.
You can have America on a silver platter- all for "twenty pieces of gold". They're doing to us what we did to the Indians. Funny how that works.
13
Mr. Bolton needs to understand that his name will go down in history as both that of a coward and hypocrite if he does not step forward and testify without preconditions.
He has always portrayed himself as a conservative patriot but now when faced with a test of character and our Constitutional principles he plays games with doing what is morally right. A patriot? It remains to be seen.
29
These current and former senior officials of the Trump administration in the revolving door of his Executive Branch that don’t voluntarily testify in the Impeachment inquiry when they have been summoned with a authorized order by the House of Representatives, will be in violation of Obstruction of Justice which incidentally is another impeachable offense!
Donald J. Trump has again predictably moved the goal posts and is very much in fear at the start of next weeks open public hearings and has now called for their immediate cancellation. Mr. President, you have met your match and her name is Speaker Nancy Pelosi and if you are as innocent as you claim, Obey the law Sir, for it makes you look very guilty!
13
So Bolton's lawyer has volunteered that his client knows stuff no one else does, but won't share that without a subpoena because someone at the White House, perhaps Individual 1, told him not to. That makes me think whatever Bolton knows might incriminate that Individual, so it would be natural to ask him not to disclose it. It does not make sense if Indy 1 believes Bolton would somehow exonerate him.
Knowing time is of the essence, the defensive team came up with this misdirection play, claiming Mr. B really wants to testify - to exonerate his former boss, of course - but Congress needs to start a lawsuit first and get a court ruling, to make sure he won't later be sued or arrested by the Executive Branch (is that possible?) for violating a request not to testify in front of the Impeachment panels, before his comfort level is reached. Which would take weeks or even months, well after this inquiry should be wrapped up.
If the trials go badly for Indy 1, Mr. B can then take his case to the press that he had exculpatory testimony, incontrovertible evidence, maybe the "Best Proof of non-wrongdoing the World has ever seen", but Congress refused to hear it because, eh, they hate Trump. Right?
Yep, that sounds like a Trumpy thing to do. I predict Bolton will still make that claim even without a subpoena, and say, "well, they never subpoenaed me, if they really wanted to hear the truth they could have subpoenaed me".
4
"The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing."
- Archilochus, Greek poet, (c. 680 - 645 BCE)
- Isaiah Berlin, (1909 - 1997), The Hedgehog and the Fox, essay originally published in 1953
3
Bolton and others like him need to cut the nonsense and appear as required by Congress. There's no legal issue to be settled. When you're subpoenaed by Congress, you have to appear and take questions under oath. Everything else they're engaged in doing to distract and evade is just contemptible, so they should be cited for contempt if they fail to show as required. In Bolton's case, I would think he'd be happy to trash Trump who threw him under the bus like so many before him.
9
Mr. Tough guy is too scared to testify. Give me a break.
10
@Alex : Exactly! I guess he's not as brave as all the witnesses who have already testified, starting with Marie Yovanovitch, who marched over to the Capitol with her head high after being dishonestly, viciously smeared and bullied out of her post by a gang of criminals.
1
Cooper and Bolton are too cute by a half . Others have testified in the wake of a subpoena and in defiance of the WH. And they are not private citizens like Bolton.
Bolton realizes that he will been deemed a partisan coward who put a book deal (and future roles in GOP administrations ) before national security . I suspect he would want to testify on TV on a Tuesday , the day new books are released .
Bolton is no public servant but another Trump blowhard and profiteer . The Dems should ignore him and let history render its judgement.
12
This is simple. Bolton wants his book deal over being patriotic and testifying. Not a surprise for a guy without scruples.
11
Are the Dems sure Bolton is not a Trojan horse? Is he also a hand grenade to be detonated? Bolton may be dangling the prospect of having new or more dirt, when in fact he can add nothing substantial to that which is all ready of record. If he takes the opportunity to simply reiterate what has already been attributed to him, but offers a characteristically John Bolton arrogant and contrary opinion that, while distasteful, noting illegal was done, he would be Trump’s star witness. Trump already seems to have struck out with Barr on that effort. Don’t hand him the same on a silver platter with a walrus mustache.
7
Mulvaney was subpoenaed, and did not comply. This issue needs to be resolved by the courts RIGHT NOW; does the Congressional subpoena have the force of law, or doesn’t it? If it does not, then our democracy is in big trouble. Congress will be a toothless dragon, and a president would be above the law.
9
The very fact that Bolton is OK with his lawyer dangling a "lure" in front of a House who doesn't really even need his testimony makes me very suspicious of Bolton's motives, and suspicious of whether he really has any significant evidence to provide.
If Bolton has goods on Trump, and wants to testify, then he can just testify. Let him put his spine where his mouth is, like the brave career diplomats who have already risked their careers and their families' safety to testify. Either Bolton wants to do the right thing or he doesn't.
18
Bolton should testify because it is his patriotic duty. He doesn't need a court to tell him that.
13
Seems like this makes the case for obstruction. Bolton's attorney is basically stating that Bolton has important things to say and can't say them because Pres won't let him. Similar to a missing witness charge where one side who has control over a witness, doesn't bring him in to testify. Jury is allowed to infer whatever he was going to say wasn't good for the controlling party.
9
Mr. Cooper, it seems to me, wants to press a ruling that will be definitive on the Separation of Powers and what Powers the Executive has that are subsumed by the Legislative and Judicial branch. In this, I can see that he suspects this might be a time in history when we can set some precedent for future issues of this type.
Unfortunately, the time it would take to make this precedent is not available now. I don't believe the Founders imagined a possible scenario like this with a president having such blatant disregard for the Constitution and the gravity of holding the presidential office.
Freedom was so dear a thing to them then, they could not imagine a president taking advantage of his office so blatantly and with such terrible consequences for the newly created country.
5
Executive Priviledge cannot be used to hide a crime. So how do we get subpoenas enforced speedily? How do we keep our government accountable? Chief Justice Roberts needs to answer that question NOW. I find it extraordinary that strict constructionists on the Supreme Court silent. If you live by the sword ...
6
If it looks like a trap, sounds like a trap and smells like a trap, it’s a trap. How magnanimous of Bolton to feign a sense of patriotism and duty to country, offering to provide testimony only if compelled by court order. I’m glad Schiff and team seem to be saying “thanks, no thanks” and carrying on without his testimony. At this point they don’t seem to need it to prove without a shadow of a doubt that Trump has committed multiple impeachable offenses.
15
Don’t fall for Bolton’s trickery. If he were interested in protecting the country, he would testify under subpoena just like others have done. His ruse that he knows a lot but needs court protection is a delaying tactic and a set-up. Keep the express train rolling and don’t stop until you reach Impeachment Station.
13
Mr Bolton may dislike Trump but he is probably weighing the likelihood of actually taking him down with his testimony without also jeopardizing Pence in the process. If his testimony also leads to Pence being impeached that would assure a Democratic POTUS in 2020, not something Bolton wants despite his anger at Trump. My guess is he never testifies, but releases his tell-all best seller after the election to cash in without taking any blame for the outcome.
4
It's hard to read the tea leaves here. Bolton's claim that his national security function may put him into a special category with respect to presidential privilege is not a trivial assertion. Cooper's argument that it does not fall within the scope of the pending McGahn ruling seems plausible.
It is possible that Bolton really is sitting on a smoking gun and wants to preemptively counter the loud and shrill Trumpian claims of treasonous disclosure that would surely follow upon his testimony. Cooper's comments about other yet undisclosed meetings explicitly drop that very hint; what motivation would he have to mislead here? Perhaps Bolton's desire to obtain a prior court ruling is not in fact a delaying tactic.
Bolton surely has no love for Trump. He joined the administration in an effort to prevent Trump from making unwise concessions to traditional American foes such as Russia and North Korea. His only real success was to aid in the rejection of Obama's deal with Iran. Was that enough to secure his undying loyalty?
Maybe not. The Iran decision is not likely to be reversed no matter what Bolton does now. The remainder of the foreign policy mess is still unresolved and subject to ongoing Trumpian chaos. Bolton's disgust at the politicization of Ukrainian policy is already a matter of public record. He may well believe that the best hope going forward for promotion of his hawkish policies is to replace Trump with Pence.
3
This seems like a game to get the supreme court to back up the president, or at least to weaken the authority of the legislature. A congressional subpoena is not to be trifled with and yet these people seem to be redefining it as an optional request.
8
While I am not a lawyer, I am struggling to understand how its not incumbent on the White House to move to quash a congressional subpoena in Federal District Court. While a letter from the White House counsel directing parties not to appear might seem compelling, the normal course of action in any court proceeding is for the party objecting to the subpoena to move to quash it. While Bolton’s lawyer has a novel approach “throwing his hands-up” and going the declaratory judgment route, normally parties comply with lawfully issued subpoenas unless and until a court rules on a motion to quash.
1
There are plenty of honorable public servants who have willingly come forward to testify in this matter. Those who have chosen to testify have put country and the rule of law ahead of their personal interests. This is a delaying tactic on the part of Bolton and his lawyer that benefits Trump and his Republican Party enablers. Subpoena Bolton's testimony, and if he refuses to appear, let him land on the wrong side of history.
5
Well then.. the Courts will definitely require him to testify before Congress. Probably a big hint to Moscow Mitch and Lady Lindsey Graham to reconstitute their positions?
3
What is missing from the picture is the red carpet. And if there was a little more fanfare perhaps we would have less no shows. And maybe some entertainment too. Break up the proceedings with musical guests. Bring in the court jesters.
2
@Jim : "Bring in the court jesters?" You must have missed the footage of Republicans storming a deposition even though some of them were allowed to be there and participate in the first place.
2
I don’t know what is more infuriating: trump’s corruption or the Dem’s fear of the court’s regarding subpoenas.
the “concern” about the time it may take for the subpoena issues to make their way through the court’s is an excuse: rather, the Dems seem afraid that they will lose in court. This is the same excuse they made pre impeachment when they were too afraid to invoke the courts regarding Congressional oversight.
It all smells like the Dems have a lack of confidence in the courts
and are willing to risk everything in the hope that they otherwise have enough to convince the public. Very dangerous game
If Bolton’s truly invested in national security, it’s his duty to give congressional testimony and stop this charade of letting the courts decide the fate of his appearance before committee - and permitting his lawyer to tantalize the public by indicating that Bolton was present at many WH meetings about Ukraine only confuses and somewhat trivializes an issue of paramount importance to the Republic. We need to know what Bolton knows now.
2
A trap , if SCOTUS rules for the White House all further subpoenas or proceedings may be in danger of being illegal. Bolton is not playing this card someone else has seen a loophole to exploit.
4
Isn't this pivotal? John Bolton seeking protection, in front of the entire country, from Trump's wrath?
This isn't about the presidency anymore ,or about the people who voted for him. Please. This is about a man unhinged who is the most powerful man in the world.
3
This is far more than a "drug deal." Democracy is at stake. If Bolton saw a crime that endangers our national security, he has a moral obligation to come forward.
6
I'm sure that Trump will be willing to waive all privileges pertaining to Bolton's "relevant" testimony so he can get the truth out to the American public. And I further believe that Trump will also want to reconsider his position on public testimony for Mulvaney, other WH officials and even Giuliani for the same reason. Sure, what could Trump possibly need to hide regarding his "perfect" telephone call with Zelensky?
3
@Ken thanks, Ken! I really enjoy a robust serving of cynicism, topped off with a dash of sarcasm with my coffee in the morning! You sir, just made my day. Well stated.
2
Would someone please tell me why Congress drops subpoenas? Why not just let the subpoena hang out there? What does Congress get by just dropping them?
I am not convinced Bolton wants to testify. He is certainly afraid Trump's thuggish approach to policy damages the United States. If he had any real thoughtfulness, he'd see Trump's fly by the seat of his pants and self-interested moves as devastatingly dangerous. He'd understand Trump's abrogation of the Iran nuclear deal has made us less safe. But given Bolton's hawkish history, he is too afraid of what he erroneously sees as Democrats' weakness.
1
Bolton should NOT be asking for immunity. He works for the American people not the other way around. We are his boss and if he has relevant information that our sitting POTUS is committing crimes nationally or internationally it should be made know the the impeachment committee.
I don't care how "top secret" it is.
5
Bolton's Attorney should point out to Mr. Bolton that it does not matter what the WH wants. If there is a crime, as apparently this is, then there is no Executive Privilege for the president or any witnesses. The House should subpoena Bolton and when he fails to show, then have hime arrested. Enough is Enough of stonewalling.
This harks back to Nixon, deny, deflect and obstruct.
"No one is above justice" George Mason 1787.
3
"In effect, Mr. Bolton and Mr. Kupperman are asking for a court ruling on competing demands by the executive branch, which does not want them to testify, and the legislative branch, which does."
In a matter like this, looking to anybody else but your own conscience to tell you what you should do is an act of cowardice.
3
Bolton’s lawyer wants to see if he can testify. Schiff is so eager to impeach, he doesn’t want to wait for this key witness.
This process is a joke.
So it’s a security threat to give testimony to the US Congress in a SCIF, but it’s not to withhold relevant information from the US Congress pertaining to an established national security threat instigated internally by the White House. This is Bolton’s position through his lawyer. He should speak up if knows relevant info. He has to decide if he serves the people of the US or he’s an accomplice.
4
Bolton, for all his pretensions to patiotism, should be ready to go to prison, for the country and for doing the right thing.
Do you need a court order to tell the truth ?
8
All of this involving the courts in what is a clear division of powers is not what the constitution supports.
Congress decides how to do its business as specified by the constitution. Congress has the power to impeach and along with that, the right to subpoena anyone it wants to, as part of its open ended process.
This is not a court case. It is a Congress case and Congress decides how to proceed and no other branch gets to impede or decide how they do it and whom they question.
Why are people not being responsible for their jobs? Judges on any court have no say about this process.
9
“Mr. Cooper argued that if the House was serious about an inquiry, then Mr. Bolton would be a logical person to question.”
I agree and the House IS serious - a subpoena IS serious. Mr Bolton is the one that should be serious.
Bottom line, I don’t trust Mr Bolton. This is a delaying tactic and House should should continue with their plans. There are others of witnesses who are testifying.
10
Can't the courts fast track this and similar cases? I don't understand why courts couldn't rule on these cases in say a month or two months time or perhaps less? Aren't there compelling reasons to do so?
5
A true patriot would do their duty to their country in the blink of an eye. Bolton is no patriot. His failure to present is clear evidence that he, like his boss ‘has no clothes’ and his only cover is a multitude of legal writs. No shame.
27
It sure looks like our democracy is failing us. By the very slow deliberations of the court Trump could get away with keeping many witnesses from testifying and documents relevant to the inquiry not being provided. In so doing he can control the evidence presented at his senate trial so that he can be acquitted. In other words a president can in effect stonewall Congress and so is above the legislative branch.
The courts should realize the importance of this constitutional crisis and prioritize these suits between the House and the White House over access to witnesses and documents in order for the impeachment inquiry to be properly done.
9
Bolton could easily ignore the White House with no repercussions. However, to ignore a Congressional subpoena could wind him up in jail. I would also suggest, that when the Democrats retake the White House (and the DOJ) Mr. Bolton may very well be the target of a criminal investigation. I assume he knows this and, hence, 'let me escape any responsibility by having the courts require me to testify'. Sorry, Bolton, the world does not work that way.
13
One wonders if Mr. Bolton's attorneys are fishing here for a proffer of immunity. From the reaction of the Democrats they will not be playing games with Mr. Bolton. Either Bolton testifies, or he does not and it becomes part of the obstruction charge in the Bill of Impeachment.
12
Bolton is an important witness. First, can he corroborate the account in "Anonymous"? (go to MSNBC and listen to Rachel Maddow read the most relevant passages) We have a President with a 10 yr old's mental capacity with severe Attention Deficit Disorder. Add to this extreme narcissism and racial bias. The question is: Why was he not removed from office by the people around him who knew this 2 1/2 years ago? (Times commentators seem to be stuck on Anonymous remaining anonymous. Think of him/her as a spy that needs to remain in place to keep reporting on this.)
Why do Republicans who know this not remove him? On Biden and the current reason to impeach, he plans to cheat to win (again); they in their own campaigns have also gone to great lengths to cheat to win. On holding up aid, he is working for the Russians; they have also known this from day one. But the mental incompetence to do the job, this is a clear and ongoing danger, and they bend over backwards to pretend this is not happening.
On the racism, we have children at the border kidnapped, locked in cages, with a plan to never have them see their parents again. And we have just seen deliberate looking the other way to a planned genocide and ethnic cleansing in Syria. These are CRIMES. Is the Republican Party the party of Crime? It certainly looks that way.
On climate change, Trump might get off on "too stupid to understand it". But not so the Republican climate deniers in Congress. Waiting is peril.
13
@Loveman0
We should be so lucky—that DJT should have the mental capacity of a 10 year old suffering with ADD. You give the man FAR too much credit. When my son was ten, and struggling with Asperger’s, he could reason 1,000 times better than Mr. Trump (on his BEST days). XXV Amendment: What is it good for? (Absolutely nothing!)
1
It's a ploy to get the Supreme Court to rule that the despotic "unitary executive" theory is the law of the land.
8
It’s time for John Bolton to step forward and do the right thing.
8
People are truly desperate if they believe a dark, cartoonish character like Bolton will save the day. Honest people do not need to be pushed to do good. This is a dangerously deranged neoconservative who is so clueless that he thought joining the Trump team was a good idea. This is all I need to know about his judgment and who he wants to surround himself with.
11
If I were Bolton I wouldn't wait for the starting gate to open
Jump the fence , and leave it up to the horse to do the right thing .
3
I don’t see why the supreme court can’t decide this issue immediately, as with the ban on Muslim immigration, among other executive orders. Surely this is a matter of utmost urgency—the nation will be irreparably damaged otherwise.
5
John Bolton, a man never shy nor afraid to send young American men and women off to fight in foreign wars, is now hesitant to take his place on the front line when called upon. Kind of ironic isn't it?
24
Not ironic - par for the course. Remember Dude had better things to do than go to Vietnam to participate in a war he supported.
Can you imagine if HRC had refused to testify to Congress about Benghazi? Republicans would have gone bezerk with indignation and outrage. Fox would have had a field day attacking her, and its viewers would have been frothing with fury. The NYTimes comments forums would have been roiling with wrathful Republican commentary. But she showed up, gave an 11-hour testimony, and cleared herself of wrongdoing. Now try to imagine anyone on Trump's staff even being capable of doing that...
24
This feels like a trap. I'd want to know what he was offering before taking this to court. And, I'd want assurances he did not plan to fight the subpoena vigorously.
7
Please remember than no privilege - attorney-client or executive - applies when the conduct involves commission of a crime. Here there are multiple crimes at issue. The only possible out is to take the 5th. Any lawyer can tell his client this, this is why the State Department employees are testifying, they don't need to take the 5th. Bolton would seem to be in the same position, his insistence on a court decision is just an effort to stall the hearings, hoping that they will fade away. I don't believe him for a minute.
8
There is no need for Courts on this issue. Grant Mr. Bolton Immunity and he will testify.
4
Seems Bolton doesn't need immunity. Why do you think this is a factor?
Wouldn't the DOJ have to grant immunity? Trump would never permit that.
This is beginning to sound like a backhanded ploy by Bolton to frame the house investigation as incomplete unless his testimony is obtained while at the same time making it difficult or impossible to do so. It’s not clear what his game is but it’s making him look less than honorable.
17
This may be the central question regarding the process of this inquiry. Having a court ruling in favor of the subpoena could strengthen subpoena process moving forward. On the other hand, the fact that the court determines the outcome could weaken the balance of power between branches. If the court rules in favor of the White House objections, that is a constitutional crisis.
One would think if the president is innocent that he would want testimony to proceed and get the inquiry over with. Instead, he and his supporters thumb their noses at congressional powers and grave concerns of over half of Americans. Where does that leave our country? Dangerously divided, which is exactly what the president thrives on.
7
Bolton has the standing, wherewithal and recognized ability to speak out. He could testify as have the other White House witnesses either voluntarily or in response to a Congressional subpoena and not dilly-dally behind an attorney.
Rather than being the bearer of tantalizing testimony, Bolton may be a loose cannon. If he wants to testify, a deposition should be taken in private as with all the other witnesses and the committee decide whether to call him.
2
I don't understand why these judges just don't expedite such cases, since this impeachment inquiry is rather important to our national security. And by expedite, I mean, like hear the case early next week, and make a decision the week after that.
9
Bolton and his lawyer obviously want to testify if his lawyer just wants a court order. Why can't a judge rule quickly on this testimony? Why did the House withdraw it's subpoena. This is a matter of extremely urgent importance. At stake is our country and it's path forward. Stop treating it is a case to be presented on a judge's docket.
2
@NNI
I don’t think the House withdrew its subpoena (it was only issued last night). Mr. Bolton chose to ignore it. In theory, at least, Congress could hold him in contempt, and impose a fine, or even (!) imprison him until he relented (it’s been done before!).
1
On what basis does Bolton’s lawyer disregard a subpoena for an ex government employee? Trump can’t prohibit him from testifying (Fiona Hill, his former assistant, appeared even though the White House directed her not to do so). Either Bolton doesn’t want to testify or this lawyer is trying to charge additional fees for unnecessary services. If Bolton appeared pursuant to a subpoena, what could Trump do? Nothing.
3
As with all things political - the proof is in the moment. That defining moment. When all pretense is dismissed and all that remains is the irrefutable truth. History is the keeper of such moments.
John Bolton knows history. He knows the truth. He also knows this - is his moment.
2
This is layer upon layer of game playing. As in: We know things that would help your case, but we dare you to figure out how to get the information. And we can ALWAYS delay.
If Bolton were a patriot, he’d come forward like the other dedicated civil servants have done. Such citizens place the preservation of democracy over politics. If he does not, regardless of whether an invitation or a subpoena has been issued, we know his true colors. You’re in Trump’s cabal or you’re not.
9
I know a trap when I see one, and this smells awfully like a trap. Democrats, don't get baited into this one! If Bolton has such tantalizing details that are important to the country, well let him come forward and testify. Ball's in his court. Otherwise, there's sufficient evidence to make the case for abuse of power.
I think Bolton is trying to draw them into a lengthy court process to delay this whole thing, or else force an unhelpful decision on executive privilege.
7
First things, I'm not a lawyer so please bear with me. The Dems say they don't need Bolton's testimony since they already have more than enough evidence of wrongdoing to be able to draw up articles of impeachment. Instead of waiting for the courts to decide the separation of powers issue (house subpoena vs executive privilege) that Bolton et al have hidden behind, couldn't we just wait until the trial in the Senate and ask the presiding judge (Chief Justice Roberts) to decide at that time whether these witnesses would be required to testify there? Does anyone know the answer to this question?
2
@Alberto Delgado I'm with you. Thinking the same thing. Time for "The Times" to address this.
Cuz you don’t call a witness when you don’t know what they’ll say.
Many people have put their careers and reputations on the line in order to tell the House committees about the perceived wrong-doing resulting from Trump's efforts to use the power of his office to investigate his "enemies". John Bolton certainly has no need to fear retribution by Trump or his minions. Bolton is a stalwart of the conservative Republican establishment, and he'll be a Beltway insider long after Trump is done setting the world on fire. Bolton's failure to speak up if he believes there has been wrong-doing is a mix of cowardice and opportunism.
4
If he witnessed a crime he needs to say so. Executive privilege doesn't cover the president's illegal activities.
1
The idea that someone as problematic as John Bolton is going to be the straw... is laughable. Media has to stop setting up unrealistic expectations for these "events." It has a negative effect on overall engagement.
4
If what trump did was impeachable, Bolton is guilty also, since he knew about it.
Now by refusing to testify he is covering himself, or trying to, so as not to be seen as complicit in an illegal act or acts by the president.
2
It seems to me that Mr. Bolton actually wants to testify. He just doesn't want to pay the price of angering the Republican faithful, and thus cutting into his future earnings. He wants to be compelled to testify so he can claim that he had no choice.
Also, remember during the Ken Starr inquisition when Susan McDugal wouldn't testify for Starr, refusing to lie for him. She got thrown in jail. Why haven't Republicans been thrown in jail for refusing to testify?
5
It seems quite likely that if Bolton tells what he knows it will lead to Trump's conviction and removal. Bolton would become a political leper. A subpoena, validated by a court, would be a fig leaf that might allow him a future in politics.
1
He's always considered himself about the smartest person in the room and it must be eating at him to hear, from his perspective, inferior descriptions of what transpired.
If there is some way to give him cover -- immunity from trumpsters and courts -- he could potentially become a John Dean.
Keep him in mind, never write him off, maybe he'll walk back on the set like Perry Mason's surprise witness and finish our villain off.
2
Bolton has everything to gain, if, he shows up on TV. He can say anything at all, and his publisher will print more books.
He can appear publicly, untethered by previous testimony, settle his scores with Mick M., John Pompeo, then just, put the blame on Rudy, not 45, and jam up the impeachment hearings, all at the same time.
But he has to get that chance, and he has to be on TV. I really hope he was simply, "Outsmarted" by the committee.
1
Of course, the WH has objections about Bolton testifying in Congress. If I was Trump (thanks to God I am not), I would be scared too. I disagree more than agree with Bolton's points of views but he has a patriot's aura and, most importantly, he has the record straight on who are our enemies.
On the other hand, Bolton has been next to Trump enough to get infected with that "me, me,me approach". He knows the right thing is to testify. But he will not.
Bolton wants people to think he would be willing. If a judge says so. Bolton wants it both ways.
It is a pity because he can talk about that phone call and the Ukranian "drug deal" as well as the ones with Russia, Turkey, North Korea and, Saudi Arabia. Maybe other? Shame on him.
2
I guess he should have shown up and testified.
He is warming up to the task of being the biggest nail in the coffin.
1
Bolton’s lawyer is bluffing. Keep sending subpoenas to Bolton. He will blink.
So, Bolton' s lawyer claims Bolton has new information but won't provide it unless a court rules he should comply with a subpoena.
Bolton doesn't even work for the White House any more. He's free to testify if he wants to. He just doesn't want to.
So much for patriotism. It's all just talk with these guys, isn't it?
3
Like some many others, I would like this thing to end... Lawyer is absolutely correct and can't thing of one instance in which legislative privelege overruled executive privelege. Get on with it. Also, Peter Baker may need to begin on Volume II of President Obama's presideency.
How does this random lawyer get to decide how his client should or should not respond to a subpoena? since when does a court decide this?
3
@E Campbell What? That's how literally every discovery dispute works.
So if Congress ever subpoenas me, a private citizen like Bolton, I can Just take it to court up to and including the Supreme Court, thereby delaying my appearance before Congress for oh say a year or two? Great. I’ll have to remember that.
1
So interesting- this is quid pro quo about quid pro quo: If the court lets us testify about things that we know about, we will give you the testimony and reliability that you need to impeach. But if you don't wait for the courts to decide then oh well...I guess we won't give you your info.
5
Bolton should be subpoenaed before the House Judiciary Committee and be required to tell all he knows, even if he requires immunity as a quid pro quo.
7
Everybody is being forced to chose between doing what is right for their country or what is best for Trump. Bolton is seeking cover from right wing Trump minion attacks (before he tells the story that he so desperately want to tell). If he testifies because the courts forced him, then he will not be as vulnerable to these attacks. His ego cannot stand being seen as just another Trump minion who put himself under the bus for the boss.
14
You wanted a constitutional crises, you got one.
There should be no confusion that if the branch of government constitutionally mandated to oversight issues a subpoena anyone, especially a private citizen regardless of their past governmental role, has no *choice* but to testify. This was settled in US vs Nixon - if the President cant claim executive privilege, then Bolton, et al sure cant most especially during a criminal investigation. Its shameful and should be punishable.
15
"Separation Of Powers" is a sham perpetrated on the American People, just like the so called "Trusts" of Wall Street which brought about the financial collapses of 1929, and 2005, and who are still underwriting securities today.
1
@Tim
Hunh?
Separation of powers is implicit but perfectly clear in the Constitution, and is discussed explicitly in the Federalist Papers. Whatever your view of the relative powers of the different branches, separation of powers is not a "sham." That's a bizarre assertion.
The housing bubble collapsed in 2007.
1
@bob Mostly in 2008, but who's counting?
He wants to talk, but he REALLY wants to remain on the “conservative “ gravy train. Lectures, TV i.e. FOX News, Books, etc. very easy and very lucrative. Therefore, he MUST be ordered to talk, by an actual Judge.
Well played, Sir. I’m actually impressed.
14
John Dean spilled the beans on Nixonian corruption in 1973, and he’s still in great demand on the talk shows today, and he’s a true American hero. Bolton will never be called a hero.
2
@Donald White
I agree. Dean was a Patriot. Bolton is a money grubber, and Collaborator.
Why doesn’t he just testify if he has information? He has already been fired so he’s not going to lose his job. He might get a few mean tweets from POTUS but any serious legal action would never see the light of day. It’s time to consider what’s good for the country. If there is no case against POTUS it will come out soon enough. It sure seems like the WH is trying to hide from what is already out there. The gun has been found and its smoking, is there another body to go with it?
7
Read: I’ve got the goods and will play ball.
2
That's fine, exclude him from the proceedings. His big ego will be begging Congress to give him the biggest stage of his life.
7
Tell Bolton with his I've got a secret ploy to jump in a lake. He will only come if the courts says he can?The way the courts move Mayor Pete will be in his forties by time a decision is made.Less than twelve months until election tell Bolton if he can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen. Bolton playing the I know something you don't know game is childish for a man in his 70's. I really think he wants to make Trump squirm but not really help The Dems.
8
What's with the tease? Does he have no sense of patriotic responsibility to respect Congressional request for his testimony in an undertaking of this magnitude?
4
This is exactly like Junior High. “I know something but won’t tell”. It makes perfect sense since Trump has never gotten past Junior High antics and mentality.
7
If Bolton were a true American wanna be hero, he would testify. It's not like any administration will ever hire him again. Best to come clean and salvage the stain of working with Trump. But then again, he could be working on a book and would like to save information for his publication "how I sold my soul to Trump and lived to regret it". Not really sure why the stall tactics unless it is for a book deal.
4
Bolton is an ultra-right, belligerent, self-promoting war hawk who should never be a part of a civilized democratic government. He's using this high-profile episode to promote his 'brand' and increase his speaking fees. He's not nearly as important as he would have us believe.
8
One senses Mr. Bolton feels nothing but contempt for Trump and that he takes the way in which he was basically used and tossed aside personally. Could he be playing this out so in part to mess with the man's mind?
3
Sounds like Bolton is begging to be subpoenaed. Could it be that this man has a conscience, at least one ethic and a spine? If so, he'll be the first of Trump's inner circle to have developed one. Let the man grow.
Wouldn't it be delicious if Bolton has the stuff to eject Trump from the Oval Office directly into the slammer?
Please keep in mind that Trump's M.O. in his handling of all his bankruptcies is note for note the same as his approach to impeachment. It's really a shame they closed Alcatraz.
2
I hope the House doesn't play rope-a-dope. DJT and Giuliani were damaging US interests abroad. Bolton knows that full well, and his refusal to testify shows that he puts a lot more ahead of his purported love for this country. Hawks are always vocal until the eagle shows up.
5
Allow me to address Mr. Bolton directly:
Mr. John Bolton:
It is in my interest and that of the rest of the United States citizenry to hear your testimony concerning the call to President Zelensky on July 25, 2019. I do not believe you or your attorney hesitate due to any obscure opinions concerning "the immunity of the President and his circle" proffered by the White House and/or his attorneys.
Please, come forward, testify to the House Intelligence Committee.
1
If Bolton admits to being a witness to a crime by the president wasn’t he obligated to report it at the time? He might be vulnerable.
5
@Lee
Other than law enforcement personnel, nobody has a legal obligation to report any crime
This “tease” seems like a stalling tactic to me. Drag the impeachment out to further numb the attention span-challenged public. If Bolton is such a patriot he needs to come out with what he knows NOW.
6
On the other hand, if Trump though Bolton's testimony would be good for Trump, he would have ordered Bolton to testify.
So just the fact that Trump has not done tells me WH does not trust Bolton or expects his testimony to be friendly to Trump.
Having said that, I don't trust Trump. He has proved to be a con-man and fraud par excellence.
3
Bolton and the white house just want the Dems to get hung up in court. With appeals it would be too late, next year, and too close to election.
So this is just a ploy which the Dems shouldn't fall for.
If Bolton is honorable then he should testify on his own.
But he won't.
3
But is there any way that this question for the court can be expedited? Seems like a legitimate wiggling of the mustache to speak, or a stall by tying it up in the courts.
Never agreed with Bolton, but I never thought of him as untrustworthy. He always spoke his scary mind honestly and openly.
If Bolton were a patriot, he should have turned up and ignored that nonsense about directives from the so-called president.
The so-called president has no say in Bolton testifying or not. Bolton no longer works for him, and a Subpoena trumps illegal orders from the so-called president.
1
McGann raises atty-client privilege. Bolton raises only executive privilege, I'd guess. I would have thought that had been fully litigated with Nixon, but maybe not.
Maybe the Bolton case will give Kavanaugh a chance to develop his Unitary Executive theory. Sort of like when the wife was absorbed by the husband, so they were one person, under the legal fiction of coverture. I can't wait.
@maqroll
Yes. I think it's a ploy to get the Supreme Court to rule that the despotic "unitary executive" theory is the law of the land.
1
Everybody's scrambling to get lawyers, even the lawyers. Are there echoes of Watergate here?
mr. president: you don't need to endure this impeachment crucible. why not just resign for your family? why not just retire so they won't have trump to kick around anymore?
1
True patriot. Great statesman. Won't tell what he knows unless faced with contempt.
1
Privilege does not cover crimes. That is what he is being asked to testify to. Be a patriot not a partisan! Testify
1
It's an interesting gambit. Bolton is clearly aware Republicans are prepared to attack anyone who testifies as a Never Trumper. Being compelled to testify might bolster his credibility with voters and break the Fox News/White House lie machine.
1
I may take the day off to watch this testimony.
Bolton knows a lot and he is angry.
I do not like what is going on in DC but I do like watching lindsay graham fall apart on live tv when asked to comment.
8
Well, we can only hope that the history books record that John R. Bolton was such a Great Patriot (and definitely not a whimpering, chicken hawk coward) that, instead of doing the morally correct thing and testifying about what he knew for the benefit of his country, he waited for a court to decide for him. He should be mentioned on the same page as such great patriots as Benedict Arnold and Jefferson Davis.
Of course, they won’t because the history books are written for Texas, who will probably want this chapter of history to be about the lib’rul witch hunt against The Greatest American President Ever, but we can hope.
2
Poetic justice if it is Bolton who saves the Republic from our national nightmare. I wonder what Moscow Mitch is thinking after he touted Bolton for the NSC post.
1
Bolton just wants to delay anything that gets his evidence out so that he can get his book to market...
given that any testimony in public now would ultimately kill the explosiveness of a book deal already in the works.
This is self-serving game playing on Bolton's part. Grow a spine and tell Congress - and the American people - what you know.
It is so crazy how those we once viewed as vile evildoers can become rehabilitated if they step out and add to the legal and corruption cases against Trump.
We need to exercise caution when listening to "flatterers" (or in this case, those telling us what we want so much to hear). I worry about being consumed if we too quickly embrace these voices.
Recall the translated La Fontaine (The Fox and the Raven):
' Flatterers thrive on fools' credulity.
The lesson's worth a cheese, don't you agree?"
The crow, shamefaced and flustered swore,
Too late, however: "Nevermore!" '
2
The House Intelligence Committee appears to have enough evidence for Trump’s impeachment, though Amb. Bolton’s testimony would carry the force of an arsenal of atomic/ hydrogen power bombs . But, as some argue, he’s a wild card and who knows what he could end up saying or helping.
2
Bolton, from this latest bombshell just dropped by his attorneys, is obviously trying to play both sides of the fence. On the one hand he wants the investigative body of Trump's rolling clown circus to know that he (Bolton) has potentially incriminating evidence against Trump Inc. But on the other hand, Bolton also is emphatic about letting the Orange One know, that unless he gets assurances of a full presidential pardon, that Bolton is prepared to sing like a canary.
Wily old Fox (and dangerous to know) is this Bolton guy: But we knew this from his years at the foot of that evil Puppet Master-Dick Cheney.
4
John Bolton does not the Court's permission to respond to the United States House of Representatives. To pretend that he needs permission is cowardly.
1
Schiff should give Cooper a call, pronto. Bolton is ready to open his mouth. That will leave very little choice to Trump but to make Guiliani a scapegoat. Then, if Giuliani opens his mouth, Trump is done for.
Some patriot this Bolton. Won’t testify until all the lawyers get paid.
Sigh.....the late, once great, United States of America. Thanks, it was awesome.
1
Bolton can testify today. He is a private citizen. He is a witness. He won't be giving away any secrets to verify already given testimony. He is being the thing Nicole Wallace said on the air.
So Mr. Trump has " never even heard" of these people.
Sounds too much like the lines he uttered when denying the extramarital affairs that ultimately landed lawyer- Cohen in jail.
Good that Guiliani is not so naive, and is lawyering up. He is next to take the fall for POTUS.
Bolton might want to consider getting an extra lawyer or two. His attorney may be playing hardball but it is not going to protect his client one bit. Of course, lawyers work by the hour, and the good ones charge a lot of $$$$$.
1
It looks like Bolton wants the cover of a court ruling to make sure his NDA won’t put him in legal jeopardy if he testifies. But a subpoena would offer sufficient cover... What does he want?!? Immunity?
Either he is teasing because he wants to talk, or is a partisan tactic to distract the Dems from their impeachment calendar. If the Dems decide to wait, it will affect the whole primaries without plan. Having impeachment on the books by Christmas will allow the candidates to plan so they can attend the Senate court. If he wants to talk, he can. He was fired and is a private citizen. But, that means he’ll threatened his position in the GOP. Do not pay attention and continue as planned.
2
At difficult moments people need to make their choices.
Bolton has made his, to sit on the sidelines knowing what he knows, while brave public servants put their careers and reputations on the line in defense of our constitutional republic.
Not a good look.
6
Legally, this should be a very simple decision. The House has the power to subpoena witnesses; the White House does not have any Constitutional power to withhold, or direct anybody else to withhold, testimony to the House.
Mr. Bolton faces no legal risk from the White House, while defying the House does carry legal risk.
3
And the answer is:
The House will impeach without Bolton's testimony, but he will be called at the Senate trial presided over by Chief Justice Roberts who will have the authority and responsibility to rule that as a material witness Bolton must testify. Don't worry about whether he will implicate or exonerate the president. Ask the questions cold and let the chips fall.
1
Will the Kupperman-Bolton case go before US District Court Judge Leon, who was appointed by Geo.W. Bush? If Judge Leon rules that the subpoenas are legit, will the plaintiffs be able to appeal to a higher court? The case won't be heard until Dec. 10th. If a timely ruling comes, how likely will an appeal be heard prior to the 2020 election?
IMHO a dodge to delay. A subpoena dispute will go all the way to the election which is what the President wants. Congress is right to prevent him from this.
I suspect this is a ploy to delay the matter.
5
It's a clever ploy in that matters that require the House Intelligence Committee to receive testimony from Bolton on matters that involve intelligence material classified at the TS/SCI level cannot share this testimony with others that don't possess Top Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information Security Clearance, also known as TS/SCI clearance. Therefore, certain members of the Intelligence Committee that's conducting the Impeachment Hearings, as well as members of the Senate that don't possess the TS/SCI Clearance, and the general public will be blocked from hearing this testimony. Given this dilemma, how can the Senate conduct an Impeachment Hearing without access to all relevant testimony?
The title of the article implies a pressure campaign if spite of both head of state saying there was no pressure and clarification in texts and apparently conversation that no quid pro quo was desired. That aid was given and there was no public announcement of a public investigation.
Can we maybe at least use the word alledged.
Also, ignoring Biden's roll in politics shouldn't a son with no apparent industry skills who got thrown out of the armed forces followed by a demand that the prosecutor be fired be investigated?
In that we have an investigation Treaty with Ukraine shouldn't our head of state work with the other head of state to pave the way for our respective justice departments to work together.
Under the President's responsibility to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed" obligate him to help get such an investigation going. Separate from. Biden's presidential ambitions, shouldn't his withholding of a billion or so in U. S. money be investigated?
True Heros and ethical "stand up" patriots DO NOT NEED a subpoena nor a court ruling to step into committee at congressional request to testify in defense of the US Constitution and Democracy.
Period.. Full Stop.
There are shenanigans at play here.. I'm just sure yet what they are.
3
Charles Cooper should realize that it would take too long for a court to rule on whether Bolton should honor the subpoena. Congressional committees investigating Trump should not fall into that trap. What exact purpose does Cooper have in saying that Bolton knows a lot? Is he trying to seriously delay the investigation?
It is doubtful that the framers of the Constitution would have wanted the President to be above regular law. It is also doubtful that they would have given Congress the responsibility to impeach for high crimes and misdemeanors, but then wanted Congress to NOT to be able to subpoena evidence from everyone working in the Executive Branch.
But there you have it when the Dept of Justice is more political than just. I must admit, Eric Holder was also partisan, and now Barr makes it much worse. Wrong name for the Dept of Justice. Should be called the Dept of Politics.
1
What could be more serious than impeachment proceedings?
Why are these people playing games?
If Bolton has something important to say, why is he waiting? What is he looking for? Political cover?
If the saying “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” is inadequate to describe the situation. It’s a conflagration in process.
2
It's moments like these that I wonder if I'm actually witnessing history in the making or simply viewing a political version of "Let's Make a Deal."
3
The US foreign aid is nothing but money to buy influence and concessions from those who receive it. It is a disguised form of corruption. That is why we don't see any significant change in the countries that received it. I hate to say that I agree with Trump when it comes to cutting foreign aid until we find a more efficient way of doing it that yields actual results.
@JG We (and Europe) give aid to the Ukrainians so that they will fight Russian aggression. Would you rather have our sons and daughters in the field fighting and dying to stop the Russians?
They should put Bolton in prison until he decides it's in his best interest to testify. The house should show they are serious about obstruction and the consequences of not testifying under oath when called, though I doubt that's going to happen.
1
As I recall it from my almost three weeks in law school, generally speaking, what is not prohibited by law is permitted. So rather than assume it's not OK to testify without a court saying it is, why don't Bolton and other witness assume they can testify unless a court says it's not OK.
1
Key word here is "sensitive." Bolton and Kupperman's attorney is attempting a shell game. This is not "national security" sensitive information; rather, Bolton and Kupperman simply have definitive information on the criminal buffoonery that went down regarding this matter. The comparison to the statement about sensitive national security regarding McGahn, and the reasoning as to why this supposedly matters, is flawed. They're trying to bait Schiff into getting this tied up in courts w/hopes that Trump stays in power through the next election (they may not like him, but they like the conservative agenda), but he (Schiff) is not falling for it.
2
Pelosi should play hardball and use the House power of arrest for defying a subpoena to testify and after holding the individual in contempt of congress. It's there for a reason, so these refusals don't end up in court with no end.
2
@Mark All Pelosi needs to do is to announce that she is giving Bolton and the White House 10 days to try to get a court order quashing the subpoena. And if no such order appears in 10 days, Bolton either testifies or he is locked up until he talks.
The courts will delay a Bolton testimony beyond the scope the House democrats want to wait. I wonder what the reason Bolton does not put patriotism in front of legal pettiness as have many others who have defied the WH. He is a hawk who normally does not care about other's opinions when it comes to diplomacy.
We know he is writing a book, I hope this delay is not to put more money in his pocket upon its release.
There is nothing - nothing - to prevent Bolton from testifying, now that he is no longer a government employee.
If he is indeed so eager to testify, we look forward to seeing him on TV within the next two weeks.
Why does one need permission to testify regarding potential crimes? From anyone?
Anyway, shouldn't Trump welcome Bolton's testimony? After all, everything Trump did was perfection.
1
What is there for a judge to rule on if there is a subpoena? This is a co-equal branch of government.
It makes no sense that the White House could constitutionally forbid anyone to testify in an impeachment hearing. Their actions are on trial. Do criminals get to forbid a witness to appear?
The House needs to subpoena. They are perhaps afraid it’s going to go all the way to SCOTUS and the Supreme Court is going to allow Bolton’s testimony to be blocked - another imperialist presidency ruling. But what are you going to do? We are already on the way to discovering if the Court is corrupt - or not - because they need to rule on the release of Trump’s tax documents in NY State. If we are completely destroyed morally, let’s just get it out in the open now and let people react.
"Mr. Cooper argued that if the House was serious about an inquiry, then Mr. Bolton would be a logical person to question."
Cooper, you don't think the house if serious about the inquiry? What are they not reimbursing you and your client for an Uber?
3
Cooper wants to be in the news.
There is more than enough evidence to impeach Trump now, today.
Cooper's clients are not necessary.
1
The House Impeachment Committee is not issuing a subpoena to John Bolton for one simple reason:
They do not want to do anything that might compromise their ongoing investigation of John Bolton and criminal charges to be lodged against him.
@Matthew O'Brien Mr. Bolton may have some criminal exposure, but I have not so far seen it. He seems to have made a conscious effort to avoid being part of the primary criminal scheme the president concocted with respect to the Ukraine.
Of course, if you factor in his being a war criminal, that's a different story. But Iraq is not really on the docket for impeachment.
"Mr. Bolton would be an important witness in the impeachment inquiry, but his lawyer wants a court to rule on whether he should testify." -P. Baker
Why? Why does he need a court to order him to do the right and patriotic thing?
3
So far, no witness has testified that the White House set “quid pro quo” conditions on aid to Ukraine or a meeting with President Zelensky. AmbassadorTaylor testified that it was his “understanding” was that White House would deny military assistance to Ukraine and would not invite President Zelensky to the White House unless Zelensky announced he had initiated an investigation into the Bidens’ dealings with Burisma Holdings. But Taylor based his testimony on his conversations with Ambassador Sondland.
In the addendum to his original testimony, Sondland testified he warned President Zelensky that “resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks.” But he also testified that he only presumed aid might be denied. He said, “by the beginning of September 2019, and in the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid, I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anticorruption statement.”
Sondland did not say the White House told him there was a quid pro quo. He made a prediction base on a presumption. His prediction turned out to be wrong. The White House released the aid to Ukraine even though Zelensky did not make the proposed statement.
@William Case Many witnesses, and the president's own "transcript" provide evidence of an explicit quid pro quo. But I guess facts don't matter to some of us, eh?
@Justin
Nonsense. The transcript show the president asked more a favor. There was not mention of aid. Zelensky has repeatedly said there was no pressure or blackmail. Presidents routinely set conditions on aid, but the transcript show there was no need, Zelensky enthusiastically agreed.
John Bolton had a viable opportunity, to demonstrate his regard for the Constitution, and the American Government, but true to character, he failed to respect a subpoena from the American Congress.
Our National Security is being attacked by the republican party of Vladimir Putin.
2
Let's hope the court rules soon so we can hear from John Bolton. As a certified member of the ultra-right wing bomb-throwing neocon Republicans, he has both credibility and stature. He also clearly knows a hand grenade when he sees it, but also, unlike those involve in the Ukraine conspiracy and those defending it, has a firm belief in "the rule of law." As a high-ranking member of the Trump administration, he knows who threw the grenade and those who aided and abetted him in the unraveling criminal attempt to trade military aid "Dollars for Dirt" on former Vice President Joe Biden, his son Hunter, and Hillary Clinton.
1
When it comes to waging war, Mr. Bolton is willing to risk the lives of others, but never his own. When it comes to standing up to corruption in the White House, Mr. Bolton is willing to risk the security of this nation, but never his own. Just another fair weather patriot who deserves absolutely no respect.
3
It looks like Bolton is trying to make a deal: subpoena me and offer me immunity, and I will come and tell of Trump's wrongdoing.
I went to a new doctor today and while he was examining me I complimented him for the careful notes he was taking and said I wished he was working at the White House.
He laughed knowingly and agreed.
Seems like the word about our White House is getting around.
2
Just two days ago, Adam Schiff's team filed a motion to dismiss its suit to subpoena Bolton's aide Charles Kupperman. Schiff clearly understands that the refusal of Kupperman (and others) to comply with the House subpeonas is part of a ploy to create a case that would rise to the (presumably Trump-friendly) Supreme Court, which they hope will render a decision in support of the "unitary executive" that Bolton so fervently desires. Now Bolton is dangling his own testimony as bait for the House impeachment managers -- as though Bolton's character were so (ahem) unimpeachable as to make him an invaluable witness! No one is fooled.
5
May be I am naive, is it to testify in the Congress a basic civic duty of any citizen ?
2
This smells like a stalling tactic so Bolton can appear cooperative while ultimately never having to testify, thus preserving his potential for a fat contract with Fox. It will take months for the issue to work its way to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, the time window is much shorter for the Democrats to make their case without appearing to subvert the 2020 campaign. Several of Bolton’s aides had the courage to testify without inventing the need to run for legal cover. We should have learned what kind of a man this is from all those decades of his demanding that the children of other Americans go fight wars Bolton liked, but never enough to have his own skin in the game.
2
Why??? Why would his lawyers say that if they don’t want him to testify? Doesn’t that teaser just bolster the obstruction of justice charge?
This is actually quite interesting. The President - ANY President - does have a right to receive confidential advice. The claim of executive privilege here may actually be quite compelling. The court will have to weigh that against any potential criminal activity that may be disclosed by the testimony. Or even more interestingly, against any potential impeachable activity. Which would require the court to determine, even if broadly, what might reasonably be considered impeachable activity.
This isn't the usual Trump nonsense. This is actually quite interesting from a legal perspective.
94
@Mike
It's a trick from those believing in "the unitary executive" and how to use executive privilege to further corrode the tenants of our Democracy.
"Interestingly" or not, you have received no recommendations on your theory. Understandably. But I'll give you one because it's is an "interesting" trick.
27
@Mike In the Nixon impeachment case the Supreme Court ruled that executive privilege could not be used to hide criminal activity.
158
@Mike Executive privilege applies, as you indicate, to the deliberative process. In other words, discussions where the President is receiving INTERNAL ADVICE.
What we're talking about here are mostly conversations with other world leaders. These are not deliberative in nature. There should be no privilege, and the argument that there is is ridiculous.
What is noteworthy is that they're not even trying to argue that disclosure would implicate national security interests of the US, because obviously the only interests in play on these calls were Trump's.
97
Obviously, I am no lawyer nor legal expert on any level.
But maybe the bottleneck to obtaining the truth lies with lawyers.
For crying out loud, if Bolton has information, direct information pertaining to the president and his abuse of power, then just step forward and start talking and elaborating. Otherwise, why even bring it up or even mention it to his own lawyer?
This charade of "I know something you don't know" and then stop midstream and claim that Bolton "would be willing to talk but only if a court rules that he should ignore White House objections."
What kind of game are they playing? What is Bolton looking for, immunity in exchange for testimony?
He didn't seem too afraid, cautious or bashful when advising Trump about other national security issues in the past when he was the national security adviser, so why so timid and careful now?
7
@Marge Keller
Right? Great question.
I wonder if Bolton is hoping to be some big hero, appearing like he wants to help ethical Americans by providing the proverbial ammo we seem to need to take down this president, while simultaneously trying to get the support of #AlwaysTrumpers by appearing reluctant?
Or is he planning to just go hardcore R/Trump (as AG Barr did vis-a-vis his spin on the Mueller report) by providing the proverbial ammo *they* seem to need to prop up this incipient dictatorship, hoping for some reward?
He’s crafty, that’s for sure.
2
Don’t miss your moment. While you are waiting on the court the committee will move on without you. They won’t beg. You will have missed you chance to be on TV and be a hero.
15
Please don’t bite. Feels like a red herring.
With this much at stake, a patriot would not be playing these stupid games.
Bolton should show up or shut up.
41
In typical Looky-Me fashion John Bolton is dragging this out for publicity before he graces the House with his presence. Stop all the drama Bolton. We are very, very tired of drama. Get on with it. You know quite well what you need to do.
25
Bolton claims to be a super tough guy patriot. Now is the time to put his money where his mouth is. Be a mencsh!
29
Indeed, if the democrats were running a serious inquiry rather than a partisan rush to reach an impeachment vote before the holiday recess so that they can have what they hope will be a politically damaging senate trial during an election year (even though they know it will not result in removal from office), they would not drop their subpoena request for Bolton and Kupperman but would allow the courts to rule on how to balance the legitimate competing prerogatives of the executive and legislative branches in order to obtain what Cooper has told them is critical information. If only if.
1
Does it not seem that the Democrats are trying to be expedient on this issue specifically so it DOES NOT last for an extended period of time? It seems they want to avoid this consuming the majority of headlines and news coverage for months, which is exactly the opposite of what their plan would be if this was simply a partisan ploy to harm Trump’s re-election chances. To me it seems they want to put the facts out there and avoid long, drawn-out court battles. Remember: it is the Trump administration trying to draw this out, not the Democrats. If Dems followed Trump’s schedule this would last long into 2020.
23
They dropped the cases because an almost identical case is much farther along and if that rules in favor of subpoena over executive privilege then they hope the other holdouts will also accept the decision and testify.
And it is only partisan because the Republicans are ignoring real misbehavior and refusing to participate at all on their own partisan grounds.
But Bolton's lawyer is not taking the right path. On one hand, his client is being compelled by legal process (subpoena). On the other, is simply a request from the President's counsel that he not testify, without the force of law or any legal consequence in the event he does testify. Bolton's attorney should be sending a letter to the White House counsel instead of the House counsel, alerting the White House that Bolton will be complying with a subpoena unless the WH gets an injunction to stop it--which they never will.
38
@Tom Forcing the White House to try to get an injunction would be in accordance with common civil practice, where the person objecting to a subpoena has to go to court to try to quash it. This is what happened when New York prosecutors subpoenaed the records of Trumps tax accountants, and Trump went to court (so far unsuccessfully) to try to stop it from going into effect. Giving the White House 10 days or so to try to get a restraining order, would be quick and efficient.The problem here is that Bolton is trying hard to appear to be neutral about testifying - even if he would have to file a lawsuit at his own expense in order to get a court ruling. Getting a ruling in that kind of lawsuit would be a slow process which may be what Bolton wants. -
Delay and deny is the old legal trick in the book. Does Bolton have no free will that he will talk only if "compelled". Did his oath to the Constitution mean nothing but legal trickery? Others have honored the Constitutional validity of Congressional subpoenas without frivolous questioning. Does Bolton have honor or not? Apparently not at this point.
24
We are living in an unprecedented time. Until we amend the laws, John Bolton and all others served can not possibly misunderstand that compliance with a subpoena is mandatory. The White House needs to respect and comply with the rule of law as well The Constitution has indicated the path, for all that refuse, they should be jailed. Please be assured that these actions are called obstruction. Obstruction has a definite outcome under the laws of America.
20
Mr. Cooper is giving some insight already by the way he has worded his letter concerning Mr. Bolton and Mr. Kupperman
Is there anyway that Congress can subpoena the actual tape of Trump’s conversation with President Zelensky? I don’t trust the transcript of the tape to be as accurate as the actual recording of the conversation.
Perhaps the tape of the conversation between Trump and Erdogan would be of value as well. I am curious as to what they really discussed before the Turks invaded Iran.
5
@Jean The conversation was not recorded; only notes were taken during the call.
@J
I read that the call was transferred to another secure server in the White House and that notes were also taken
1
This is a trap. If the House sues there will not be a resolution until next summer. If they don’t the GOP will claim that they didn’t hear relevant evidence.
I would not go to court.
10
It’s already in the courts!
@John Graybeard
Kupperman already filed a suit to get a judge to decide for him.
The goal is to link the suspension of aid to the request for an investigation of Biden. And Bolton is seen as another brick in the wall. But every wall has two sides.
Countless government employees in Ukraine knew of the suspension of funding. And, if an investigation of Biden had been undertaken, it would have been known to the public -- the whole purpose was a public smear. Then, if aid had been restored after the smear was made public all those Ukrainian government employees would have been able to put two and two together. The whole scheme, if played out, would have been transparent in Ukraine.
There never was any way to keep this thing secret on the other side of the wall. Take that for what you will.
2
Whats to talk about here. The constitution gives congress, at its sole discretion, the right to interview a witness in an impeachment inquiry. Why would the constitution even talk of the process of impeachment if it was not to specify a process to try someone from another branch. Nowhere does it grant the executive branch the right to try itself. That would be nonsensical.
17
First, Bolton nor his attorney knows what the committee has heard. Stating he has specific knowledge no one else has heard/does is disingenuous. He likely can fill in some blanks, but don’t pretend that he holds some magic missing puzzle piece.
Two, there’s no reason for the court to decide. Plenty of other people have come forth despite White House directives to do otherwise.
It sounds like machinations. If Bolton and his attorney think they have information the committee should know, step up and give it. Bolton’s never waited for permission to speak before.
28
Mr Bolton May be deeply disturbed but not roused to action. For someone who wears his patriotism on his sleeve, and isn’t hesitant about facing American adversaries, he’s apparently hit a brick orange wall in Trump. He’s willing to testify, wanting to testify, waiting to testify, only he can’t. Because the man who fired him says no. Since when did no stop Mr Bolton? When a Trump tweet could end his appearances on Fox, stymie his upcoming book sales, and make him a pariah in the Trump orbit. So much for honesty, integrity, and the truth.
15
Perhaps his reluctance is a quest for immunity of some kind. He probably supports Trump except for this one issue and has great reluctance to testify while putting on I wish I could front.
4
The Democrats have enough evidence to impeach trump even without Bolton's testimony. The Democrats should ignore Bolton. If Bolton sees that he has become irrelevant, maybe he'll come forth. I don't think he is the kind of man who wants to be considered irrelevant.
12
@Diane Well said. This is Bolton looking for a way to claim deniability to his like minded colleagues. In other words, The courts made me do this.
Pathetic.
I would rather see the House do a thorough investigation, rather than rush to get it done. I think the more evidence they unearth, the more opinion will be swayed by their findings. I would love to hear Mr. Bolton's testimony, and the testimony of other senior White House officials including the Prez.
I would love to see the investigation look into how controversial Trump decisions with regards to Russia and Saudi Arabia were arrived at, and whether investments by Russians in Trump's family business, or business with the Saudis by the Kushners altered our national security policy to benefit the Prez & familia. As Mulvaney said, they do this sort of stuff all the time.
7
Trump's confidence that "there is no firsthand knowledge" is probably thanks to his having learned mob ways; the only person who likely got explicit instructions from him is Giuliani, and even that probably took the form of winks and nods. Bolton was frozen out of the critical deliberations precisely because Trump felt Giuliani was the only person whose loyalty he could count on.
8
Personally, I would love it if Mr. Bolton held a smoking gun but the skeptic in me questions whether this a just another delaying tactic for Trumps administration while they try to shore up a very feeble defense.
Mr. Bolton comes across as honest, patriotic and a 'no nonsense' kind of guy. If this assessment is correct then why, if he has pertinent information relative to the investigation and ultimately to the American people, would he not just come forward to testify?
If he is the patriot he's been portrayed to be, why would he even need a subpoena? Mr. Bolton is well aware that the impeachment inquiry is a legally sanctioned proceeding.
At first I thought he was just seeking legal justification to prevent a backlash from Trump. Now I wonder what his motives are?
8
No one has said why the subpoena for Charles Kupperman was withdraw.
By withdrawing it, House democrats invited this move.
Bolton has no love for Trump, but no good soldier wants to be seen as testifying against their boss. It becomes very hard to get work.
1
Hopefully the Democrats are smart enough to know that if they go to the courts and wait for a decision, it will push the impeachment further into the primary and that will also put a lot of weight on Boltons testimony - much like Mueller's - and in the end he might be setting them up to say disingenuously, 'No, it was all fine.' With so much anticipation, he wields a lot of power.
3
What good are subpoenas when those who choose simply ignore without fear of punishment.
According to the US Code #104: Disobedience to subpoena:
"Any person willfully neglecting or refusing obedience to such subpoena or neglecting or refusing to appear and testify when
subpoenaed is guilty of a misdemeanor".
The law goes on to cover the punishment. Unless Congress backs up the law it becomes irrelevant and a mockery. We claim that no one is above the law, lets prove it.
6
For a person who expects the men and women in our military to put themselves in harms way - risking death even - seems he is unwilling to do the same for his country for fear of a lawsuit.
A lawsuit.
13
Bolton came to Trump via Fox News. That already throws a curveball into accepting any relevancy he supposedly presents. The only factor that might lead to a more truthful account from him is anger over the burnt bridge Trump proffered.
It will be interesting to observe his allegiance to the Constitution, if he gets called to testify under oath.
4
If John Bolton is truly a patriot of the U.S., and has information that can prove that our president did in fact abuse his power, put our national security at risk, and/or violated our Constitution, then Mr. Bolton should voluntarily testify before the House impeachment inquiry regardless of the personal consequences to him. For a person in his position, there is absolutely no excuse not to. For our service people, our veterans, and military families, who have sacrificed so much, it is a disgrace that Mr. Bolton would even think twice about testifying. Our Democracy can only work when we allow truth to prevail, and only when we put our country and our Constitution above ourselves, and beyond our politics.
… And please be thankful for and remember those who served our country this Veterans Day 11/11.
7
So, if I understand this correctly Bolton can write a book, say anything he wants that makes him look good, reap the profits and that's perfectly legal. But to testify and tell the truth under penalty of perjury poses a legal problem. Something is wrong here.
11
In the words of General Ackbar from Star Wars:
"its a trap!"
If he was willing to pile on anything useful against Trump, he would have already done it. I think the House can find corroborating evidence without taking on the risk of Bolton falling on the sword for Trump.
5
Reissue a subpoena for him, arrest him when he doesn’t show up, and let him wait for his court decision from jail.
5
He obviously wants to talk. He's wealthy and doesn't need a job or campaign money. He can still write a book, even after he testifies. I think he's more of a Scaramucci than a Lindsey Graham. I believe he will wind up talking.
1
Since the Republicans are beginning to take the stance that it was Sondland, Guiliani and Mulvaney who developed the quid pro quo, and Trump had no knowledge of it, Bolton could be one person with direct contact to all of the players who could blow that theory away. So I think he is a very important witness.
That being said, there isn’t really time for delay. Again, Republicans are grumbling that you can’t impeach in an election year. After Merrick Garland, I would not put it past McConnell for one second that he would call a vote to dismiss any impeachment referral to the Senate if it occurs even as early as January. So waiting a month to get a ruling on Bolton’s testimony just can’t happen, and Schiff knows that.
Bolton can testify if he wants to. He can refuse to answer questions if he believes something should not be revealed for reasons of national security or executive privilege. Fiona Hill did not answer everything (based on the little I have read) because of executive privilege.
Now is not a time for cowards. Testifying comes with risk. But so does Trump staying in the presidency. Bolton has to decide which is worse.
8
So Rudy Giuliani, Trump's personal attorney, is running around to other countries conducting foreign policy for the United States. He holds no office in our government, is not an employee of our government, has not been appointed or elected to any position in our government, and as Trump's personal lawyer, has no duty to anyone other than Trump himself. Our relations with other countries are under the purview of the State Department, headed by the Secretary of State, who must be confirmed by the Senate. If Trump has delegated that authority to Giuliani, is that not in itself an impeachable offence?
6
if Bolton testifies, he has the possibility of a John Dean moment in the sun of american history- one that will be distinguished far more than his current blip in the annuls of administrations' passing wiki mentions. if he does not testify, his sense of duty to country and personal integrity are merely myth... fake news, as it were. all relevant facts matter. all of this posturing is ultimately ego-driven. cut to the chase, subpoena him and see it thru to the court ruling. leave no stone unturned in the search for truth.
2
Bolton can be the John Dean of this investigation. Though Dean took his lumps afterward he is viewed by most retrospectively as one who did the right thing. Bolton should note as others point out here this is his time in history.
3
I am a lawyer who investigated antitrust conspiracies. Any witness who wants to testify can if he or she wants to, without a court ruling. Witnesses who are honest come in period. Mr. Bolton's lawyer is going him a disservice.
13
Miraculously, other patriots have somehow been able to go before the elected officials and respond to legitimate inquiries (following the constitution that requires an errant president to be analyzed).
Bolton's demand for a judge's direction to do the right thing shows either cowardice or ignorance. He has belittled himself.
5
Subpoena him... please. Bolton's testimony, particularly in light of the fact that he has been in the GOP's favor for years, will lend more credibility to the evidence to impeach.
1
DJT famously doesn't listen to any American advisors; and that includes Mr Bolton. The latter has not ruled out testifying. His lawyer has requested a subpoena- which seems to hint at an open possibility. Although hawkish, I believe he is smart enough not to commit perjury. Donald to his ultimate historical infamy (though I am sure he doesn't give a rolled up magazine about legacy), just does not listen to patriotic Americans right or left. You have to be pre-investigated for patriotic probity to be allowed into US Intelligence services. But the stable genius refuses to listen to them. Who does he listen to? Foreign dictators. This must horrify Mr Bolton. It would be great if he would help out in defending American democracy-even for the roughly half of all Americans who lean to some extent to the left. Maybe Bolton hasn't forgotten that he would be protecting the right too; and that non rightists are Americans as well.
3
This is a seminal moment in our nation's history.
It is time when all three branches of our government should earn its pay.
Congress should force a SCOTUS ruling on whether its subpoenas carry the force of law. It should be expedited. The ambiguity, if there is such on this matter, should be resolved.
Americans really do have a vested interest to find out whether the US Constitution and our systems of laws applies to this executive office in the privileges it asserts.
God help this country if it does not.
656
@TDurk
Your are right. We need a Supreme Court ruling, but Congress hasn't pushed the issue because it fears the court would set additional limit on Congress' investigative powers. Congressional "oversight" is an "implied power," which means its not in the Constitution.
10
@TDurk
I have been dismayed by the daily spectacle of watching your President demolish your country's rule of law and the governing system of processes for checking and balancing the exercise of power. His effectiveness in turning lie-telling into normal leadership practice is astounding.
68
@TDurk I agree that the House should seek a precedent even if it comes too late for this round of investigations. If an impeachment can be stopped because the accused blocks it then there is no impeachment process. We need to know if this is true.
10
When we didn't know how Florida was going to count votes in 2000, the US Supreme Court heard the case and decided the issue within about 30 days. What's stopping that speed from happening again now? This is why we have a Supreme Court -- to decide "cases and controversies" involving the Constitution, and what could be more critical or controversial than weighing a legitimate presidential privilege versus a legitimate legislative inquiry?
27
Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. The best Justices that Mitch McConnell could buy.
1
Looks like the lawyer is testing the waters to see who will win the battle of the checks and balances - the exexutive or the legislative branch - and to see which party the judciary will side with in this struggle between two of our three branches of government. I hope that people of all political persuasions who believe in democracy will understand the importance of a relatively impartial judiciary, and that we put a stop to allowing the appointment of overly politicized judges (looking at you, Kavanaugh).
45
As many experts have noted, the Congress and the executive branch a co-equal branches of government. Therefor, neither one of them have absolute power over the other.
For example, Trump could issue an executive order, but Congress could override it by legislation or someone could challenge the order in court, as has happened. To put it another way, just because the president orders something, that does not mean it can't go unchallenged. That's why we have the courts as the third co-equal branch.
Similarly, just because Congress demands something from the executive branch does not automatically mean that the executive branch must automatically give it to Congress. That would allow Congress a superior authority over the executive branch which, as a co-equal but not as a superior, it does not have under the Constitution.
The way to resolve a conflict between the executive branch and Congress is through the courts, just as a challenge to an executive order would be resolved.
Neither Congress nor the President have unchallenged authority over the other. In the event of an impasse, the courts decide.
It is not the last word just because the president issues an
order, nor is it the last word just because Congress issues a demand.
If - and only if- the court orders the president to comply and he doesn't, then he would be in contempt and certainly guilty of obstruction.
7
@Gene Gambale, In whatever polity you are a citizen, it might be true that the legislature cannot demand documents and other things from the Executive Branch, but in this country the presumption[tion is that people who get subpoenaed need to show up and testify before the subpoenaing authority (in this case, Congress). Some of the sought after testimony or documents might be subject to t privilege, but you have to show up and claim the privilege on an item-by-item basis. This is all First Year Law stuff. Civil Procedure, Constitutional Law . . . .
2
@A Good Lawyer
I too am a good lawyer, or at least some people tell me I am.
And, depending upon the situation, I may, and have, advised a client not to automatically comply with a subpoena. That would give some other party absolute authority to demand anything of a client. So, I very often try to negotiate down the scope of the subpoena, file objections and/or file a motion for a protective order. Receiving a subpoena is not by any means the last word. It is only the beginning.
@Gene Gambale Although simplified, your assertion is not correct. The White House has been publicly engaged in witness tampering, to the degree that the money launderer's (part of his personal lawyers team,) have asserted "executive privilege" as a defense.
A Prosecutor does not have more power than a defense attorney, yet they can, in secret, convene a grand jury to determine if someone should be tried for a crime. It doesn't matter what relationship you have to the principals of an alleged crime, you are still required to answer a grand jury subpoena and you can plead the fifth. But if you don't show up- a warrant is issued and you are arrested and will give your testimony under guard.
The House has these same powers, though because of norms previously held in conduct, they have not had to exercise this option for many years.
In an official impeachment inquiry, the subjects of a congressional subpoena have no further rights than a subject of a grand jury subpoena. They can be arrested, held without bond, and be found in contempt.
I really don't know where you came up with the idea that politicians and white house employees do not have to follow the same laws any citizen of the USA does. If the laws were written how you perceive them to be, we would basically have a protected class of citizens: who by their occupation, or elected capacity were not required to obey the law- aka lawlessness.
1
At no point in his life did Mr. Bolton have a more defining and historic opportunity to change the course of this country's future. Nothing else he has said and done to date nor is anything he will ever say or do in the future would come to this inflection point.
If he is an uncompromising truth teller and patriot as he likes to posture himself, this is his clearest opportunity to show it.
Let's hope he lives up to this moment.
138
@Yuri Vizitei Don't count on it - he has always been a coward - and might be playing a game here to get people to buy the book for which he just signed a deal.
2
some posters seem to forget Bolton has a book deal. If he reveals too much by voluntarily going to testify, it can reduce the value of his book
79
@mike BINGO!
Selfish.
2
@mike: Commerce over conscious. Sounds about right for anyone tethered to this administration.
@mike That a self-proclaimed patriot would put a book deal, however lucrative, over the need to protect our national security against an ongoing grave threat just sounds sickening to me.
Subpoena Bolton - I will personally hand deliver it!
35
@Chris Conklin
They did subpoena him & Kupperman & lawyer Cooper took it to court where the judge said he would hear it in December. That's why the committee has withdrawn the subpoenas on both. They don't have time to wait & don't need their testimony.
This is about a lawyer who wants to make the news & get some free advertising.
God forbid Bolton considered Patriotism over self interest and came forward to testify on a critical matter for our country.
99
That is not the definition of a patriot.
39
What is the definition of patriotism?
Oh goodness. Do we really think Donald is going to have John Bolton arrested? Or heaven forfend, maybe Donald will stop being nice to him. Why not just go testify and let the chips fall where they may? Be brave, John. Be a patriot.
66
He needs court to tell him to defend America?
169
Apparently. He cannot make such a consequential decision on his own? Then he has no business holding sensitive government positions. I have respected him without always agreeing with him, but this? Needs cover? Why, one wonders.
1
@Cleareye He's not defending America, he has no interest in anything but the cult of Trump (once known as the Republican Party). He's not unlike a communist.
The American people aren’t buying this outrageous game playing and gross manipulation by Bolton and his counsel. We painfully learned Bolton’s modus operandi all too well during the Weapons of Mass Destruction debacle. Fooled once, shame on him. Fooled twice, shame on us. He should stop the nonsense and testify, openly, honestly and truthfully. He knows it. We know it. We have seen first hand what courageous, principled, patriotic Americans do when they were called called to testify before Congress in accordance with the US Constitution. It remains to be seen if Bolton has even a scintilla of character, decency or patriotism. I for one hold out little hope.
193
@havadude
Here here. Very succinct.
1
@Havadood Well said. Thank you.
45 ought to be heartened by the news his perfect call and foreign policy can be testified to by Bolton and therefore free him to testify before the committee.
7
@jefszi Bolton is going to testify that it was all Sondland, Mulvaney and Giuliani, and that Trump didn't knew anything about it. That's the latest defense the republicans are pushing.
If Bolton was as patriotic as his lawyer wants us to believe than he would testify before the house. But he doesn't want to be seen as a 'rat' in the current Republican world. His lawyer is being disingenuous at the very least. He knows these things can take months or years in the courts. He works for the Republicans. What would you expect.
42
John Bolton is a private citizen. The White House can't order him to not testify any more than they can do so to me.
91
@M2 "John Bolton is a private citizen. The White House can't order him to not testify any more than they can do so to me."
You really haven't been paying attention, haven't you? They have some jurisdiction about what he can and can't say about what he did while he worked for Trump.
That being said, executive privilege and other limitations on testimony don't operate when covering up illegal activity. If Bolton has knowledge about such, he doesn't need any court decision about competing spheres of government authority: NO part of the government can order one to keep quiet about illegality. You can only keep quiet if asserting 5th Amendment rights - and then you still have to honor the subpoena to officially plead the 5th, because some one has to actually ask you a question that might cause you to incriminate yourself. There is no such thing as a blanket 5th "just in case".
2