It appears Bolton's book undercuts Trump's defense

[Anonymous]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/us/politics/trump-bolton-book-ukraine.html#click=https://t.co/DjmTxJiJA6

WASHINGTON — President Trump told his national security adviser in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens, according to an unpublished manuscript by the former adviser, John R. Bolton.

The president’s statement as described by Mr. Bolton could undercut a key element of his impeachment defense: that the holdup in aid was separate from Mr. Trump’s requests that Ukraine announce investigations into his perceived enemies, including former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter Biden, who had worked for a Ukrainian energy firm while his father was in office.

Mr. Bolton’s explosive account of the matter at the center of Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial, the third in American history, was included in drafts of a manuscript he has circulated in recent weeks to close associates. He also sent a draft to the White House for a standard review process for some current and former administration officials who write books.

Multiple people described Mr. Bolton’s account of the Ukraine affair.

The book presents an outline of what Mr. Bolton might testify to if he is called as a witness in the Senate impeachment trial, the people said. The White House could use the pre-publication review process, which has no set time frame, to delay or even kill the book’s publication or omit key passages.

It seems clear all senators should vote against witnesses being called because who would want to hear more about this from someone who was there when you could just read Trump's twitter defense of himself instead

[Anonymous]

The Senate will revert to "so what, get over it"

[Anonymous]

He has to be called as a witness. The Senate's verdict loses all credibility otherwise.

[Anonymous]

The GOP is backing Trump. Laws are only for Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Also from the article, a new data point in Barr timeline. Bolton says that after Trump's July call with Zelensky, he told Barr that Trump mentioned his name on the call. DOJ has said that Barr learned about the call in mid-August in the context of the whistle-blower's complaint

[Anonymous]

Of course Bolton won’t be called. The GOP is all in on Trump’s criming.

[Anonymous]

Downside to having the White House counsel representing Trump in this matter. No attorney-client priviledge.

The transcript (irony) was submitted to the White House for review. The White House could easily delay release or kill the book all together.

Bolton wants revenues, Trump doesn't want the book released.

Conflict.

Trump pissed off the one person who can sink him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Senate will revert to "so what, get over it"

That's the Trumpster party line. First it was, "no, he didn't do it..", then it was "POTUS can shape foreign policy anyway he sees fit..", and finally, "so what? What about Biden? They all do it!".

One excuse after another. So da*n pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Downside to having the White House counsel representing Trump in this matter. No attorney-client priviledge.

The transcript (irony) was submitted to the White House for review. The White House could easily delay release or kill the book all together.

Bolton wants revenues, Trump doesn't want the book released.

Conflict.

Trump pissed off the one person who can sink him.

What could Bolton possibly say to change the public's or the Senators' minds? Nothing! This country has lost its mind for Trump.

[Anonymous]

Options for Senate Republicans tomorrow, when asked about the NYTs report on the Bolton book

1. Didn’t see it
2. It’s just a draft
3. The House should have gotten him to testify
4. It will just get bogged down in a court fight
5. Can’t trust a guy who was pushed out on bad terms

[Anonymous]

OK, what is Bolton playing at? Obviously, Trump is not going to approve the book. I'm pretty sure Bolton knew this. So, why submit it to the WH now? I don't know which way Bolton is swinging here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Options for Senate Republicans tomorrow, when asked about the NYTs report on the Bolton book

1. Didn’t see it
2. It’s just a draft
3. The House should have gotten him to testify
4. It will just get bogged down in a court fight
5. Can’t trust a guy who was pushed out on bad terms

It will be #1 and/or #5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Downside to having the White House counsel representing Trump in this matter. No attorney-client priviledge.

The transcript (irony) was submitted to the White House for review. The White House could easily delay release or kill the book all together.

Bolton wants revenues, Trump doesn't want the book released.

Conflict.

Trump pissed off the one person who can sink him.

What could Bolton possibly say to change the public's or the Senators' minds? Nothing! This country has lost its mind for Trump.

+1 Trump could literally shoot someone on 5th ave and not lose support. I think some people thought this was hyperbole, but I don't think it is. It's 100% true. The R party is now the cult of Trump.

[Anonymous]

Thing is Bolton wasn’t even pushed out. He quit. So they don’t have that defense.

[Anonymous]

Executive privilege doesn’t protect documents exchanged between a former national security adviser and his publisher.