- Key point one: That asking to reopen the investigations into the company Burisma is akin to election interference because the investigation would focus on the role that Hunter Biden had in the company, and the role that Joe Biden played in getting the prosecutor fired. So in essence, asking for an investigation into Burisma, is asking for an investigation into Joe Biden (Trump's potential political opponent in the 2020 election).
- Key point two: That the suspended investigations of Burisma were focused on things that happened prior to Hunter Biden ever joining the company, there was never any evidence of any wrongdoing by Hunter Biden, and that Joe Biden asked for the prosecutor to be fired for reasons that had absolutely nothing to do with the investigation into Burisma.
So which is true? If point one is true and asking for an investigation into Burisma is akin to asking for an investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden, then point two cannot possibly be true. But if point two is true, and Hunter Biden had nothing to do with the Burisma investigations, and the Prosecutor was not fired in order to end the Burisma investigation, then point one cannot possibly be true.
Such a logic quagmire.
The truth, of course, is that key point one is likely true, and that key point two is total fiction. Democrats are afraid of what the Burisma investigations would uncover, but are forced to make the nonsensical argument that such an investigation also unwarranted. They cannot just argue that the investigation might uncover negative things about their potential 2020 Presidential candidate, so it cannot happen. That would be an admission that they believe that there probably is corruption that involves Hunter and Joe Biden. It could also arguably be called obstruction of Justice.
So they have to add the second portion (that the investigation is unwarranted) to cover up their real fears. It actually undercuts their first argument, but their hope is that the logical quandary would to unnoticed. So far it has.
So they have to add the second portion (that the investigation is unwarranted) to cover up their real fears. It actually undercuts their first argument, but their hope is that the logical quandary would to unnoticed. So far it has.
The fact that this twisted argument has even made it this far is just a testimonial in regards to how much hatred and how much Trump derangement syndrome actually exists. Their rabid fans and swooning media do not want to think that hard. They prefer to be happily fooled by a dumb argument, than to actually admit that this whole thing is bullshit!
The bottom line is that if the Democrats are really confident that there is no Burisma corruption that will touch Hunter or Joe Biden, then they should welcome such an opportunity to clear the reputation of their potential 2020 candidate. The fact that they don't welcome this opportunity can only be explained by the reality that they do believe that the Bidens acted corruptly, and that they desperately want to sweep it under the rug.
The bottom line is that if the Democrats are really confident that there is no Burisma corruption that will touch Hunter or Joe Biden, then they should welcome such an opportunity to clear the reputation of their potential 2020 candidate. The fact that they don't welcome this opportunity can only be explained by the reality that they do believe that the Bidens acted corruptly, and that they desperately want to sweep it under the rug.
210 comments:
1 – 200 of 210 Newer› Newest»I'm not sure how Biden is still a top Democrat candidate but then again I can't understand how truthful Senators can read the transcript, follow the proceedings and think this president is guilty of high crimes.
I sure wouldn't want this "jury" on any normal criminal trial.
And the prosecutors are as unethical as anyone could imagine.
...a frustrated president Tweeted out that
“the Fake News Media and their partner, the Democrat Party, want to stay as afar away as possible from the Joe Biden demand that the Ukrainian Government fire a prosecutor who was investigating his son,
[THAT IS A TOTAL FICTION. THE FIRED CORRUPT PROSECUTOR HAD ALREADY LET THE INVESTIGATION OF CORRUPT BURISMA GO DORMANT, AND JOE BIDEN'S SON WAS HIRED AFTER THE INVESTIGATION OF BURISMA TOOK PLACE]
or they won’t get a very large amount of U.S. money, so they fabricate a story about me
ALSO A LIE; THE WHISTLEBLOWER DID NOT FABRICATE; HE ONLY REPORTED WHAT TRUMP'S OWN PEOPLE WERE FRANTICALLY SAYING AND DOING AND TRYING TO HIDE, UPSET AS THEY WERE BY HIS UNCONSTITUTIONAL REQUEST TO ZELENSKY.
and a perfectly routine conversation
ATTEMPTED BRIBERY, ATTEMPTED EXTORTION, ATTEMPTED QUID PRO QUO ARE ROUTINE?
I had with the new President of the Ukraine. Nothing that was in any way wrong,
BRIBERY, EXTORTION, ATTEMPTED QUID PRO QUO ARE IN NO WAY WRONG?
THEN WHY WERE TRUMP'S PEOPLE SO ANXIOUS TO HIDE THAT CONVERSATION? IT WAS ONLY UNDER PRESSURE THAT THEY RELEASED THE "TRANSCRIPT" (ACTUALLY AN INCOMPLETE REDACTED CALL SUMMARY THAT OMITTED, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE WORD "BURISMA")
but Biden's demand (THAT THE CORRUPT PROSECUTOR BE FIRED) on the other hand, was a complete and total disaster.
HOW SO? ALMOST ALL THE WORLD INCLUDING OUR ALLIES WERE CALLING FOR HIM TO BE FIRED, AND EVENTUALLY HE WAS FIRED BY A NEW UKRAINIAN ADMINISTRATION ATTEMPTING TO GET RID OF CORRUPTION.
The Fake News knows this but doesn’t want to report.
TYPICAL TRUMP BS.
More Than Half Think Trump Should Be Convicted by Senate
A new FOX NEWS poll found that 50% of Americans think that the Senate should vote to convict and remove Trump, while 44% say the upper chamber should not vote to remove the president.
Schiff Says Exoneration Not Possible Without Witnesses
January 26, 2020 at 11:49 am EST
Rep. Adam Schiff told NBC News the White House defense is “deathly afraid of what witnesses will have to say” and
“if they’re successful in depriving the country of a fair trial, there is no exoneration.”
_____
A majority of voters WANT more witnesses. ANYone can see that to deny that is to deny justice.
looks like somebody is getting even more DESPERATE and UNHINGED even after just getting back from church.
A TREMENDOUS WEEK FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP and getting ready for an even better upcoming one.
We live in FANTASTIC TIMES !!!
Hey how about Schiff start by releasing the transcript of witness number 18, the second one to testify in the bunker?
The IC IG, and it is alleged it blows up the whole Schiff and "whistleblower" collusion.
What is lying Schiff trying to hide?
Well if Adam Schiff says so...
then it must be true!
believed nobody... ever!
McConnell Looks to Finish Impeachment Trial As Quickly As Possible Without Witnesses
Politico:
“The Republican strategy — which is still fluid — could mean senators have limited time between key procedural votes and the final vote on whether to convict the president of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
And with the odds growing against additional witnesses being called,
A BIG MISTAKE! HUGE!
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) will face critical decisions on how fast he can bring the proceedings to an end.”
TOO FAST, AND AMERICA WILL RIGHTLY CALL REPUBLICANS DISHONEST COWARDS AFRAID TO FACE THE TRUTH
“Sen. John Barrasso suggested that an acquittal vote could take place as soon as Friday — if senators don’t agree to subpoena additional witnesses or documentary evidence.
BETTER NOT DO THAT. THE GOP IS PLAYING WITH FIRE.
Under the organizing resolution that controls the proceedings, Democrats could offer additional motions if the Senate votes down deposing additional witnesses — including former national security adviser John Bolton —
WHICH OF COURSE THEY WILL DO
but Republicans could then move to shut down debate and call for an up-or-down vote on acquittal.”
AND THUS CUT THEIR OWN THROATS
Stop Schiff from denying President Trump justice, and the first fact witness needs to be Schiff to explain his actions with the start of effort with the whistleblower.
After this farce is over the Senate needs to call the IC IG, the "whistleblower, Schiff and the Bidens to testify under oath in a probe of how this evolved. This should never be allowed to divide our country again by such obvious political crooks.
Knee slapping funny.
Thanks for the laugh.
A majority of voters WANT more witnesses. ANYone can see that to deny that is to deny justice.
absolutely, pederast!
i cannot believe that the house democrats made such a colossal fucking blunder, not calling witnesses. i mean, just think of how the outcome of this impeachment might be so different.
if only the house democrats hadn't rushed and had actually done their fucking jobs, eh?
even jon turley took the time to point this out -
"If the House had simply gone to court to enforce a subpoena, it would have forced a review of such privilege questions. Even before the impeachment vote, Bolton indicated his interest in testifying but it would require a subpoena. The House, however, refused to issue such a subpoena or take other reasonable steps to secure evidence because it feared such a move would push the court proceedings into late spring or beyond. Magnifying this mistake was the decision of the House to withdraw the subpoena issued for Charles Kupperman, Bolton’s deputy. Kupperman indicated he might testify but went to court for review of the subpoena. Before the court could rule, the House pulled the subpoena. Judge Richard Leon seemed nonplussed in dismissing Kupperman’s case, stating, “the House clearly has no intention of pursuing” the witness.
It is time for Democrats to acknowledge the blunder in the rushed vote."
so...
...it's sad but necessary to acknowledge that it simply is not the senate's job to address or correct the galactically massive and clusterfuckingly stupid-assed fuck up that the democrats own - lock, stock, and barrel.
i weep tears of laughter for America today.
Wow Kobe Bryant died in a helicopter crash. That is sad. He was only 41
Nancy Pelosi’s Golden Moment
http://americandigest.org/nancy-pelosis-golden-moment/
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Wow Kobe Bryant died in a helicopter crash. That is sad. He was only 41
there must be an angle here that can blame trump, eh alky?
r, not calling witnesses.
How you dumb fucking loser.....Your asshole forbid his staff to testify or provide any help!!!!!...If the D's issued a subpoena, the court battles would last until next year.....god gave you a brain, use it for christ sake!!!!!!!!
Well Reverend Hypocrite!
If cutting the trial short will be such a disaster for the GOP, then why would they do it... and why are Democrats screaming bloody murder about it?
If the D's issued a subpoena, the court battles would last until next year..
probably.
you see denny dumb fuck... there's a term which describes the situation -
DUE PROCESS
and even trump is entitled to it.
democrats need to admit, and to own their fuck up.
our constitution is crystal clear about the workings of impeachment in the house and in the senate. the responsibilities of each are separate and distinct, and there is no overlap.
had the house chosen to undertake impeachment thoughtfully, intelligently, rationally, logically, truthfully and competently, they might have achieved their goal. or at least come significantly closer.
but no, democrats being democrats can sometimes be just as fucking stupid as the base they 'represent.'
like you.
but Republicans could then move to shut down debate and call for an up-or-down vote on acquittal.”
AND THUS CUT THEIR OWN THROATS
hey pederast,
can you please give us a glimpse into the pretzel logic and mental gymnastics required to arrive at THIS conclusion?
i'm sure it's eerily similar to the thought process one used to arrive at the conclusion that nancy peloshee "won" something by holding on to the articles of impeachment for a couple weeks.
flesh this out for us, eh pederast?
DUE PROCESS
WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP ORDERING ALL HIS PEOPLE TO NOT COOPERATE....THAT IS CALLED OBSTRUCTION YOU DUMB FUCKING ASS WIPE!!!!!! How long did it take to get Mcgahn's order through the courts......Your assholes all want a quick trial....imagine the uproar if D's waited for the courts to act....Due process is your fucking delusion...!!!!
Bryant and his wife, Vanessa, have four daughters: Gianna, Natalia, Bianca and Capri, who was born in June 2019.
Bryant and his wife, Vanessa, have four daughters: Gianna, Natalia, Bianca and Capri, who was born in June 2019.
Fuck you asshole
denny dumb fuck,
the executive branch is afforded some rights that do fall under due process AND executive privilege.
one of those rights is to challenge any subpoena in court.
it can't be obstruction or objection* if it's a right constitutionally granted to the executive.
that's how this works. that's how this is supposed to work.
i do find it curious that all the people who scream the loudest about trump being a fascist would advocate using fascistic tactics, methods and procedures to deny him his most basic and fundamental rights in a effort to depose him.
seems a tad hypocritical, no?
take a breath and think this through, dumb fuck. you might actually see what i mean.
objection*
* h/t: the alky
WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP ORDERING ALL HIS PEOPLE TO NOT COOPERATE
Actually the reality is that he cited executive privilege (which is his right as President) and Congress could have gone to court to get a final ruling on the dispute.
The fact that Congress didn't want to take the time to wait out the courts is not the President's fault... and determining that a President of the United States citing executive privilege is a criminal action that Congress can impeach him for...
is 100% a constitutional issue as well as most certainly a violation of the President's due process. Congress is an "equal" branch of the Government, not a superior branch. When the two branches have a legal dispute, they use the third branch (Judicial) to arbitrate it.
It would be akin to the President having someone arrested by the Dept of Justice for challenging an executive order in court.
hey alky,
see if you can get #trump killed kobe trending with your 7 twitter followers.
Rat the gaping asshole stated....
our constitution is crystal clear about the workings of impeachment in the house
BWAAAAAAAAA!!!!! You mean those 2 sentences are perfect, like the phone call????????
You really need a civics lesson you dumb ass!!!!!
Here is what is written you dumb fucking asshole.....article 1 section 2 paragraph 5
The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment
Congress is an "equal" branch of the Government, not a superior branch.
and this, in a nutshell, is the single most overlooked factoid in this entire impeachment debacle, in my humble opinion.
since this shitshow began i've been wondering just how exactly one co-equal branch of government obstructs another.
You really need a civics lesson you dumb ass!!!!!
The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment
you don't say...
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
ARTICLE I, SECTION 3, CLAUSE 6
now, about that civics lesson dumb fuck...
Hey dumb fuck.....Your post stated the House.....BWAAAAAAAA!!!! Try to keep up you dumb fuck......BTW....about as clear as your inability to post a cogent though!!!!!! Keep digging...You lose again!!!!
Feltcher James failed attempt to steal my Moniker.
Too funny, what a exposed fraud of a human Feltcher James is.
No loss asshole Colby Byrant died.
Yawn
rrb quoting James:
but Republicans could then move to shut down debate and call for an up-or-down vote on acquittal.”
AND THUS CUT THEIR OWN THROATS
hey,
can you please give us a glimpse into the pretzel logic and mental gymnastics required to arrive at THIS conclusion?
i'm sure it's eerily similar to the thought process one used to arrive at the conclusion that nancy peloshee "won" something by holding on to the articles of impeachment for a couple weeks.
flesh this out for us, eh pastor?
_____________
Gladly, rattypoop,
A STRONG majority of Americans think we need MORE witnesses giving MORE REAL EVIDENCE before deciding on the crucial matter of which the Donald deserves impeachment.
The GOP leadership is determined not to allow that evidence.
Americans will then rightly conclude that Trump and his lackeys FEAR what first hand witnesses could reveal
-- and for that reason Americans will vote Democratic in even greater numbers.
Clear enough, rattypoop?
crucial matter of whether
The Three Socialist Stooges of CHT
Got 67?
Feltcher James last week concluded that Gleeful Pelosi, Schiff and Wadller had presented an overwhelming case.
Given today statement by Feltcher James something is not lining up for her again.
Tommy Pigott
@TCPigott
NBC News' Chuck Todd reports on Democrats mourning voter "apathy" on impeachment:
"nobody cares"
"our phones aren't ringing"
"it's the saddest thing ever"
watch: https://twitter.com/TCPigott/status/1221460920368541697
when even the FAKE NEWS is saying this is a nothingburger (very sad)...
Julie Kelly
@julie_kelly2
Senate Republicans should support witness open testimony for no other reason than to compel Michael Atkinson to appear
I agree, just don't like the delay. Forcing Schiff to release the transcript should speed this up and end the farce though.
Your post stated the House.....BWAAAAAAAA!!!!
no, my post stated this:
our constitution is crystal clear about the workings of impeachment in the house and in the senate. the responsibilities of each are separate and distinct, and there is no overlap.
man, if you could follow a thread the way you stuff your gaping maw at the golden corral...
A STRONG majority of Americans think we need MORE witnesses giving
and many Americans probably don't care for the fact that there is a two week wait for the Superbowl... but it's not going to change anyone's vote.
At the end of the day, people simply do not care about this impeachment. Almost double the amount of people watched the Kavanaugh hearings than watched day three of the impeachment trial.
A Democratic focus group took 80 minutes discussing issues, before the subject of impeachment came up.
Polling is a useful tool if it is about things people care about. But there are very few people (other than the "very" anti-Trump haters) who actually believe that more witnesses will actually change anything or change anyone's minds.
From the start, most people who are opposed to impeachment are opposed "because" the actions are not impeachable. So those people are simply not "getable" with "more testimony".
But hell... I would even like to see more testimomy!
Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, Adam Schiff, Eric C... but it won't change my mind nor will it change yours!
Or would it?
What if under examination it turns out that Hunter Biden did garner influence from his dad's position to get his job? What if under examination it is determined that Joe Biden DID have the prosecutor fired to shut down investigations? What if it was determined through more evidence that the whistleblower and Schiff set this whole thing up?
It wouldn't change your mind one single bit. You would still demand Trump be impeached.
NBC News' Chuck Todd reports on Democrats mourning voter "apathy" on impeachment:
"nobody cares"
"our phones aren't ringing"
"it's the saddest thing ever"
but the pederast would have us believe that the GOP senate is in peril because they refuse to do the house's job for them.
can i get a "BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!"?
The GOP leadership is determined not to allow that evidence.
because it's not their fucking JOB.
post all the polls you want, pederast. it still doesn't change the fact that the house could've called all the witnesses if it wanted to.
Turley:
"If the House had simply gone to court to enforce a subpoena, it would have forced a review of such privilege questions. Even before the impeachment vote, Bolton indicated his interest in testifying but it would require a subpoena. The House, however, refused to issue such a subpoena or take other reasonable steps to secure evidence because it feared such a move would push the court proceedings into late spring or beyond. Magnifying this mistake was the decision of the House to withdraw the subpoena issued for Charles Kupperman, Bolton’s deputy. Kupperman indicated he might testify but went to court for review of the subpoena. Before the court could rule, the House pulled the subpoena. Judge Richard Leon seemed nonplussed in dismissing Kupperman’s case, stating, “the House clearly has no intention of pursuing” the witness.
It is time for Democrats to acknowledge the blunder in the rushed vote."
so NOW the senate needs to abandon its duties to the process and clean up after house democrats because of some fucking likely-fictional POLLING?
the words GO FUCK YOURSELF immediately come to mind.
After Trump's lawyers eviscerated the Democrats case in two hours on national TV, I think America now wants impeachment over as quick as possible.
There really is nothing to see here.
Jane, Alky and Dennys agree the US Economy is not an issue in 2020.
dyers eviscerated the Democrats case in two hours on national BWAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! That's what Joni the castrator said....here is what people with brains say....WEAKER THAN EXPECTED!!!!
They harped on overturning an election which is more bullshit than normal, even for idiots like you....
A ludicrous proposal? Indeed. But it’s in line with — and an extrapolation of — a favorite argument against Trump’s conviction and removal from office. His Republican supporters say that lawmakers shouldn’t speak for voters on such a crucial issue. To pre-empt the verdict at the ballot box, they say, is to subvert the people’s will.
Nice try. Lawmakers are elected specifically to speak for voters on crucial issues. That’s the system. That’s their job. American government doesn’t operate by daily, hourly or issue-by-issue polls (at least not overtly). Congress doesn’t have exponentially more power one week after Election Day than it does one year later (though it may indeed have more political currency).
Blogger KansasDemocrat said...
Jane, Alky and Dennys agree t
That you are a lying fake pile of goatfucking stupidity without a brain.......speak for yourself dumb ass..... the 2% Trump GDP is as good as obama's!!!!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
Kobe Bryant and his 14 year 9md daughter killed in fiery helicopter crash. Very sad.
Correction, Denny disagrees with Jane and Alky .
This Economy will in 2020 be a Huge Issue.
Blogger KansasDemocrat said...
Correction, Denny disagrees with Jane and Alky .
BWAAAAAAAA!!!!! Dayum you are a god less pile of goat fucking shit.....speak for yourself asshole.....2% GDP was a huge issue for Obama,,,,,,,wonder what you think about this snail growth under trump?.......Asshole!!!!!
Bryant's daughter, 13-year-old Gianna, was also reportedly one of the passengers on board the aircraft, according to an ESPN source. They were on their way to a travel basketball game along with another player and parent. The other victims have not been identified.
Denny is stuck on a GDP stupid.
Former national security adviser John Bolton reportedly claims in his as-yet unpublished memoir that President Trump sought to tie hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to Ukraine to his requests for the country's leaders to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden (D) and his son Hunter.
Multiple sources familiar with Bolton's writings told The New York Times that Bolton writes that President Trump personally told him that $391 million in aid to Ukraine should be frozen until Ukrainian officials announced the investigations, including one into the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
The book, which does not have a publishing date as of yet, has been submitted to the White House for review. White House officials did not immediately return a request for comment from The Hill on the report.
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/480014-bolton-book-alleges-trump-tied-ukraine-aid-freeze-to-biden?amp&__twitter_impression=true
Bolton left the White House last year, with the president and his former aide disagreeing publicly at the time over whether he was fired or resigned. The claim in his upcoming book revealed Sunday directly contradicts statements from Trump and other administration officials, who have denied that aid to Ukraine was ever tied to the president's efforts to convince Ukraine's president to open investigations.
Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Inquiries He Sought, Bolton Book Says https://nyti.ms/2GrpMsI
Goldilocks economy is an economy that is not too hot or cold, in other words sustains moderateeconomic growth, and that has low inflation, which allows a market-friendly monetary policy.
Mr. Bolton’s submission of the book to the White House may have given the White House lawyers direct insight into what Mr. Bolton would say if he were called to testify at Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial. It also intensified concerns among some of his advisers that they needed to block Mr. Bolton from testifying, according to two people familiar with their concerns.
The White House has ordered Mr. Bolton and other key officials with firsthand knowledge of Mr. Trump’s dealings not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry. Mr. Bolton said in a statement this month that he would testify if subpoenaed.
You Got em Alky.
How is Kobe?
NEW: John Bolton alleges in his forthcoming book that President Trump explicitly told him "he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine" until officials helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens."
The revelations directly contradict Trump's claim that he never tied the hold-up of Ukrainian aid to his demands for investigations into his political opponent Joe Biden.
https://nyti.ms/2GrpMsI
Bryant's daughter, 13-year-old Gianna, was also reportedly one of the passengers on board the aircraft, according to an ESPN source. They were on their way to a travel basketball game along with another player and parent. The other victims have not been identified.
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/orange-county-baseball-coach-killed-calabasas-helicopter-crash/2298623/
Brewster Whitecaps
@WhitecapsCCBL
We are heartbroken and shocked to learn that our former head coach, John Altobelli along with his wife Keri and daughter Alyssa passed away this morning in the helicopter crash that also claimed the lives of Kobe Bryant and his daughter Gianna.
Alky, what caused you to become so poor?
How do archive your stated FB 2020 wealth?
🤣
Over dozens of pages, Mr. Bolton described how the Ukraine affair unfolded over several months until he departed the White House in September. He described not only the president’s private disparagement of Ukraine but also new details about senior cabinet officials who have publicly tried to sidestep involvement.
For example, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo acknowledged privately that there was no basis to claims by the president’s lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani that the ambassador to Ukraine was corrupt and believed Mr. Giuliani may have been acting on behalf of other clients, Mr. Bolton wrote.
Mr. Bolton also said that after the president’s July phone call with the president of Ukraine, he raised with Attorney General William P. Barr his concerns about Mr. Giuliani, who was pursuing a shadow Ukraine policy encouraged by the president, and told Mr. Barr that the
Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer, the minority leader, said the Bolton manuscript underscores the need for him to testify, and the House impeachment managers demanded after this article was published that the Senate vote to call him. “There can be no doubt now that Mr. Bolton directly contradicts the heart of the president’s defense,” they said
Republicans, though, were mostly silent; a spokesman for the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, declined to comment.
Mr. Bolton would like to testify for several reasons, according to associates. He believes he has relevant information, and he has also expressed concern that if his account of the Ukraine affair emerges only after the trial, he will be accused of holding back to increase his book sales.
https://nyti.ms/2GrpMsI
Alky Spam Champion 🏆
and here's the usual "tell" that this entire story is one giant fucking fable:
Multiple sources familiar with Bolton's writings told The New York Times...
let me guess without even clicking on the link - this is another maggie haberman story. no wonder the alky is jerking off all over it.
WOW!!!!!! I ONLY JUST NOW SAW THIS!!!!!
(which I see Roger has already seen and referenced above.)
THIS IS A GAME CHANGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HERE IS SOME OF THAT MORE IMPORTANT, FIRST HAND INFORMATION WE HAVE BEEN WANTING.
THIS IS AS IF BOLTON HAS STEPPED FORWARD WITH FIRST HAND INFORMATION THAT DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS TRUMP'S LIES.
from Politicalwire.com
Bolton Confirms Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Biden Probe
January 26, 2020 at 7:08 pm EST
“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 Bolton,” the New York Times reports.
“The president’s statement as described by Mr. Bolton could undercut a key element of [Trumnp's] 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 Joe Biden 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 was included in drafts of a manuscript he has circulated in recent weeks to close associates.”
________________
Jonathan Swan:
“The revelations present a dramatic 11th hour turn in Trump’s Senate impeachment trial. They directly contradict Trump’s claim that he never tied the hold-up of Ukrainian aid to his demands for investigations into his political opponent Joe Biden.”
___________
THIS IS BIG. IT'S HUGE. AND IT IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THE WHITE HOUSE DID NOT WANT US TO SEE.
and so it IS another haberman pack of lies:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/us/politics/trump-bolton-book-ukraine.html
they even allow comments on her biggest whoppers.
alky, you should post comments on the NY Times articles like this one. you could copy & paste WaPo articles. that would REALLY piss them off.
LOL.
alky and pederast,
i know that neither of you could ever be considered strategic thinkers, but to the rest of us the timing of the publication of this article is just a little suspect.
isn't it a coincidence that as the democrat impeachment effort is turning to shit right before our very eyes, suddenly, no lesser of a liar than maggie haberman trots out a tale shining the spotlight squarely on bolton, just as the democrats give us one last gasp of "if we could've only had john bolton testify!!!" on the sunday shows.
and you assclowns fell for it hook, line, and sinker... complete with it's always faithful and reliable "anonymous sources."
RRB and CH and Cowardly and Myballs and all the rest of you. This sinks your boat. I think you had all better shut up and read the entire article before you start pontificating.
Trump Tied Ukraine Aid to Inquiries He Sought, Bolton Book Says
Drafts of the book outline the potential testimony of the former national security adviser if he were called as a witness in the president’s impeachment trial.
Democrats managing President Trump’s impeachment trial have long sought testimony from John R. Bolton, his former national security adviser.
By Maggie Haberman and Michael S. Schmidt
Jan. 26, 2020
Updated 7:28 p.m. ET
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 [Trump's] 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.
Over dozens of pages, Mr. Bolton described how the Ukraine affair unfolded over several months until he departed the White House in September. He described not only the president’s private disparagement of Ukraine but also new details about senior cabinet officials who have publicly tried to sidestep involvement.
For example, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo acknowledged privately that there was no basis to claims by the president’s lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani that the ambassador to Ukraine was corrupt and believed Mr. Giuliani may have been acting on behalf of other clients, Mr. Bolton wrote.
Mr. Bolton also said that after the president’s July phone call with the president of Ukraine, he raised with Attorney General William P. Barr his concerns about Mr. Giuliani, who was pursuing a shadow Ukraine policy encouraged by the president, and told Mr. Barr that the president had mentioned him on the call. A spokeswoman for Mr. Barr denied that he learned of the call from Mr. Bolton; the Justice Department has said he learned about it only in mid-August.
And the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, was present for at least one phone call where the president and Mr. Giuliani discussed the ambassador, Mr. Bolton wrote. Mr. Mulvaney has told associates he would always step away when the president spoke with his lawyer to protect their attorney-client privilege.
Marie L. Yovanovitch, the former United States ambassador to Ukraine, testified that she was “devastated” that the president vilified her.
During a previously reported May 23 meeting where top advisers and Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, briefed him about their trip to Kyiv for the inauguration of President Volodymyr Zelensky, Mr. Trump railed about Ukraine trying to damage him and mentioned a conspiracy theory about a hacked Democratic server, according to Mr. Bolton.
Charles J. Cooper, a lawyer for Mr. Bolton, declined to comment. The White House did not provide responses to questions about Mr. Bolton’s assertions, and representatives for Mr. Johnson, Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Mulvaney did not respond to emails and calls seeking comment on Sunday afternoon.
Mr. Bolton’s submission of the book to the White House may have given the White House lawyers direct insight into what Mr. Bolton would say if he were called to testify at Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial. It also intensified concerns among some of his advisers that they needed to block Mr. Bolton from testifying, according to two people familiar with their concerns.
The White House has ordered Mr. Bolton and other key officials with firsthand knowledge of Mr. Trump’s dealings not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry. Mr. Bolton said in a statement this month that he would testify if subpoenaed.
In recent days, some White House officials have described Mr. Bolton as a disgruntled former employee, and have said he took notes that he should have left behind when he departed the administration.
Mr. Trump told reporters last week that he did not want Mr. Bolton to testify and said that even if he simply spoke out publicly, he could damage national security.
“The problem with John is it’s a national security problem,” Mr. Trump said at a news conference in Davos, Switzerland. “He knows some of my thoughts. He knows what I think about leaders. What happens if he reveals what I think about a certain leader and it’s not very positive?”
“It’s going to make the job very hard,” he added.
The Senate impeachment trial could end as early as Friday without witness testimony. Democrats in both the House and Senate have pressed for weeks to include any new witnesses and documents that did not surface during the House impeachment hearings to be fair, focusing on persuading the handful of Republican senators they would need to join them to succeed.
The assertion from Bolton could undermine one core defense that has repeatedly been laid out by Trump, his defenders and his legal team: That there was no explicit quid pro quo involved when the administration withheld the military assistance, as well as a White House visit coveted by Ukraine.
The White House has said Trump’s request for Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate the Bidens, as well as a discredited theory that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 elections, was because he was interested in rooting out corruption and that he did nothing improper.
“John Bolton has the evidence. It’s up to four Senate Republicans to ensure that John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney, and the others with direct knowledge of President Trump’s actions testify in the Senate trial,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a tweet.
The revelation was certain to roil the dynamics of the trial this week, when the Senate was expected to face a critical vote on whether to allow witnesses at all. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and many Senate Republicans would prefer the Senate avoid witnesses, but at least four GOP senators are seen as potential votes for favoring more testimony: Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Mitt Romney (Utah) and Lamar Alexander (Tenn.).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democrats-call-for-bolton-to-testify-in-trump-impeachment-trial-after-new-report-on-aid-to-ukraine/2020/01/26/de234402-409a-11ea-b503-2b077c436617_story.html
But a week into the trial, most lawmakers say the chances of 51 senators agreeing to call witnesses are dwindling, not growing.
Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer, the minority leader, said the Bolton manuscript underscores the need for him to testify, and the House impeachment managers demanded after this article was published that the Senate vote to call him. “There can be no doubt now that Mr. Bolton directly contradicts the heart of the president’s defense,” they said in a statement.
Republicans, though, were mostly silent; a spokesman for the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, declined to comment.
Mr. Bolton would like to testify for several reasons, according to associates. He believes he has relevant information, and he has also expressed concern that if his account of the Ukraine affair emerges only after the trial, he will be accused of holding back to increase his book sales.
Mr. Bolton, 71, a fixture in conservative national security circles since his days in the Reagan administration, joined the White House in 2018 after several people recommended him to the president, including the Republican megadonor Sheldon Adelson.
But Mr. Bolton and Mr. Trump soured on each other over several global crises, including Iranian aggression, Mr. Trump’s posture toward Russia and, ultimately, the Ukraine matter. Mr. Bolton was also often at odds with Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Mulvaney throughout his time in the administration.
Key to Mr. Bolton’s account about Ukraine is an exchange during a meeting in August with the president after Mr. Trump returned from vacation at his golf club in Bedminster, N.J. Mr. Bolton raised the $391 million in congressionally appropriated assistance to Ukraine for its war in the country’s east against Russian-backed separatists. Officials had frozen the aid, and a deadline was looming to begin sending it to Kyiv, Mr. Bolton noted.
He, Mr. Pompeo and Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper had collectively pressed the president about releasing the aid nearly a dozen times in the preceding weeks after lower-level officials who worked on Ukraine issues began complaining about the holdup, Mr. Bolton wrote. Mr. Trump had effectively rebuffed them, airing his longstanding grievances about Ukraine, which mixed legitimate efforts by some Ukrainians to back his Democratic 2016 opponent, Hillary Clinton, with unsupported accusations and outright conspiracy theories about the country, a key American ally.
Mr. Giuliani had also spent months stoking the president’s paranoia about the American ambassador to Ukraine at the time, Marie L. Yovanovitch, claiming that she was openly anti-Trump and needed to be dismissed. Mr. Trump had ordered her removed as early as April 2018 during a private dinner with two Giuliani associates and others, a recording of the conversation made public on Saturday showed.
In his August 2019 discussion with Mr. Bolton, the president appeared focused on the theories Mr. Giuliani had shared with him, replying to Mr. Bolton’s question that he preferred sending no assistance to Ukraine until officials had turned over all materials they had about the Russia investigation that related to Mr. Biden and supporters of Mrs. Clinton in Ukraine.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democrats-call-for-bolton-to-testify-in-trump-impeachment-trial-after-new-report-on-aid-to-ukraine/2020/01/26/de234402-409a-11ea-b503-2b077c436617_story.html
The president often hits at multiple opponents in his harangues, and he frequently lumps together the law enforcement officials who conducted the Russia inquiry with Democrats and other perceived enemies, as he appeared to do in speaking to Mr. Bolton.
Mr. Bolton also described other key moments in the pressure campaign, including Mr. Pompeo’s private acknowledgment to him last spring that Mr. Giuliani’s claims about Ms. Yovanovitch had no basis and that Mr. Giuliani may have wanted her removed because she might have been targeting his clients who had dealings in Ukraine as she sought to fight corruption.
Ms. Yovanovitch, a Canadian immigrant whose parents fled the Soviet Union and Nazis, was a well-regarded career diplomat who was known as a vigorous fighter against corruption in Ukraine. She was abruptly removed last year and told the president had lost trust in her, even though a boss assured her she had “done nothing wrong.”
Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, pursued a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine with the president’s encouragement.
Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, pursued a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine with the president’s encouragement.
Mr. Bolton also said he warned White House lawyers that Mr. Giuliani might have been leveraging his work with the president to help his private clients.
At the impeachment trial, Mr. Trump himself had hoped to have his defense call a range of people to testify who had nothing to do with his efforts related to Ukraine, including Hunter Biden, to frame the case around Democrats. But Mr. McConnell repeatedly told the president that witnesses could backfire, and the White House has followed his lead.
Mr. McConnell and other Republicans in the Senate, working in tandem with Mr. Trump’s lawyers, have spent weeks waging their own rhetorical battle to keep their colleagues within the party tent on the question of witnesses, with apparent success. Two of the four Republican senators publicly open to witness votes have sounded notes of skepticism in recent days about the wisdom of having the Senate compel testimony that the House did not get.
Since Mr. Bolton’s statement, White House advisers have floated the possibility that they could go to court to try to obtain a restraining order to stop him from speaking. Such an order would be unprecedented, but any attempt to secure it could succeed in tying up his testimony in legal limbo and scaring off Republican moderates wary of letting the trial drag on when its outcome appears clear.
My boldfaced above is the entire NYT article.
During a conversation in August with Mr. Trump, Mr. Bolton mentioned his concern over the delay of $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine. Mr. Trump replied that he preferred sending no assistance to Ukraine until officials had turned over all materials they had about the Russia investigation related to former Vice President Joe Biden and supporters of Hillary Clinton in Ukraine. (Mr. Trump frequently lumps together the law enforcement officials who investigated his campaign’s ties to Russia with Democrats and other perceived enemies, as he appeared to do with Mr.
Mr. Bolton said that he warned White House lawyers that Rudy Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, might have been leveraging his work with the president to help his private clients. And he said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo privately acknowledged to him last spring that Mr. Giuliani’s claims about Marie Yovanovitch, then the ambassador to Ukraine, had no basis.
What does this mean for impeachment?
Mr. Bolton had been near the top of the list of witnesses Democrats wanted to hear from in the impeachment trial, and the new revelations have only intensified that: House managers said in a statement on Sunday night that “there can be no doubt now that Mr. Bolton directly contradicts the heart of the President’s defense and therefore must be called as a witness at the impeachment trial of President Trump.”
Democrats would need support from a handful of Republicans in the Senate in order to call witnesses. Before this news broke, most lawmakers said the chances of 51 senators agreeing to call witnesses were dwindling, not growing. Several moderate Republicans have said that they would wait until the conclusion of opening arguments and the question-and-answer round of the trial — likely by the end of the week — to decide on whether to support such a move.
Why are these revelations such a big deal?
Here’s what my colleague Mike Schmidt, one of the reporters of the story, told me:
“Until this point, Mr. Bolton had been signaling that he had something to say, but we didn’t know what he was going to say. It didn’t sound like a hollow promise, but it certainly was one that you didn’t know what was behind Door No. 1. Now there’s some significant meat on the bone.
Mr. Bolton was in this highly unusual situation where, if he wasn’t going to testify and it was going to come out in a book, people were going to say, ‘What the heck, where was this important information when there was an impeachment investigation?’ The fact that there’s a book coming has a lot of people alarmed."
Ok. Bolton for Biden. But dems afraid to make that deal.
Mr. Bolton directly contradicts the heart of the President’s defense and therefore must be called as a witness at the impeachment trial of President Trump.”
And here is the entire WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE:
Report: Bolton says Trump tied Ukraine funds to Biden probe
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump told his national security adviser he wanted to maintain a freeze on military assistance to Ukraine until it launched political investigations into his Democratic rivals, according to a report in The New York Times on Sunday.
The newspaper said John Bolton’s description of his exchange with Trump appears in drafts of his forthcoming book. The revelation challenges the defense offered up by Trump and his attorneys in his Senate impeachment trial and raises the stakes as the chamber decided this week whether to seek sworn testimony from Bolton and other witnesses.
Bolton, who acrimoniously left the White House a day before Trump ultimately released the Ukraine aid on Sept. 11, has already told lawmakers that he is willing to testify, despite the president’s order barring aides from cooperating in the probe.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment Sunday night.
Democrats need at least four Republicans to vote with them to seek witness testimony. Those prospects looked unlikely in recent days and it’s unclear if the new revelations about Bolton’s book will sway any GOP senators.
Democrats quickly sought to ramp up the pressure on their Republican counterparts.
“John Bolton has the evidence,” tweeted Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. “It’s up to four Senate Republicans to ensure that John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney, and the others with direct knowledge of President Trump’s actions testify in the Senate trial.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell had no immediate comment, according to his office.
The Associated Press has not confirmed the content of Bolton’s draft book. A person familiar with the matter told the AP the book had been submitted to the White House for pre-publication review, which is standard for the work of former officials with security clearances. The person insisted on anonymity to discuss the sensitive subject.
AD
The book’s publisher, Simon & Schuster, declined to comment.
Sarah Tinsley, an adviser to Bolton, said: “The ambassador’s manuscript was transmitted to the White House in hard copy several weeks ago for pre-publication review by the NSC. The ambassador has not passed the draft manuscript to anyone else. Period.”
Democrats accuse Trump of abuse of power in withholding the military assistance to Ukraine to push that country to mount investigations into Democrats, including former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter, who served on the board of a Ukraine gas company, Burisma, while his father was in office.
On Saturday, the president’s attorneys said during their opening day of defense arguments that there was no evidence that Trump made the military aid contingent on the country announcing an investigation into Biden.
The Times also reported that Bolton says he told Attorney General William Barr that he was mentioned by Trump on his July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. A Justice Department official on Sunday disputed Bolton’s account that he had told Barr about the president’s call with Zelenskiy but did say that Bolton had called Barr to raise concerns about Giuliani’s shadow diplomacy efforts.
Trump on Wednesday told reporters in Davos, Switzerland, that he didn’t want Bolton to testify before the Senate.
“The problem with John is it’s a national security problem,” Trump said. “He knows some of my thoughts. He knows what I think about leaders. What happens if he reveals what I think about a certain leader and it’s not very positive and then I have to deal on behalf of the country?”
He added: “It’s going to be very hard. It’s going to make the job very hard.”
end of article
It is going to be very interesting in the next days
to see how Trump supporters here on this blog try to twist and defend against this
and even more interesting to see how GOP Trump supporters in the Senate trial try to twist and defend against this.
The obvious conclusion: Trump and his minions have LIED, LIED, LIED.
Alky Spam Champion 🏆
Jane Spam 2nd rate 🥉
Jane doesn't read Alky's posts🖕
Jane doesn't exist.
Alky doesn't exist.
Taegan Goddard says there are
Four Bombshells in John Bolton’s Draft Manuscript
Are they bombshells or Nooses or are they something else .
The tail chasing butt sniffers are buying this well timed publicity prank.
Bolton "book" is now down graded to a "Manuscript" what's next it was a "note" unpublished?
The New York Times
5 Takeaways on Trump and Ukraine From John Bolton’s Book
Noah Weiland 1 hr ago
WASHINGTON — President Trump directly tied the withholding of almost $400 million in American security aid to investigations that he sought from Ukrainian officials, according to an unpublished manuscript of a book that John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, wrote about his time in the White House.
John R. Bolton, the former national security adviser, sent a draft of his manuscript to the White House in recent weeks for a standard review process.
The firsthand account of the link between the aid and investigations, which is based on meetings and conversations Mr. Bolton had with Mr. Trump, undercuts a key component of the president’s impeachment defense: that the decision to freeze the aid was independent from his requests that Ukraine announce politically motivated investigations into former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter.
In their opening arguments on Saturday in Mr. Trump’s trial, the president’s lawyers asserted that Mr. Trump had legitimate concerns about corruption in Ukraine and whether other countries were offering enough help for its war against Russian-backed separatists, which his lawyers said explained his reluctance to release the aid. They also said that Democrats had no direct evidence of the quid pro quo they allege at the heart of their impeachment case.
Multiple people described Mr. Bolton’s account. A draft of the manuscript, which offers a glimpse into how Mr. Bolton might testify in the trial if he were called to, was sent to the White House in recent weeks for a standard review process.
Here are five takeaways.
Mr. Trump tied his willingness to release aid to Ukraine on investigations he sought.
During a conversation in August with Mr. Trump, Mr. Bolton mentioned his concern over the delay of the $391 million in congressionally appropriated assistance to Ukraine as a deadline neared to send the money.
Mr. Trump replied that he preferred sending no assistance to Ukraine until officials had turned over all materials they had about the Russia investigation related to Mr. Biden and supporters of Hillary Clinton in Ukraine, referencing unfounded theories and other assertions that Rudolph W. Giuliani, his personal lawyer, had promoted about any Ukrainian efforts to damage Mr. Trump politically.
The president often hits at multiple opponents in his harangues, and he frequently lumps together the law enforcement officials who investigated his campaign’s ties to Russia with Democrats and other perceived enemies, as he appeared to do with Mr. Bolton.
Mr. Trump was at odds with his senior national security officials.
According to Mr. Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper joined him in pressing Mr. Trump to release the aid in the weeks leading up to the August meeting.
Mr. Trump repeatedly set aside their overtures by mentioning assorted grievances he had about Ukraine, some related to efforts by some Ukrainians who backed Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election and others related to conspiracies and unsupported accusations about, among other things, a hacked server at the Democratic National Committee.
Mr. Bolton says he talked to Barr and Pompeo about Giuliani.
Mr. Bolton wrote that Mr. Pompeo privately acknowledged to him last spring that Mr. Giuliani’s claims about Marie L. Yovanovitch, then the American ambassador to Ukraine, had no basis, including allegations that she was bad-mouthing Mr. Trump. Mr. Pompeo suggested to Mr. Bolton that Mr. Giuliani may have wanted Ms. Yovanovitch out because she might have been targeting his business clients in her anti-corruption efforts. Yet Mr. Pompeo still went through with Mr. Trump’s order to recall Ms. Yovanovitch last May.
Mr. Pompeo lashed out at a National Public Radio host on Friday and Saturday after she asked him in an interview about Ms. Yovanovitch’s removal.
Mr. Bolton also wrote that he had concerns about Mr. Giuliani. He said he warned White House lawyers last year that Mr. Giuliani might have been using his work representing the president as leverage to help his private clients.
Among other names Mr. Bolton referenced in the manuscript: Attorney General William P. Barr. Mr. Bolton wrote that he raised concerns with Mr. Barr about Mr. Giuliani’s influence on the president after Mr. Trump’s July 25 call with Ukraine’s president. That call was a critical piece of the whistle-blower complaint that prompted the impeachment inquiry. Mr. Barr on Sunday denied Mr. Bolton’s account through a spokeswoman.
Mr. Bolton is willing to testify. The White House doesn’t want him to.
Mr. Bolton, who released a statement this month saying he would appear at Mr. Trump’s trial if he is subpoenaed, is prepared to testify before the Senate, according to his associates. He believes that he has relevant insight to present before senators vote on whether to remove Mr. Trump. He is also concerned, his associates said, that if his account of Mr. Trump’s Ukraine dealings comes out after the trial, he will be accused of withholding potentially incriminating material in order to increase his book sales.
Mr. Trump and the White House, however, do not want Mr. Bolton to appear.
The White House had already ordered Mr. Bolton and other key officials not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry. The manuscript has intensified concern among advisers that they need to use a restraining order to block Mr. Bolton from testifying, according to two people familiar with their concerns. It was unclear whether they would be successful in doing so.
The manuscript introduced a significant twist to the impeachment trial.
The revelations from the draft of Mr. Bolton’s book could complicate the impeachment trial. A handful of moderate Republican senators who have signaled an openness to calling witnesses did not appear persuaded by the case that the Democratic House managers made last week at the trial, which The Times reported on Friday was heading as early as this week toward a vote on Mr. Trump’s acquittal.
Mr. Bolton’s revelations could unearth support among that group and a handful of other senators who have indicated they might be open to hearing from him. Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee said Friday he planned to wait until after Mr. Trump’s lawyers presented and after senators asked the lawyers questions to decide on whether to support new testimony and evidence.
At least one senator who will vote on impeachment was mentioned by name in the draft of the book: Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin. Mr. Bolton said Mr. Johnson was at a meeting last May with Mr. Trump in which the president railed about Ukraine trying to damage him politically.
If the Senate does vote to hear from Mr. Bolton, the trial could stretch deep into February.
White boy can't jump.
🤣“There are millions of people, not just in Los Angeles, but around the world right now mourning because they were inspired by what he did on the field, what he meant off the field,” Buttigieg said.🤣
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/report-bolton-says-trump-tied-ukraine-funds-to-biden-probe/2020/01/26/503d88ba-409e-11ea-99c7-1dfd4241a2fe_story.html
Jane the fuck'n retard
Democrats demand Bolton testify after report his book says Trump tied Ukraine aid to Biden probe
The reported account in an unpublished manuscript by the former national security adviser counters the White House's defense of the president.
WASHINGTON — Democrats stepped up their calls Sunday night for former national security adviser John Bolton to testify at President Donald Trump's impeachment trial after an explosive report alleged that in his unpublished book, he said Trump personally tied aid for Ukraine to an investigation of the Bidens — an account that conflicts with the president's.
"John Bolton has the evidence," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., tweeted.
According to the manuscript, as reported by The New York Times on Sunday night, Trump told Bolton that nearly $400 million in aid to Ukraine would not be released until it offered assistance with investigations of Democratic targets, including former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.
NBC News has not seen a copy of the manuscript or verified the report, which cited multiple sources familiar with Bolton's account.
The contents of the manuscript were described as a rough account of how Bolton would testify should he be called as a witness in the Senate trial. The prospect of new witnesses has been viewed as unlikely given most Republicans' reluctance to accept additional testimony.
Hill Democrats said Sunday that the new report highlighted the urgency of a Senate request for Bolton's testimony — a move that would require several GOP votes.
"It's up to four Senate Republicans to ensure that John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney, and the others with direct knowledge of President Trump's actions testify in the Senate trial," Schumer tweeted. Mulvaney is Trump's acting chief of staff.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., tweeted that because of the report that Bolton had firsthand knowledge of Trump's decision that ran counter to the White House's account, the "refusal of the Senate to call for him, other relevant witnesses, and documents is now even more indefensible."
The House Democrats' impeachment managers said in a statement that there could be "no doubt now that Mr. Bolton directly contradicts the heart of the President's defense and therefore must be called as a witness at the impeachment trial of President Trump. Senators should insist that Mr. Bolton be called as a witness, and provide his notes and other relevant documents."
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn. — one of the senators running for the Democratic presidential nomination whose campaigns have been affected by the need to serve as jurors in the impeachment trial — echoed the sentiment Sunday.
"I don't know how my Republican colleagues cannot call for witnesses," she said while campaigning in Iowa, adding: "We should all be calling for witnesses. We have to get to the truth."
Biden, also campaigning in Iowa, told NBC on Sunday night that he did not have "any idea of what's in the book."
"But if it in fact contradicts Trump, it's not a surprise," he said.
The president's allies have said the aid delay was unconnected to Trump's requests that Ukrainian officials announce investigations that stood to undercut his domestic political opponents, including Biden.
In the unpublished book, Bolton is reported to allege that other administration officials, including Mulvaney, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Attorney General William Barr, were made aware of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani's unusual involvement in a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine well before it became a central element of the whistleblower complaint at the heart of the impeachment inquiry.
Charles Cooper, an attorney for Bolton, appeared to confirm the substance of the report Sunday, saying the manuscript was submitted to the National Security Council last month for a standard review for classified information.
It is "clear, regrettably, from The New York Times article published today that the prepublication review process has been corrupted and that information has been disclosed by persons other than those properly involved in reviewing the manuscript," he said.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Last week, Trump expressed misgivings over the prospect of Bolton's testimony.
Mr. Trump dismissed the head injuries, saying they weren't "very serious." Several veterans' groups have criticized Mr. Trump for his comments and called on him to apologize.
"I heard that they had headaches, and a couple of other things," Mr. Trump said. "I don't consider them very serious injuries relative to other injuries that I've seen."
YOU HAVE A HEADACHE NOW, MR. PRESIDENT. HOW DOES IT FEEL?
During their impeachment arguments on Saturday, the president's legal team stated there is "simply no evidence anywhere that President Trump ever linked security assistance to any investigations."
THERE SURE IS NOW.
Adam Schitt admits his party is self-fornication
The House Judiciary chairman began the second day of the Senate's impeachment trial by admitting the unconscionable.
"If not remedied by his conviction in the Senate and removal from office, President Trump’s abuse of his office and obstruction of Congress will permanently alter the balance of power among the branches of government," the lead impeachment manager said. "For precisely this reason, the president’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won."
A note on Jane's effeminate napkin is now "evidence".
What a stupid douche.
At a Fox News Town Hall with Chris Wallace on Sunday in downtown Des Moines, Iowa, Pete Buttigieg joined a chrous of Democrats in calling for Bolton to testify in the wake of the Times' report.
"Just now, we're getting more indications about John Bolton, and what he knew, which is one more reason why, if this is a serious trial, we're going to have the witnesses and evidence," Buttigieg said.
Bolton's mss. reveals that in August 2019 President Trump told him he wanted to continue holding up military aid to Ukraine until Ukraine relented and helped with investigations into Joe Biden and other Democrats. So this means that during the trial we suddenly get a clear indication that the President’s then-foreign policy chief says that his entire impeachment defense is bogus.
Chuck Schumer
✔
@SenSchumer
The @NYTimes report suggests multiple top Trump Admin officials knew the facts and deliberately misled Congress and the American people.
A massive White House cover-up.
All we need is four Republican Senators to get the truth.https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/us/
Trump tweets that he 'NEVER' told John Bolton that Ukraine aid was tied to investigations
Ellen Cranley 2 hours ago
President Donald Trump denied a bombshell report that claimed he told former national security adviser John Bolton about a quid pro quo that involved withholding military aid to Ukraine.
Trump was impeached last month on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress for his alleged pressure on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to announce investigations into a political rival.
The New York Times reported that Bolton's upcoming book presents a starkly different version of events than what the White House has described throughout the impeachment process.
President Donald Trump denied that he told former national security adviser John Bolton about withholding military aid until Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky agreed to pursue investigations into Trump's political rivals.
The New York Times obtained an unpublished manuscript of Bolton's book and reported Sunday that Bolton writes that Trump asked the Office of Management and Budget to extend a nearly month-long hold on $391 million in military aid to Ukraine.
Hours after the report was published, Trump took to Twitter to deny that characterization, dismissing the claim as a way "to sell a book."
"I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens," Trump wrote. "In fact, he never complained about this at the time of his very public termination. If John Bolton said this, it was only to sell a book."
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens. In fact, he never complained about this at the time of his very public termination. If John Bolton said this, it was only to sell a book. With that being said, the...
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
...transcripts of my calls with President Zelensky are all the proof that is needed, in addition to the fact that President Zelensky & the Foreign Minister of Ukraine said there was no pressure and no problems. Additionally, I met with President Zelensky at the United Nations...
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
...(Democrats said I never met) and released the military aid to Ukraine without any conditions or investigations - and far ahead of schedule. I also allowed Ukraine to purchase Javelin anti-tank missiles. My Administration has done far more than the previous Administration.
Trump was impeached last month for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The inquiry and vote by House lawmakers focused on Trump's apparent efforts to pressure Ukraine into investigating former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter, in addition to a debunked conspiracy theory involving Ukraine and interference to the 2016 election.
In subsequent tweets, Trump went on to claim that he had released the aid to Ukraine "without any conditions or investigations - and far ahead of schedule."
The release came AFTER national news reports surfaced describing the freeze, and not all of the expected $391 million in assistance was distributed before the end of the fiscal year.
A lawyer for Bolton said after the Times report that the manuscript was taken to the White House to be reviewed for classified information, but that process had been "corrupted."
The Times report came as the impeachment trial is ramping up in the Senate, where lawmakers will vote later this week on whether to subpoena witnesses.
Bolton has said he has relevant information to the issues being weighed by lawmakers and that he would comply with a Senate subpoena to testify, but Trump has said he would seek to invoke executive privilege and block aspects of Bolton's testimony, which could possibly be out of reach for the president.
Bolton's book, titled "The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir," is set for release by Simon & Schuster on March 17, 2020.
_________________
Trump says he doesn't want John Bolton to testify in his impeachment trial because 'he knows some of my thoughts.'
LOL
Trump's impeachment team is so worried that John Bolton could sink his defense that it has drawn up plans to make him testify behind closed doors.
LOL
Democrats are having a field day after Trump's lawyers accidentally made the strongest case to call witnesses in his impeachment trial.
LOL
I suppose the latest "whistle blower" must be whoever it was in the White House(?) who released the manuscript of the book.
I am not a crook.
I did nothing wrong.
I never had sex with that woman.
I never told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens.
Charles Cooper, an attorney for Bolton, appeared to confirm the substance of the report Sunday, saying the manuscript was submitted to the National Security Council last month for a standard review for classified information.
It is "clear, regrettably, from The New York Times article published today that the prepublication review process has been corrupted and that information has been disclosed by persons other than those properly involved in reviewing the manuscript," he said.
WHO DAT? WHO DID DAT?
Sounds like a Hail Mary from the New York Times.
Charles Cooper, an attorney for Bolton, appeared to confirm the substance of the report Sunday
he did nothing of the sort, pederast.
he simply blasted the assholes responsible for the NSC review process.
and who is in charge of that review process?
vindman's asshole twin brother. so there's your leak.
A source close to the Trump administration informs Breitbart News that Army Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, a senior ethics lawyer for the National Security Council (NSC), is in charge of reviewing all publications by current and former NSC officials.
The official added that Yevgeny Vindman could have seen former National Security Advisor John Bolton’s draft manuscript after it was submitted for prepublication review at the end of December.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/26/source-alexander-vindmans-brother-yevgeny-clears-publications-by-nsc-officials/
this becomes more hilarious by the minute.
the ny times has not seen the transcript and is, at best, relying upon third-hand leaks from those who talked to those who MIGHT have seen the transcript.
this is as clearly an orchestrated set-up as swetnick was in the kavanaugh debacle.
heh.
Sounds like a Hail Mary from the New York Times.
it is. and democrats called upon their most trusted pathologically lying c*nt to fabricate the story.
i'm starting to understand why ann coulter said that on 9/11, the ragheads should've flown a plane into the ny times building instead.
Mr. Trump tied his willingness to release aid to Ukraine on investigations he sought.
During a conversation in August with Mr. Trump, Mr. Bolton mentioned his concern over the delay of the $391 million in congressionally appropriated assistance to Ukraine as a deadline neared to send the money.
Mr. Trump replied that he preferred sending no assistance to Ukraine until officials had turned over all materials they had about the Russia investigation related to Mr. Biden and supporters of Hillary Clinton in Ukraine, referencing unfounded theories and other assertions that Rudolph W. Giuliani, his personal lawyer, had promoted about any Ukrainian efforts to damage Mr. Trump politically.
The president often hits at multiple opponents in his harangues, and he frequently lumps together the law enforcement officials who investigated his campaign’s ties to Russia with Democrats and other perceived enemies, as he appeared to do with Mr. Bolton.
Noah Weiland
Published Jan. 26, 2020
Updated Jan. 27, 2020, 3:56 a.m. ET
Just to note, Bolton has not made a statement on the record and it's not clear whether Halberman has actually seen the manuscript. (That would be illegal), so she is depending on what the source told her.
When this is all over, Trump really does need to purge his administration of the traitors in it's mist.
"Cover Up"
Code for "we got our asses kicked into 2021"
A source close to the Trump administration informs Breitbart News
you can stop spamming the blog with sections of the article, alky.
bold font or not, it's still 3rd party hearsay written by a proven liar.
go sit in the tv lounge and watch the wall-to-wall kobe coverage. i see MSDNC decided to spice it up by reporting on the "Los Angeles Ni@@ers."
smooth move.
Lol, head it from a friend, who heard it from a friend......
The three circular butt suffers are at it with this , what to call this, less then heresy gossip.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
A source close to the Trump administration informs Breitbart News
that's right alky.
1) breitbart actually IS close to this administration
2) what's good for the ny times is good for anyone.
you don't get to completely rely upon a reporting method and then bitch about it.
Roger is very effeminate , he cried when I "bully him".
We have a clear indication that the President’s then-foreign policy chief says that his entire impeachment defense is bogus. From a recent personal intelligence advisory to the President. John Bolton
Those Brothers are Traitors.
You have less then a note passed between traitors .
Your kind of low life scum.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
We have a clear indication that the President’s then-foreign policy chief says that his entire impeachment defense is bogus.
only in alky-delusion land.
in reality we have nothing of the sort. what we DO have is 3rd hand hearsay leaked by one of the traitorous vindman boys.
You really want to defeat Pres. Trump so badly , not at the ballot box as Schitt stated, the American people can not be trusted to deliver a Socialist Democrat to the White House.
Roger is a millionaire on Facebook and on this and three other blogs he soils oh, and yes on Twitter too.
In real life he is a twice divorced poorly educated broke and broken, evicted, suicidal and clinically depressed stalker if young Asian girls at Planet Fitness locations around CA.
Innocent people do everything they can to have exculpatory evidence come to light. Guilty people run away from the evidence like cowards because they know the actual facts are incriminating.
Bernie Sanders Surges in National polls and in early primary states.
Lol@convictedAlky
Bolton in one book release destroyed Trump’s endless tirades and legal defense.
You have to admit. Bolton really just showed Trump the art of the deal. He testified, did his civic duty and got rich doing it. True American way. Republicans are spineless though. Prepare the popcorn for his testimony in the Senate trial.
Roger steals my "The Lost Years" phrase and uses it on his Twitter .
Roger 100% Economic Prediction Record intact, wrong as always.
"The National Retail Federation Retail Sales surged ⬆️ 4.1 %.
Roger predicted a far smaller increase.
Last Lost Years.
"Jan 13, 2017 · Holiday retail sales during November and December increased 4 percent over 2015 to $658.3 billion" Alky Throws a Party
Alky Throws a Effeminate hissy fit.
"NRF says 2019 holiday sales were up 4.1 percent
Holiday retail salesduring 2019 grew 4.1 percent to $730.2 billion, according to NRF."
Blogger KansasDemocrat said...
Roger steals my "The Lost Years" phrase and uses it on his Twitter .
BWAAAAAAAA!!!! Economists now predict GDP growth for this year at 1.1 to 1.9% !!!!!! Now extending those lost years into trumps overstimulated economic rhetoric!!!!!!! Yep, you sure are lost....nothing new there!!!!
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Innocent people do everything they can to have exculpatory evidence come to light. Guilty people run away from the evidence like cowards because they know the actual facts are incriminating.
oh, so THAT'S why you're so tight-lipped about mail order's restraining order against you.
Bolton in one book release destroyed Trump’s endless tirades and legal defense.
How? Assuming the report is true (and that's a big assumption), merely discussing options with your national security advisor is not an impeachable offense, especially if those options were never taken.
In other words, there's no case for calling Bolton since his testimony is not relevant to impeachment.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Innocent people do everything they can to have exculpatory evidence
Isn't that what did when he released the transcript, and othe exculpatory information?
And didn't Adam Schiff lied about the contents of the transcript and hid his staff's contacts with the whistleblower?
Seems to me the guilty party is Adam Schiff.
this becomes more hilarious by the minute.
For once, I agree with Rat.
Trump: I never tied aid to Ukrainians investigating the Bidens.
Bolton: Yes he did.
BWAAAAAAA!!!! The goat fucker in real life is an unemployed leech with no means of support ,,,,,Likes to lie and speak for other people while living with his head firmly stuck up his old white ass!!!!!! His legacy is his dead parents gave him a worthless POS farm that he grows that cash crop.....potatoes,,,,,,BWAAAAAAPAAAAAA!!!!!!
Isn't that what did when he released the transcript
IT'S NOT A TRANSCRIPT ASSHOLE....The whole word for word transcript was locked up in a secret classified server for no one to see....wonder what they are truly hiding???????? BWAAAAAAPAAAAAA!!!!
Cramps now calls John Bolton a liar.....quite a turnaround for a trump sucker who has defended Bolton at every step except now.....BWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Assuming the report is true (and that's a big assumption),
Bolton was right. Giuliani was a hand grenade that has blown them all up.
So if a former administration official says something in a book after he's fired, it must be true. Right James Comey?
Buck Sexton
@BuckSexton
Given the obvious timing of this, wondering if they will let Michael Avenatti out of prison to help Julie Swetnick claim she was on the phone call with Trump too, so the media can breathlessly print her insane and fact free allegations in a last desperate act to rig the trial
So the NYT who hired, what 50 new reporters to investigate all things Trump, and then endlessly "reported" Russian collusion "bombshell after "bombshell" which were all proven false comes up with another one. No animus there. And exact same playbook as smear on Kavanaugh.
And the livid left-wing reaction proves how desperate they all are.
Just another sugar high which will come crashing down.
Enjoy it while you can.
Greg Price
@greg_price11
So some bad press involving a former member of Trump's administration leaked to the New York Times and than that person's Amazon link for his new book went up a few hours later.
Where have I heard this story before?
It will be VERY INTERESTING to hear John Bolton's testimony under oath, will it not?
rrb said
A source close to the Trump administration informs Breitbart News that Army Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, a senior ethics lawyer for the National Security Council (NSC), is in charge of reviewing all publications by current and former NSC officials.
The official added that Yevgeny Vindman could have seen former National Security Advisor John Bolton’s draft manuscript after it was submitted for prepublication review at the end of December.
Thanks rrb, we can see whose fingerprints are all over this.
Has Schiff released the under oath IC IG Atkinson testimony from the bunker yet ?
Ballz again shows why I call him a dumb fucking loser with
it must be true. Right James Comey?
According to trump, who denies everything as a hoax....just another brick in the wall of trump everyone lies but trump.....Maybe roberts will grow a set and call Bolton as witness......Funny, you think trump is an angel......he is nothing more than a big liar whose management style of micromanaging everything is evidenced in the way he ran is crooked company into bankruptcy....To think he knew nothing or did not order the hold for a investigation shows what a naive asshole you truly are!!!
Jordan Schachtel
@JordanSchachtel
Team John Bolton is attempting to convince you, the potential buyer of his memoir, that he had nothing to do w/ leaks to the press. & oh by the way it was just a shocking coincidence his book's Amazon pg went live simultaneously.
TBH it doesn't seem like he respects you at all.
and the compliant FAKE NEWS NYT threw out this red meat to desperate starving dems
Anonymous cowardly king obama said...
Buck Sexton
@BuckSexton
BUCK FUCKING SEXTON!!!!!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! Another ZERO with nothing to say!!!!!
Mollie
@MZHemingway
This is obviously book promo coordinated with compliant media, yes. But an additional word of skepticism: these *particular* folks have a pattern of overpromising and underachieving with their "bombshell" anti-Trump book roll outs.
Will create a lot of reason to listen to Trumps defense team today.
Unexpected consequences...
CITATION: Bolton in one book release destroyed Trump’s endless tirades and legal defense.
COMMENSA, RELYING ON HIS BRILLIANT LEGAL MIND, SAID:
How? Assuming the report is true (and that's a big assumption), merely discussing options with your national security advisor is not an impeachable offense, especially if those options were never taken.
In other words, there's no case for calling Bolton since his testimony is not relevant to impeachment.
_______________
Read my lips, Commensa.
ATTEMPTED robbery is a crime.
ATTEMPTED bribery is a crime.
ATTEMPTED extortion is a crime.
ATTEMPTED quid pro quo is a crime.
ATTEMPTED bribery/extortion/quid pro quo in exchange for a foreign government interfering in our electoral process, and then lying about it and obstructing Congress' investigation into it is IMPEACHABLE.
Sean Davis
@seanmdav
Just like James Comey, John Bolton is trying to get rich off of a lie- and leak-fueled campaign to overturn the 2016 election results. I suspect it will work out as well as all of Bolton’s other wars.
Trump has done it again !!! Now the left LOVES Bolton !!!
Assuming the report is true (and that's a big assumption)
No it's not.
Bolton for Biden. Let's do it.
The left does not love Bolton, but it is encouraging to know that even he and others had the good sense and common decency to see that Trump-Giuliani had gone over the line and others were in danger of being pulled over it with them.
And here we are.
Pelosi promised in 2016 a huge middle income tax cut she has never delivered.
She can't she is a feckless cunt, akin to the Three circular butt sniffing Socialist mutts of CHT .
Julie Kelly
@julie_kelly2
All this by @nedryun is correct. A Senate trial is a golden opportunity, why waste it? Call witnesses, drag this out, and expose all the liars. Otherwise, they’ll get away with it—again.
https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/26/why-are-republicans-settling-for-acquittal-instead-of-total-victory/
Definitely bring in Schiff, Bidens, ICIG Atkinson, the "whistleblower" and other fact witnesses to this sham. And Bolton.
Will absolutely destroy all front-running democrats but maybe that is the dem's hope >
Cramps now calls John Bolton a liar...
I said Bolton didn't make a public statement.
The wife and I are donating blood today. I have been giving blood since my time in the US Army. Over 2 gallons +.
The Three circular butt sniffing Socialist mutts of CHT together have not donated as much.
I said Bolton didn't make a public statement.
All the more reason to have him testify and make clear what in the released manuscript may or may not represent what is willing to say under oath.
Jason Miller
@JasonMillerinDC
Good morning. I’d like to see Vindman and the so-called Whistleblower testify before the full Senate.
Excellent point. Questions of Vindman were limited by Schiff. And much has been learned since.
He'd be a necessary witness
*he is willing
Goldilocks Economy
vs
Obama's Hopey Changey Lost Years
I said Bolton didn't make a public statement.
You called him a liar!!!!
Saying you assume the book is true is basically calling him a liar. and untrustworthy ...sorry cramps your history of denying everything is most amusing.....BWAAAAAAAA!!!!
Tim Donnelly
@PatriotNotPol
I don’t believe the New York Times characterization of the #BoltonBook manuscript.
If the New York Times has a copy of the relevant portion (one would assume they do or it would be totally irresponsible to publish this story without it) they need to publish it.
@maggieNYT
And Maggie is being sued over her outrageous defamation of the Covington boys.
1.1% GDP prediction is what goat fucker......Better than Obama????? BWAAAAAAAA!!!!
I'd like to see Bolton testify before the full Senate.
Excellent point. Trump said he would be glad for him to testify (before he started saying that he did not want him to testify) and much has been learned since.
It is absolutely certain he's become a necessary witness.
James lies like it his job.
Can't wait for Ch to show up and start his usual irrational spinning and verbal dancing. He will at least make a little more sense than what we've seen here so far.
TO BE A FAIR TRIAL either BOTH SIDES get their WITNESSES or neither.
Decide which one it will be
and this follows what was an obviously unfair House "process"
Jenna Ellis
@JennaEllisEsq
After everything @realDonaldTrump has done for this country (at great personal cost!) it is so sad that so many are willing to sell out America, our Constitution, truth, their integrity, and our great President just to score a book deal or 5 minutes of fame.
You are the swamp.
I have a feeling this is going to turn out GREAT !!!
but not before liberal heads explode.
ROFMLFAO !!!
Indeed, let all the witnesses appear.
But maybe Cowardly is not aware that there are Republican Senators who do not want the whistle blower and the Bidens to testify because they think it would be disastrous for Trump's defense.
Quote of the Day
January 27, 2020 at 6:02 am EST
“The Senate needs to hear from Bolton. The American people deserve to hear from Bolton. If we can’t get Bolton let’s get a subpoena for the book!”
— Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL), on Twitter.
Blogger KansasDemocrat said...
James lies like it his job.
And you can't find one in this lost trump economy.....>BWAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
LIE OF THE DAY
Republican Senators who do not want the whistle blower and the Bidens to testify because they think it would be disastrous for Trump's defense.
the "pastor"
Oh, I'm sorry. He calls these his "mistakes"
Senate Republicans Shaken by Bolton Revelations
January 27, 2020 at 6:44 am
Playbook:
“Republicans have done a good job during this process projecting confidence in their mastery of the situation, and their ability to deliver for the president.
“But as of late Sunday, our GOP sources said they could not predict what was going to happen now with witnesses, and the Republican Conference lunch today will be key in determining the state of play. In other words, these top-level sources were allowing that things may have changed. We have yet to see if Republicans will brush off this new development, or whether it will push enough of them to vote for witnesses.
“Bolton is not Lev Parnas or one of these other characters who has sprouted up in the Trump era. He’s a through-and-through conservative who was so far to the right that George W. Bush had to wait for recess to make him his U.N. envoy. He’s known to members of the Senate.
“Here’s the dilemma for Republicans now: If you’re one of the Republicans who were already uncomfortable with this president, how do you vote to not call Bolton after seeing this? Remember: Bolton is publishing an entire book, and so far we know only what he’s said on Ukraine — not everything else he’s seen.”
Republicans Fear ‘Floodgates’ If Bolton Testifies
January 27, 2020 at 7:12 am EST
Republican sources tell Axios that party leaders and the White House will still try to resist witnesses because, as one top aide put it, “there is a sense in the Senate that if one witness is allowed, the floodgates are open.”
Said one White House aide: “If Bolton says stuff that implicates, say Mick Mulvaney or Mike Pompeo, then calls for them will intensify.”
OH NO! THE TRUTH WOULD FLOOD OUT!!!
Bolton’s Surprise Scrambles GOP Strategy
January 27, 2020 at 8:27 am EST
Before last night’s report on John Bolton’s forthcoming book, Republican leaders were confident that they would defeat the vote on subpoenaing witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trail this week, CNN reports.
But now, it is less certain, according to three GOP sources.
You called him a liar!!!!
No, I saying the source is a liter and the New York Times is not credible.
Emerald Robinson
@EmeraldRobinson
The supposed audience for this book is the American public.
The actual audience is the Senate - which is why the book suddenly appears in the middle of Trump’s impeachment trial.
It’s a highly orchestrated campaign designed to sway just 20 Republican votes.
It will fail and truth will prevail
but count on political_lire waterboy and lying POS "pastor" boswell to carry on like a raving maniac all day.
carry on dipshit
ROFLMFAO !!!
Trump Falsely Claims House Didn’t Seek Bolton Testimony
January 27, 2020 at 8:31 am EST
President Trump falsely claimed that House Democrats never sought testimony from former National Security Adviser John Bolton during their impeachment probe.
Said Trump: “The Democrat controlled House never even asked John Bolton to testify. It is up to them, not up to the Senate!”
The House Intelligence Committee did ask Bolton to testify, but he declined to testify ON INSTRUCTION FROM THE WHITE HOUSE.
(Can't be! Trump would never lie that stupidly.)
No, I saying the source is a liter and the New Yo
BWAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! Keep digging cramps.....lying is in your wheelhouse....just like trump!!!!!! Funny you think you are credible.....dayum typical delusions of the right.....Bolton and the times LIED!!!!!!!
The Nightmare Scenario for Senate Republicans
January 27, 2020 at 9:00 am EST
Aaron Blake:
“The nightmare scenario for the GOP is that they give Trump the quick and witness-free acquittal that he apparently desires, but then information like Bolton’s keeps coming out. Bolton now suggests Trump was indeed telling people privately that the withheld military aid was part of a quid pro quo — a quid pro quo which European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland testified that he communicated to the Ukrainians. This is something Trump’s team has strenuously denied, including at the impeachment trial. What if Bolton isn’t the only person Trump told this to who might suddenly contradict them?
“However closely this has already been tied to Trump, it can always be tied more closely. Bolton’s upcoming book is a great example of how the hastily assembled walls the Trump team have built around its defense can quickly crumble — and in some cases already have.”
GOP Senators ‘Feel Blindsided’ by Bolton Allegations
January 27, 2020 at 9:28 am EST
Some Republican senators are privately pushing the White House for information on who in the Trump administration had visibility into John Bolton’s book manuscript over the last month, the New York Times reports.
The senators “feel blindsided.”
____________________
In other words, If you knew we might get hit by this, why did you allow us to go so far out on a limb that is now being sawed off?
OH BOY. IF TRUE,THIS COULD REALLY BE IMPEACHABLE
Was Iran Strike Linked to Bolton’s Book?
January 27, 2020 at 9:25 am EST By Taegan Goddard 12 Comments
Laurence Tribe:
“A horrible connection if it pans out: On Dec. 30, Trump learned what Bolton’s book would say. Bolton has been pushing war with Iran for years. Iran’s General Soleimani was in U.S. sights for years. Trump suddenly ordered his assassination on Jan. 3, four days after seeing the book.”
In other words, is it possible Trump ordered the assassination hoping it would pull Bolton back onto his side?
Got a sinking feeling, Ch?
Feel "blindsided?"
If Trump was in so much trouble, James would not be trying so hard.
He he he he he he he.
Actually, I'm "hardly" trying.
It's easy now, like shooting fish in a barrel.
"There was no firsthand witnesses that actually said the president did anything wrong.”
— Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA), on Fox News just a few hours before a leaked draft manuscript of John Bolton’s forthcoming book contradicted his statement.
___________
BANG! Another dead fish!
The new Fox News poll released on Sunday morning, a clear majority of respondents — beyond the margin of error — believe Donald Trump should be convicted by the U.S. Senate for impeachable crimes and removed from office.
According to the poll, “On impeachment, by a 50-44 percent margin, voters think the Senate should vote to convict Trump and remove him from office. Most Democrats say remove (81 percent) and most Republicans disagree (84 percent). Among independents, more say Trump should be removed by a 19-point margin (53-34 percent).”
Romney Says It’s ‘Likely’ Bolton Will Be Called
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) to the Washington Post: “I think it’s increasingly likely that other Republicans will join those of us who think we should hear from John Bolton.”
Go deeper:
Bolton alleges in book that Trump tied Ukraine aid to investigations.
There is a firsthand witness!
Post a Comment