What to make of this?

So several Republicans are now pushing for the Bolton manuscript to be circulated in a private manner to the Senate, so that the Senate members could review it for themselves. The argument is that they would then have "all" have the information required to make a determination whether Bolton should be called to testify (or not), rather than relying on the "leaked" information from the NY Times.

The other argument is that having the manuscript would provide a full understanding of what Bolton is claiming, and would be superior to simply calling him as a witness (which could largely become a media circus). Republicans could then make the honest case that they were willing to take into account what the Bolton book has to say before calling for a vote. Of course, who is to say whether the book will provide more answers than questions. There could be a huge disagreement regarding that.

However, guess who doesn't like this idea? Senate Democrats! Chuck Schumer has called the idea an "absurd proposal" and believes that there should not be any preliminary private reading by the Senate.

I will offer two things to keep in mind.

• The first is that if the NYT and WaPo have inside information on this, then so do the Senate Democrats. No way this was "just" leaked to the press. It's likely that Schumer already knows details of the book that are not part of the NYT WaPo story line. 
• The second is that the book "will" come out and Bolton will make his media rounds. If the book is as explosive as the NYT demands that it is, then the Senate Republicans would have little choice but to acknowledge as much after reading the manuscript. 

So the question becomes... are the Democrats looking for this information to be carefully vetted and considered in the impeachment vote or are they just more interested in getting another anti-Trumper on the witness stand to potentially damage the President?