Toronto Escorts

Bolton wrote a book and confirms Trump's bribery of Ukraine

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,972
17,959
113
Well, even if Moscow Mitch is trying to keep Bolton from testifying its not going to be enough.
Bolton wrote a book and the manuscript confirms Trump bribed Ukraine to investigate Biden.

John Bolton’s manuscript confirms Trump’s bribery of Ukraine: report
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/john-boltons-manuscript-confirms-trumps-bribery-of-ukraine-report/

Former national security adviser John Bolton revealed in his manuscript that President Donald Trump told him as early as August 2019 that he wanted to continue freezing the military and security assistance to Ukraine until they could get officials to go after the Biden family.

New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman Michael Schmidt reported Sunday that the $391 million in aid to Ukraine was contingent on Ukraine officials agreeing to help “with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens.”

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

Trump's team is ratting him out.
First it was Cohen, then Giuliani's henchmen and now Bolton.
As a mob boss, he sucks ass.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,972
17,959
113
Here's the NYT's 5 take aways from the manuscript.

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almost $400 million in American security aid to investigations that he sought from Ukrainian officials, according to an unpublished manuscript of a book that John R. Bolton, Mr.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.

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 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.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/us/politics/john-bolton-trump-book-takeaways.html
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,972
17,959
113

Knuckle Ball

Well-known member
Oct 15, 2017
6,855
2,866
113
But...as I understand it, this leak came from the White House?
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
Yeah, and Comey wrote a book, too. Even used the same agent. And what did we learned last week??? TWO FISA warrants were ILLEGAL. In other words, since we have the transcripts of the actual conversations and the Ukrainians are on the record to the contrary, it changes absolutely nothing.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,972
17,959
113
Yeah, and Comey wrote a book, too. Even used the same agent. And what did we learned last week??? TWO FISA warrants were ILLEGAL. In other words, since we have the transcripts of the actual conversations and the Ukrainians are on the record to the contrary, it changes absolutely nothing.
Obstruction of justice.

Trying to block Bolton's testimony when they know he will incriminate Trump is obstruction of justice.
Its going to open up questions about who else on Trump's team knows and is working on this cover up.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,120
2,768
113
Yeah, and Comey wrote a book, too. Even used the same agent. And what did we learned last week??? TWO FISA warrants were ILLEGAL. In other words, since we have the transcripts of the actual conversations and the Ukrainians are on the record to the contrary, it changes absolutely nothing.
Yeah, and Trump hardly even knew who Bolton was too.

"Bolton? Hardly knew the guy. He was our coffee gopher guy, I believe. Don't believe I ever met him." - D.J. Trump

Sekulow, Cippilone and the rest of the mob boss' lawyers obviously were knowingly uttering false statements in the Senate Impeachment trial by stating "there is no direct first hand evidence" implicating Trump directly to a quid pro quo, frighteningly so considering they had Bolton's unpublished manuscript a month prior to committing legal misconduct.

"Sekulow, Cippilone? Hardly knew those guys." D. J. Trump
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
Obstruction of justice.

Trying to block Bolton's testimony when they know he will incriminate Trump is obstruction of justice.
Its going to open up questions about who else on Trump's team knows and is working on this cover up.
ROFLMAO!!!! The road to court to decide the executive privilege is unobstructed as it always has been.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,120
2,768
113
ROFLMAO!!!! The road to court to decide the executive privilege is unobstructed as it always has been.
The road to executive privilege leads Trump and his team over the cliff into the abyss when it is paved with intent to conceal and coverup illegal and criminal activity.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
The road to executive privilege leads Trump and his team over the cliff into the abyss when it is paved with intent to conceal and coverup illegal and criminal activity.
Let me guess, you have no idea how the executive privilege work and how it can be lifted?
 

Boober69

Well-known member
Feb 23, 2012
6,722
263
83
NY Times releases the story at the same time the website for the book goes live...hmmmm...it's a great marketing campaign to sell books and replace all those Russian collusion books collecting dust on the shelves and lining bird cages.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,120
2,768
113
NY Times releases the story at the same time the website for the book goes live...hmmmm...it's a great marketing campaign to sell books and replace all those Russian collusion books collecting dust on the shelves and lining bird cages.
So what? Is the NY Times facing an impeachment trial/Senate Republican coverup?

So what? Team Trump had the unpublished manuscript for a month now, hiding, concealing, burying Bolton's direct first hand evidence in addition to the Mulvaney, Duffy, Blair, Pompeo, Perry first hand evidence and documents currently being held hostage from the American people that point directly to Trump's guilt.
 

Boober69

Well-known member
Feb 23, 2012
6,722
263
83
So what? Is the NY Times facing an impeachment trial/Senate Republican coverup?

So what? Team Trump had the unpublished manuscript for a month now, hiding, concealing, burying Bolton's direct first hand evidence in addition to the Mulvaney, Duffy, Blair, Pompeo, Perry first hand evidence and documents currently being held hostage from the American people that point directly to Trump's guilt.
Nah, we all know this is going nowhere but a few will make some money selling books like they usually do. Nothing to see here, unless of course you like buying books in the fiction section.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,120
2,768
113
Let me guess, you have no idea how the executive privilege work and how it can be lifted?
More than enough to know that executive privilege cannot be used as a shield in a judicial or constitutional proceeding in a corrupt effort to hide, bury, set fire to conversations and documents of official misconduct, illegal acts and impeachable offences alleged to have been committed by one Donald J. Trump.

What we have here is a fallacy being promoted by you.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,972
17,959
113
So what? Is the NY Times facing an impeachment trial/Senate Republican coverup?

So what? Team Trump had the unpublished manuscript for a month now, hiding, concealing, burying Bolton's direct first hand evidence in addition to the Mulvaney, Duffy, Blair, Pompeo, Perry first hand evidence and documents currently being held hostage from the American people that point directly to Trump's guilt.
The NSC is saying that nobody in the White House had access to Bolton's manuscript or knew anything about it.
The news today is that Trump and his henchmen were totally blindsided by the news of the book.

What fun!

Trump runs off the mobster method, demand utmost loyalty.
Bolton is a massive note taker and a hard core warmonger and now he joins others leaving the sinking ship instead of taking one for the orange guy.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
More than enough to know that executive privilege cannot be used as a shield in a judicial or constitutional proceeding in a corrupt effort to hide, bury, set fire to conversations and documents of official misconduct, illegal acts and impeachable offences alleged to have been committed by one Donald J. Trump.

What we have here is a fallacy being promoted by you.
So you don't know. Check. FYI. Both Nadler and Schiff didn't even bother to subpoena people like Bolton and when they did they WITHDREW their subpoenas. Reason? Time constraint, as if all are not aware that courts usually fast track such cases. If they were serious, they'd investigate fully. Of course this is not about any crimes, it's about influencing the 2020 election.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,927
1,198
113
THAT'S your rebuttal?!

Thanks for showing up.
oagre, chill out bud!

It's hard to rebut something that you haven't read or seen. From what I understand, the NY Times spoke to yet another anonymous source about what they claimed to have read.

Per usual, please review my post for spelling. Thanks.
 

drawcoat

New member
Sep 2, 2004
152
0
0
So let me clear something up. I won't call fake news, but I will tell you the government HAS had this manuscript for over a month. When a book is written by a top level federal government worker, it must be vetted by a government lawyer before it can go to print. For many reasons as Im sure you can all imagine.

Guess who was the lawyer who vetted this manuscript?

Yifgeny Vindman. YUP thats right the colonels BROTHER.

You remember Mr Vindman right. SORRY SORRY Colonel Vindman.

John Boltens lawyer has released a statement on behalf of his client "It is with great regret that we confirm the leak of the manuscript''.

Geez I wonder where the leak came from.

No No the deep state doesnt exist.
 
Toronto Escorts