Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Trump’s Counsel Calls Bolton Testimony ‘Inadmissible’

 

Jay Sekulow, legal counsel for President Trump, has dismissed John Bolton’s possible appearance as a witness as “inadmissible.” Sekulow said, “To have a removal of a president based on a policy dispute? That’s not what the framers intended,” Sekulow continued.

Whether prohibited by Executive Privilege or by the fact that the House already failed in being aware of this potential testimony and choosing not to fight to obtain it before finalizing their articles of impeachment sent to the Senate, the counsel for the President is correct that this 11th-hour, Hail-Mary, Blasey-Ford fiasco is not admissible for any number of reasons.

This has prompted many GOP Senators, and former Fox News colleagues, to plead with Big John to put an end to this speculation and this delay to the Senate’s work in ending this impeachment madness.

“John, you’ve kind of thrown the country into a ditch here.” Sen. Lindsey Graham

“Now that what has unfolded with the manuscript [of Bolton’s book] being leaked — by the way, exquisite timing, maybe suspicious timing — the Wall Street Journal has called for John to just come forward…. I think that would actually be a smart thing. I’d encourage John to do that.” Sen. Ron Johnson

“You have something to say, John? Come here!” Sean Hannity

It is way past time to end this charade. This Kabuki theater impeachment play should have its last showing this week. Sayonara.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 37 comments.

  1. I Walton Member

    I don’t think Democrats will push for it. He can’t offer anything not already known and probably would not be an openly hostile witness, it opens the trial to young Biden, the whistle blower, and the Democrat prosecutor all under oath. Delay is what Democrats want, not truth which doesn’t serve their interests.

    • #1
    • January 29, 2020, at 5:47 AM PST
    • 5 likes
  2. Stad Thatcher

    One thing mentioned by Rush was if every Executive Branch advisor is a potential book author, future Presidents might do away with advisors altogether. Executive Privilege is akin to attorney-client privilege, and no former Trump advisor can legally testify if the Prez invokes Executive Privilege.

    Almost everyone who testified against Trump had an axe to grind with him, whether the person was fired or their talking points ignored. By not backing Trump over impeachment, the never-Trumpers are allowing the criminalization of a President carrying out his policy. Don’t think the next Republican President won’t be impeached over the same legal conduct . . .

    • #2
    • January 29, 2020, at 6:06 AM PST
    • 10 likes
  3. EODmom Coolidge

    I Walton (View Comment):

    I don’t think Democrats will push for it. He can’t offer anything not already known and probably would not be an openly hostile witness, it opens the trial to young Biden, the whistle blower, and the Democrat prosecutor all under oath. Delay is what Democrats want, not truth which doesn’t serve their interests.

    What he does offer in abundance- is upheaval and something to make noise about on the media outlets. Rouse the rabble and move on. And hope that something gets them through their primaries to a candidate they can tolerate. 

    • #3
    • January 29, 2020, at 6:25 AM PST
    • 3 likes
  4. Bob Thompson Member

    John Bolton has long had Republicans split in terms of his appeal to them as an advisor. I think what he has allowed or caused to happen here finishes him as an input source to government policy.

    • #4
    • January 29, 2020, at 7:00 AM PST
    • 8 likes
  5. Columbo Member
    Columbo

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    John Bolton has long had Republicans split in terms of his appeal to them as an advisor. I think what he has allowed or caused to happen here finishes him as an input source to government policy.

    Perhaps by publicly commenting about all of this hysteria, and how any testimony by him would not serve the President, Executive Privilege or the Country well, he could put an end to it by clearing up the confusion and steering us back out of the ditch. His perceptions could have differed from that of either President’s Trump or Zelensky. This is not about John Bolton.

    • #5
    • January 29, 2020, at 7:17 AM PST
    • 6 likes
  6. Bob Thompson Member

    Columbo (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    John Bolton has long had Republicans split in terms of his appeal to them as an advisor. I think what he has allowed or caused to happen here finishes him as an input source to government policy.

    Perhaps by publicly commenting about all of this hysteria, and how any testimony by him would not serve the President, Executive Privilege or the Country well, he could put an end to it by clearing up the confusion and steering us back out of the ditch. His perceptions could have differed from that of either President’s Trump or Zelensky. This is not about John Bolton.

    I agree with your POV but Bolton should have waited to publish his book.

    • #6
    • January 29, 2020, at 7:19 AM PST
    • 6 likes
  7. Freeven Member
    Freeven Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Stad (View Comment):
    Almost everyone who testified against Trump had an axe to grind with him, whether the person was fired or their talking points ignored.

    This is the problem with Trump going nuclear on anyone who disagrees with him. People hold grudges. It’s baked into the cake, however, as it’s not clear that a less belligerent Trump would be as effective.

    • #7
    • January 29, 2020, at 7:30 AM PST
    • 8 likes
  8. DonG (skeptic) Coolidge

    Stad (View Comment):
    One thing mentioned by Rush was if every Executive Branch advisor is a potential book author, future Presidents might do away with advisors altogether.

    This is by design. The Dems and GOP establishment have made the Trump administration radioactive. They have promised to punish anyone who dares works for him. You will be called a rascist, you will be mobbed in public, you will not get a lucrative future job with a think tank or media company. That made it very hard for Trump to find good officials and advisors. Partisanship has been taken to deathmatch levels and very few people are patriotic enough to put country before career. We should all vote accordingly. 

    • #8
    • January 29, 2020, at 7:45 AM PST
    • 8 likes
  9. Columbo Member
    Columbo

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):
    One thing mentioned by Rush was if every Executive Branch advisor is a potential book author, future Presidents might do away with advisors altogether.

    This is by design. The Dems and GOP establishment have made the Trump administration radioactive. They have promised to punish anyone who dares works for him. You will be called a rascist, you will be mobbed in public, you will not get a lucrative future job with a think tank or media company. That made it very hard for Trump to find good officials and advisors. Partisanship has been taken to deathmatch levels and very few people are patriotic enough to put country before career. We should all vote accordingly.

    Yep. And POTUS candidates (Corey Booker), GOP Congress Heads (Mad Maxine), and even the Speaker of the House herself will foment riots so that every crazy Leftist will get in people’s faces ….

    • #9
    • January 29, 2020, at 7:48 AM PST
    • 2 likes
  10. Columbo Member
    Columbo

    Impeachment Report Update …

    Democrats Manchin, Jones, Sinema may vote to acquit Trump

    (and even Feinstein was initially reported to do the same)

    • #10
    • January 29, 2020, at 11:33 AM PST
    • 5 likes
  11. Stad Thatcher

    Freeven (View Comment):
    This is the problem with Trump going nuclear on anyone who disagrees with him.

    Or doesn’t implement his policies. Advisors advise, and may even make policy with the President’s consent. But if an advisor is amdamantly opposed to the President, he’s got to go.

    • #11
    • January 29, 2020, at 12:02 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  12. Columbo Member
    Columbo

    It is now reported that Mitch has the votes. End the circus. Cancel the Kabuki Theater. 

    • #12
    • January 29, 2020, at 1:42 PM PST
    • 6 likes
  13. MichaelKennedy Coolidge

    Columbo (View Comment):

    Impeachment Report Update …

    Democrats Manchin, Jones, Sinema may vote to acquit Trump

    (and even Feinstein was initially reported to do the same)

    I think Diane was quickly brought back in line. Maybe her Chinese “chauffeur” give her orders.

    • #13
    • January 29, 2020, at 1:49 PM PST
    • 6 likes
  14. Unsk Member

    Just in from Zerohedge:

    “White House Told Bolton His Book Contains ‘TOP SECRET’ Information – 3 Days Before NYT Leak

    The White House told former national security adviser John Bolton that his tell-all book contains “significant amounts of classified information,” including some which is “TOP SECRET” and could harm national security.

    Under federal law and the nondisclosure agreements your client signed, as a condition for gaining access to classified information, the manuscript may not be published or otherwise disclosed without the deletion of this classified information,” the letter continues.

    Notably, the letter, sent from the National Security Counsel to Bolton’s attorneys, was sent three days before the manuscript mysteriously leaked to the New York Times on the eve of the Senate impeachment proceedings – sparking a debate over calling Bolton as a witness in the trial.”

     

    • #14
    • January 29, 2020, at 2:02 PM PST
    • 5 likes
  15. Columbo Member
    Columbo

    Unsk (View Comment):

    Just in from Zerohedge:

    “White House Told Bolton His Book Contains ‘TOP SECRET’ Information – 3 Days Before NYT Leak

    The White House told former national security adviser John Bolton that his tell-all book contains “significant amounts of classified information,” including some which is “TOP SECRET” and could harm national security.

    Under federal law and the nondisclosure agreements your client signed, as a condition for gaining access to classified information, the manuscript may not be published or otherwise disclosed without the deletion of this classified information,” the letter continues.

    Notably, the letter, sent from the National Security Counsel to Bolton’s attorneys, was sent three days before the manuscript mysteriously leaked to the New York Times on the eve of the Senate impeachment proceedings – sparking a debate over calling Bolton as a witness in the trial.”

     

    I detest the “Swamp”, the “Deep State” and all of their collaborators in the media. Someone watched too much “House of Cards”. #RememberZoe 

    • #15
    • January 29, 2020, at 2:15 PM PST
    • 1 like
  16. Unsk Member

    A comment at CTY questioned whether Bolton’s publisher and his attorney had the security clearance to review the manuscript. Damn good question which seemingly puts a bunch of people in hot water. Also others have questioned Bolton’s veracity on the fact that he should have known much of what he put in his damn manuscript would have been classified.

    • #16
    • January 29, 2020, at 2:20 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  17. Kozak Member
    Kozak Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Columbo (View Comment):

    It is now reported that Mitch has the votes. End the circus. Cancel the Kabuki Theater.

    Then have the Senate investigate corruption in Ukraine.

    • #17
    • January 29, 2020, at 2:23 PM PST
    • 5 likes
  18. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher

    Could well be that he’s throwing the country/president under the bus because he hasn’t made much money in his life and desperately needs major book sales as he looks at the “back 9.” Or, it could be that he resented the indelicate way he was “fired.” Or did he resign? I can’t tell from the reports.

    • #18
    • January 29, 2020, at 5:09 PM PST
    • 1 like
  19. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher

    Columbo (View Comment):
    It is now reported that Mitch has the votes. End the circus. Cancel the Kabuki Theater. 

    Murkowski, who owes her office to very liberal native groups, is always a holdout. It gives her clout to get $$$ and policy for Alaska her small state might not otherwise receive. Mitch had to promise her something in return for her vote. I don’t know about Susan Collins, but it’s possible the same goes for her.

    • #19
    • January 29, 2020, at 5:15 PM PST
    • 1 like
  20. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Bolton is revealed to be just like the rest of them.

     

    • #20
    • January 29, 2020, at 6:11 PM PST
    • Like
  21. Guruforhire Member

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Bolton is revealed to be just like the rest of them.

    We don’t actually know if this is true or not yet. But its reasonable to assume that putting 2 famously world class jerks together who just fundamentally do not agree on foreign policy or the national interest together was always going to explode at some point.

    • #21
    • January 29, 2020, at 6:46 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  22. philo Member

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):…he’s throwing the country/president under the bus

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment): Bolton is revealed to be just like the rest of them.

    I’m admittedly behind on this story but has Mr. Bolton done anything overt and malicious toward the President with respect to the impeachment yet?

    Correct me where I am wrong:

    He wrote a manuscript about his experience soon after leaving the job while all was still fresh in his memory. Not out of the ordinary and probably smart for one wishing to get something out of their experience while there is still a market for it. Maybe not pure at heart and somewhat questionable given these extraordinary circumstances but certainly less corrupt than 99.9% of the daily occurrences in our ruling beltway. 

    He turned it over to people (presumably legally bound to not divulge what was in it) to be reviewed for proper content. Someone probably broke the law and has “leaked” or “planted a story about a presumed leak” of some of the material that may or may not be accurate (and is most likely well out of proper context). If you don’t think that there is a very high likelihood that it has been misrepresented then you haven’t really understood much of what has been going on for the last three years

    It also appears that information in the manuscript has been deemed to be classified. Not good. But how out of the ordinary is that? I would bet that most books that get scrubbed like that result in some similar findings…it just doesn’t get announced to the media. But I could be wrong.

    He has remained silent. Well, he may be similarly legally bound not to talk about the content of the manuscript and would risk either losing his publisher and/or never getting the manuscript back from the government reviewers. He may be being counseled by his own representation to remain silent because of the impeachment activity. Maybe he’s just keeping his powder dry with all the craziness going on right now. Regardless, when in doubt, silence may be the best course.

    What have I missed? There must be something…but for now, I just don’t feel the need to pile on.

    • #22
    • January 29, 2020, at 7:02 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  23. Stad Thatcher

    Unsk (View Comment):

    Just in from Zerohedge:

    “White House Told Bolton His Book Contains ‘TOP SECRET’ Information – 3 Days Before NYT Leak

    The White House told former national security adviser John Bolton that his tell-all book contains “significant amounts of classified information,” including some which is “TOP SECRET” and could harm national security.

    Under federal law and the nondisclosure agreements your client signed, as a condition for gaining access to classified information, the manuscript may not be published or otherwise disclosed without the deletion of this classified information,” the letter continues.

    Notably, the letter, sent from the National Security Counsel to Bolton’s attorneys, was sent three days before the manuscript mysteriously leaked to the New York Times on the eve of the Senate impeachment proceedings – sparking a debate over calling Bolton as a witness in the trial.”

     

    I wonder if the other Vindman had a hand in this . . .

    • #23
    • January 30, 2020, at 6:06 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  24. Stad Thatcher

    philo (View Comment):
    I’m admittedly behind on this story but has Mr. Bolton done anything overt and malicious toward the President with respect to the impeachment yet?

    No, and that’s a good point. Some folks believe he’s going to be another Oliver North and back Trump’s side, much to the shock and dismay of the Democrats. I’d like to believe this, but Bolton’s silence and the chip on his shoulder say otherwise . . .

    • #24
    • January 30, 2020, at 6:09 AM PST
    • 2 likes
  25. MichaelKennedy Coolidge

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    Could well be that he’s throwing the country/president under the bus because he hasn’t made much money in his life and desperately needs major book sales as he looks at the “back 9.” Or, it could be that he resented the indelicate way he was “fired.” Or did he resign? I can’t tell from the reports.

    He made a recent trip to Qatar and was photographed in Doha suggesting he might have found another source of income recently.

    https://www.msn.com/en-ae/news/other/the-internet-has-a-serious-question-is-this-man-walking-around-doha-actually-john-bolton/ar-BBZ0S67

    • #25
    • January 30, 2020, at 7:21 AM PST
    • Like
  26. MichaelKennedy Coolidge

    philo (View Comment):
    What have I missed? There must be something…but for now, I just don’t feel the need to pile on.

    He has announced he is “willing to testify” and while recollections are often written down when fresh, books are usually published after some time has elapsed so as to reduce the influence on current affairs. There is a difference between Journalism and History.

    • #26
    • January 30, 2020, at 7:25 AM PST
    • 1 like
  27. Stad Thatcher

    MichaelKennedy (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):
    What have I missed? There must be something…but for now, I just don’t feel the need to pile on.

    He has announced he is “willing to testify” and while recollections are often written down when fresh, books are usually published after some time has elapsed so as to reduce the influence on current affairs. There is a difference between Journalism and History.

    Speaking of journalism, why doesn’t he sit down for an interview with Hannity or Fredo Cuomo?

    • #27
    • January 30, 2020, at 8:19 AM PST
    • 1 like
  28. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher

    philo (View Comment):
    I’m admittedly behind on this story but has Mr. Bolton done anything overt and malicious toward the President with respect to the impeachment yet?

    In all fairness to Bolton, all we really have so far is unverified gossip from the NY Times. 

    • #28
    • January 30, 2020, at 8:25 AM PST
    • 6 likes
  29. Stad Thatcher

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):
    I’m admittedly behind on this story but has Mr. Bolton done anything overt and malicious toward the President with respect to the impeachment yet?

    In all fairness to Bolton, all we really have so far is unverified gossip from the NY Times.

    I agree. I’m not going to dump on him until I hear from him first . . .

    • #29
    • January 30, 2020, at 12:17 PM PST
    • Like
  30. philo Member

    MichaelKennedy (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):
    What have I missed? There must be something…but for now, I just don’t feel the need to pile on.

    He has announced he is “willing to testify” and while recollections are often written down when fresh, books are usually published after some time has elapsed so as to reduce the influence on current affairs. There is a difference between Journalism and History.

    No real arguments here but his announced “willingness to testify” just doesn’t mean much to me. It may be genuine. But, then again, as the one having no real power/authority to do otherwise, his announcement may be the hollowest of gestures. It is entirely possible he has no intention of testifying but is just vain enough (surely not!) to want to be the name associated with the most epic Executive Privilege battle ever…and willing enough to be the bait (that could be the topic of his next book).

     

    • #30
    • January 30, 2020, at 3:06 PM PST
    • Like