John Bolton's book

Chris0nllyn

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Toxick said:
Firstly, and most importantly, Trump has done exactly dick to suppress the press. ...

So, that's one thing. Now, picking up from where I said that Trump is a yuge blowhard - is it so much of a stretch to think that maybe, just maybe, his saying something like that follows the over-the-top rhetoric that he's famous for?
Click to expand...

On the first point,
The federal government censored, withheld or said it couldn’t find records sought by citizens, journalists and others more often last year than at any point in the past decade, according to an Associated Press analysis of new data.
Click to expand...
People who asked for records under the Freedom of Information Act received censored files or nothing in 78 percent of 823,222 requests, a record over the past decade. When it provided no records, the government said it could find no information related to the request in a little over half those cases.

It turned over everything requested in roughly one of every five FOIA requests, according to the AP analysis.

Records requests can take months — even years — to get fulfilled. Even then, the government censored documents in nearly two-thirds of cases when it turned over anything.

The federal government also spent $40.6 million last year in legal fees defending its decisions to withhold federal files, also a record.
Click to expand...
https://apnews.com/714791d91d7944e49a284a51fab65b85

On the second, it's not a stretch at all. I agree with you and am pretty sure that's exactly what it is. I don't think Trump literally meant he was going to execute journalists. My comment to Hijinx was merely the hyperbole we've all come to love in this forum. What could go wrong with the idea of the executive branch controlling the press?

There seems to be only a handful of folks who get questioned on it though.
 
C

Crabcatcher79

Well-Known Member
BOP said:
Accuse-ta and the current @PressSec seem to have a symbiotic relationship. He likes getting slapped around in public, and she doesn't mind doing it.

View attachment 149065
Click to expand...

like the rest of them she is a liar in it for a check.
“New White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany was a harsh critic of then-candidate Donald Trump before she became a fierce advocate for him, including calling comments he made about Mexican immigrants in 2015 "racist."

Before becoming a prominent pro-Trump commentator during his first campaign, McEnany said it was "unfortunate" and "inauthentic" to call him a Republican. McEnany made the comments in a series of panels on CNN and Fox Business.“
 
Chris0nllyn

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Ken King said:
Did the House challenge the block? No, they were in too much of a rush.
Click to expand...

This is true.

Had they gone to court and simply waited the years it would have taken to go through the legal battle that would have ensued, the right would have been complaining about the amount of time and money wasted on the impeachment.

The Dems were damned if they did, damned if they didn't.
 
Ken King

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
Chris0nllyn said:
This is true.

Had they gone to court and simply waited the years it would have taken to go through the legal battle that would have ensued, the right would have been complaining about the amount of time and money wasted on the impeachment.

The Dems were damned if they did, damned if they didn't.
Click to expand...
Bull, they didn't even try so no one knows how long it would have taken. I think your chris-tal ball might be a little fuzzy.
 
Chris0nllyn

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Ken King said:
Bull, they didn't even try so no one knows how long it would have taken. I think your chris-tal ball might be a little fuzzy.
Click to expand...

I made a post about this when the impeachment was happening. See below.

It wouldn't have taken "years", so I'd like to correct that to "months", but the point still stands that it would have taken some time. Which is why I agreed with you that the Dems were in a rush.

We know the House subpoenaed McGahn in November, 2019 for not complying and the DC Court of Appeals ruled in February 2020. The Court agreed to re-consider the case, en banc, on appeal on March 13. It was argued at the end of April (or was supposed to be, anyway), but I couldn't find an opinion. It appears to still be going through the courts. I think you could imagine the "how much money are we wasting on this sham of an impeachment!" if it was still going on. Hell, we heard that a week into the impeachment.

It was likely a strategic move to not force him to testify. Bolton wouldn't have done it, courts would have taken forever, and they likely thought Roberts would compel Bolton to testify in the Senate per rules of impeachment. If the goal for the Dems was to get it done and over with, a goal shared by Republicans, then a long legal battle was not going to be the best way to get Bolton's testimony.

Chris0nllyn said:
Which would take, how long? Then Republicans, who already complained the House's investigation took too long, would complain the investigation was taking too long.

There are other, more intricate, reasons why the House didn't press the issue though.

The DOJ sent this memo when the Mueller report was happening back in May.


And the letter Cipollone sent to Pelosi stated:


While there is a legal argument that the Trump administration's argument is the equivalent of pulling a rabbit out of your ass, and has no real case law to back it up, the rules of impeachment in the Senate allow the managers (Schiff, et. al) to call Bolton to testify anyway. They knew that if the Senate took up the trial, they'd get Bolton to testify anyway, in less time than going through the courts. The rules state that Chief Justice Roberts would be tasked with determining the validity of any objections to the relevancy of Bolton's testimony that are surely to happen, claims of executive privilege, claims of attorney-client privilege, subpoenas, arguments of the crime/fraud exception, co-conspirator exception, hearsay rule, and other tasks.
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/3_1986SenatesImpeachmentRules.pdf
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top