Mega-Thread: Impeachment Proceedings & Inquiry of Trump

[solinari6]

Bolton has now said he is willing to testify in the Senate impeachment trial.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnb...by-senate.html

a rather sudden 180 on his part...

Maybe he's super excited about a war with Iran, but knows that Trump will F* it up, so he wants to get rid of him and let cooler heads lead the war?

[Levelfive]

Maybe he's super excited about a war with Iran, but knows that Trump will F* it up, so he wants to get rid of him and let cooler heads lead the war?

Thoughts in the order they occurred to me:

1) About fucking time
2) Too bad he wouldn't for the House proceeding
3) "IF" he's subpoenaed
4) Now they definitely won't call witnesses--is he banking on that?
5) What's his weird fucking deal, anyway
6) Is this about his book
7) Can the House enforce a subpoena now
8) "Enforce" hahaha

- - - Updated - - -

9) I almost wonder if Bolton would try to protect Trump now for what Bolton might consider "national security" reasons, or what I would consider maximum uptime on his Iran-hate boner

Edited also because I forgot the House had subpoenaed his deputy and not him.

[Martymark]

They might send it over with the second, or maybe wait for the third.

Third time's the charm!

Impeachment 2023: This Time For Real!

[starlord]

Thoughts in the order they occurred to me:

1) About fucking time
2) Too bad he wouldn't for the House proceeding
3) "IF" he's subpoenaed
4) Now they definitely won't call witnesses--is he banking on that?
5) What's his weird fucking deal, anyway
6) Is this about his book
7) Can the House enforce his original subpoena now
8) "Enforce" hahaha

- - - Updated - - -

9) I almost wonder if Bolton would try to protect Trump now for what Bolton might consider "national security" reasons, or what I would consider maximum uptime on his Iran-hate boner

this was my train of thought as well, like what's his angle? no way he suddenly grew a conscience. likely he would testify on trump's behalf.

[kaelleria]

So with Bolton willing to testify under subpoena... Collins, Murkowski, Romney and Gardner have a lot of soul searching to do.

[Levelfive]

this was my train of thought as well, like what's his angle? no way he suddenly grew a conscience. likely he would testify on trump's behalf.

Exactly, although I was frankly surprised with the conscience he displayed in the whole Ukraine thing. Limited, yes, but one was surprised to see any displayed at all.

[Jotaux]

Third time's the charm!

Impeachment 2023: This Time For Real!

I mean theres so much you can impeach Trump on because hes so dumb he'd admit to it on live television.

[Levelfive]

this was my train of thought as well, like what's his angle? no way he suddenly grew a conscience. likely he would testify on trump's behalf.

10) It definitely puts impeachment back in the news
11) See 5

[Paranoid Android]

Still not too excited about Bolton. He seems unreliable in giving good evidence on Trump. Yes, Bolton clashed with Trump but in the end Bolton still seems like in the Republican Party and that party is the Cult of Trump.

So if he testifies doe he give the non-answers that don't really say anything that Trump can say "nothing here". I don't trust Bolton.

[Breccia]

Still not too excited about Bolton.

When Bolton said he'd testify if the Senate gave him a subpoena, my immediate thought was "And I'd totally bang Selma Hayek if she knocked on my door and asked". Neither are going to happen, plus, Graham's wife might get jealous.

That said, Bolton being on the stand would cause two things.

1) It would mean the GOP was at least pretending to take things seriously.

2) I don't take Bolton as the kind to actually flat-out lie on the stand. He's not that stupid. So he'd end up with enough "I don't remember" and "I can't prove" to give soundbites for plenty of election ads.

That said,

Given that Mr. Bolton’s lawyers have stated he has new relevant information to share, if any Senate Republican opposes issuing subpoenas to the four witnesses and documents we have requested they would make absolutely clear they are participating in a cover up

-- Schumer

Bolton can't offer to give some information under oath, but then refuse to answer questions. That's not how this works. Or if that's how it works, then it's a blatantly obvious sham.

[Shadowferal]

When Bolton said he'd testify if the Senate gave him a subpoena, my immediate thought was "And I'd totally bang Selma Hayek if she knocked on my door and asked". Neither are going to happen, plus, Graham's wife might get jealous.

...ah...Selma Hayek...my fantasy...

How John Bolton just put the squeeze on Mitch McConnell over impeachment

Bolton's willingness to testify could very well change that math for McConnell. After all, Bolton, serving as national security adviser, was right in the heart of the administration's action toward Ukraine -- he was in that role when Trump spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July 2019 and asked for the foreign leader to look into debunked allegations of wrongdoing by former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter. And it was Bolton who, according to former National Security Council staffer Fiona Hill, told her that he was "not part of whatever drug deal [US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon] Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up." (Hill testified to that under oath during the House impeachment hearings.)

[cubby]

On the flip side, in regards to delaying Senate Trial until March (as a strategy for GOP Senators to prevent being primaried by Trump's lackey's), the Iran issue along with reopening Articles because of newly revealed information, might just get us there. Especially with a new investigation being opened.

[Kujako]

My money is on Bolton testifying, telling nothing but lies, all while having a pardon in his back pocket.

[Levelfive]

Bolton is only saying he’ll testify because he knows they won’t subpoena him. See his dodging the House subpoena for reference.

I had the same memory lapse, but the House didn't subpoena him, they subpoenaed his deputy, and Bolton piggybacked on the court case. Then the House withdrew the subpoena and the case was moot. What I'm wondering, though, is why can't the House just subpoena him now, seeing as how he claims to be willing to testify "if subpoenaed."

- - - Updated - - -

My money is on Bolton testifying, telling nothing but lies, all while having a pardon in his back pocket.

I mean, he and Trump parted ways on decidedly bad terms. Bolton is a completely unknown quantity at this point.

[mvaliz]

On the flip side, in regards to delaying Senate Trial until March (as a strategy for GOP Senators to prevent being primaried by Trump's lackey's), the Iran issue along with reopening Articles because of newly revealed information, might just get us there. Especially with a new investigation being opened.

Just had an interesting thought upon reading this.

Is there any advantage for Moscow McTurtle to sit on this all the way until post-November elections like he did with Garland and the SC Seat?

I mean, one can argue that it looks terribad for them if they do - but a) so did holding the SC seat, and that clearly didn't effect them, or b) would it be worse if they hold it and vote against impeachment as opposed to just endlessly delaying it?

[Levelfive]

Just had an interesting thought upon reading this.

Is there any advantage for Moscow McTurtle to sit on this all the way until post-November elections like he did with Garland and the SC Seat?

I mean, one can argue that it looks terribad for them if they do - but a) so did holding the SC seat, and that clearly didn't effect them, or b) would it be worse if they hold it and vote against impeachment as opposed to just endlessly delaying it?

They want to hand Trump his "total exoneration" as quickly as possible so they can all keep repeating it up until election day. He's bluffing when he says he doesn't want it and he doesn't care if Pelosi sends the Articles--he does. That's why Graham is talking about a vote to just go ahead without them. They want their show trial over and done with ASAP.

[cubby]

Just had an interesting thought upon reading this.

Is there any advantage for Moscow McTurtle to sit on this all the way until post-November elections like he did with Garland and the SC Seat?

I mean, one can argue that it looks terribad for them if they do - but a) so did holding the SC seat, and that clearly didn't effect them, or b) would it be worse if they hold it and vote against impeachment as opposed to just endlessly delaying it?

I think Moscow McTurtle could do it, but I agree with @Levelfive that the GOP wants their sham trail over asap. Trump is also pushing for this heavily. For all my talk about delays-until-March to allow the GOP to actually convict Trump, the odds of that happening are exceedingly low.

[Levelfive]

What squeeze? The senate GOP is taking the stance that they won’t be calling new witnesses.

The more I think about it...it'll be tough for Senate Republicans to argue they shouldn't hear from Bolton, which is the position they're in now.

[Shadowferal]

The way Trump's been babbling, he has to be feeling some heat.

[solinari6]

The more I think about it...it'll be tough for Senate Republicans to argue they shouldn't hear from Bolton, which is the position they're in now.

Reports say that Bolton gave Mitch a heads up before he made his announcement, and I suspect the conversation went like this:
"Yo! Mitch! I need to get back in Trump's good graces so he'll let me help blow up Iran! Go ahead and call me as a witness in the senate trial, and I'll say everything that I can to get Trump off. I don't mind lying, because I'm sure Trump will pardon me when he sees what I've done for him!"