Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bolton attorney 'dismayed' over lack of subpoena
The Hill ^ | 11 08 2019 | Rachel Frazin

Posted on 11/08/2019 11:31:54 AM PST by yesthatjallen

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-38 last
To: lodi90
Sounds like Schiff didn’t think he was going to get what he wants from Bolton. Or he is saving him for later.

Don't even think that, let alone say anything.

The thread of Freepers apologizing for doubting Bolton will turn into a flood and take down the FR website.

There will be thousands of apologies.

21 posted on 11/08/2019 12:20:39 PM PST by Balding_Eagle ( The Great Wall of Trump ---- 100% sealing of the border. Coming soon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie

Also that or not wanting to hear what he has to say after a few a his star witnesses didn’t pan out the way he wanted. Time will tell IMHO.


22 posted on 11/08/2019 12:23:04 PM PST by matt04
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

He called Trump/Ukraine conversations a “drug deal” and hated Guilianna. I don’t trust Bolton at all. He’s probably mad that he didn’t get a war to run too.


23 posted on 11/08/2019 12:23:48 PM PST by Pollard (If you don't understand what I typed, you haven't read the classics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

Well, we’ll see.

Look, Bolton will stand on his own. My voice isn’t going to mean anything if he is a stand up guy in all this.

He will come off looking very good if he stands by reasoned values.

If he does, he’ll certainly have my support for having done so.

Some of these long term government folks go South. At times you find out they were never who you thought they were. You may have had a common ground intersect moment, which misled you to believe you did have the same views across the board.

I hope Bolton does prove my misgivings wrong.


24 posted on 11/08/2019 12:31:23 PM PST by DoughtyOne (Pledge: "...and to the Democracy for which it stands..." I give up. Use the democRat meme...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: yesthatjallen

They’re not subpoenas. Shifty doesn’t have that authority...


25 posted on 11/08/2019 12:39:42 PM PST by jeffc (The U.S. media are our enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yesthatjallen

As I understand it, they are not issuing subpoenas because that will throw it to the courts. That would delay the proceedings. It can be looked at either way by Bolton. On one hand he may want to testify, on the other he may just want the delay.


26 posted on 11/08/2019 12:52:45 PM PST by pnut22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollard
Wait and see. This drug deal line makes no sense.

Trust....I trust him. He's a good guy. Would never do anything to harm the Presidency.

27 posted on 11/08/2019 1:12:40 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: yesthatjallen

From what I have surmised by several articles, they don’t want to test their subpoena power in court because of the cluster-f_ck way of authorizing the impeachment.


28 posted on 11/08/2019 1:50:36 PM PST by RetiredTexasVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yetidog
It could be that Bolton via his attorney wants a court decision that would reconcile any questions about his legal responsibility to testify under or without subpoena. CYA. Under that scenario, the dems dropped their demand as they did not want (1) a precedent favoring executive privilege and/or (2) apprehensive about what he might testify to.

+1

A second issue is that Bolton was very close to DJT. This would weigh heavily toward executive privilege being valid. Not a good test case from the RAT perspective.

Someone less close to the President would be a better test case for them.

Not that I think it would fool the court.

29 posted on 11/08/2019 2:17:53 PM PST by CurlyDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: pnut22

They are waiting on court decision which is now at DC Apeals level. If anyone thinks DC court is going to rule in FAVOR of DOJ vs HJC over getting grand jury documents and forcing WH officials to testify (judicial order) it’s a very slim chance.


30 posted on 11/08/2019 2:19:43 PM PST by Engedi (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: lodi90

Thing is with Bolten, you do not know what you are going to get.

The conservative Bolten, or the one who left the his position in a spat with Trump.

He could totally push Trump under the bus, or bend over backwards to defend Trump.

Neither side (R’s and D’s) do not know what he will do.


31 posted on 11/08/2019 2:25:37 PM PST by skinndogNN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
"I’m sure he never wanted Bolton to testify. He just wanted Bolton to refuse..."

Exactly right. Bolton's testimony was too much of a high risk/low reward proposition for the Dems. They wanted a refusal so they could build up some talking points about the Trump Administration's "obstructionism" to spread across the news for a few days. I'm not a fan of Ambassador Bolton but I do give him credit for handling this situation well.


32 posted on 11/08/2019 3:36:59 PM PST by Garth Tater (What's mine is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dead

“I think they may have figured out that Bolton is planning on telling them things they don’t want to hear.”

I think you’re on target. Bolton was setting up Schiff and would’ve beaten him like a stray dog.


33 posted on 11/08/2019 4:52:01 PM PST by sergeantdave (Teach a man to fish and he'll steal your gear and sell it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yesthatjallen

Everyone seems to think that Bolton won’t try to sink Trump, the man who sent him packing. The hints seem to be that he would love to spill bad news. Am I reading this wrong?


34 posted on 11/08/2019 5:24:01 PM PST by EliRoom8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dead

I think you’re spot on.


35 posted on 11/08/2019 7:11:12 PM PST by Gator113 ( ~~Trump 2020~~ EPSTEIN WAS MURDERED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Actually, if the Congress had the guts to use them, there are 2 checks (besides funding) they can use. Impeachment and the power to establish inferior courts.


36 posted on 11/09/2019 2:32:58 AM PST by rxh4n1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rxh4n1

Neither is a check.


37 posted on 11/09/2019 2:36:44 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: lodi90

Oliver North redux. They were all getting hot to impeach Reagan for Iran Contra and Oliver North blew it all out of the water.


38 posted on 11/09/2019 2:48:52 AM PST by rxh4n1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-38 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson