Should Biden attempt to exert executive privilege, it would bring into question which President he is referencing. Trump is unlikely to invoke executive privilege in Biden's behalf as he has not had any conversations with Biden. This leaves Obama, do you think that he would want to get involved in a constitutional argument on the behalf of Hunter Biden? The argument being; does a past president still have executive privilege?
Joe Biden in his last iteration said that he would comply with any lawful subpoena. If he complied and then tried to invoke executive privilege that would effectively blow up his candidacy.
Hunter Biden pleading the 5th, would likewise effectively blow up Joe's candidacy.
The New York Times reported that a draft manuscript for Bolton's yet-to-be published book reveals that he was told by Trump to maintain a hold on military aid until officials in Ukraine opened investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden.
I think so too, but not because of some alleged leak that the NYT reports. I don't trust them, not one bit, not one letter even. They have lied repeatedly and made up stories to the point where they have zero credibility. That said, all of the information should be heard. ALL of it and let the cards fall where they may.
John Bolton has a book coming out in March, I wonder what it will say. On one hand, he wants it to be juicy enough to sell, on the other hand if he shows that he isn't loyal, that might hurt his attempt to get future jobs. It could be some anti-Trump Republicans would give him a prosperous position if he takes down Trump. But I could also see him getting paid to stay quiet. The White House is allowed to review the book since it has sensitive information but time is running out, I think they only get a month.
koobookie wrote:
The New York Times reported that a draft manuscript for Bolton's yet-to-be published book reveals that he was told by Trump to maintain a hold on military aid until officials in Ukraine opened investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden.
I read that Vindman's brother at the NSC was responsible for "vetting" the manuscript. Funny how it turned up at the NYT after it was handed to him....
towermonkey wrote: I read that Vindman's brother at the NSC was responsible for "vetting" the manuscript. Funny how it turned up at the NYT after it was handed to him....
towermonkey wrote: I read that Vindman's brother at the NSC was responsible for "vetting" the manuscript. Funny how it turned up at the NYT after it was handed to him....
BOLTON was always an awkward factor in the king's scenario.....BOLTON/BIDEN/SON are
required to do face time....the AMERICAN populace deserves no less.The TRUTH is what
is lacking (and always has been)
It would seem to me in listening to the proceedings that the defense has much more solid foundation in law than the prosecution. The prosecution attempted to appeal to emotions while the defense is relying solely on law.