Democrats appeared to give up on getting John Bolton to testify in the impeachment inquiry Thursday, saying they won’t subpoena him after he blew off a voluntarily deposition and instead count his absence as evidence of obstruction on President Trump’s part. Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, didn’t show up as planned for a closed-door hearing on Capitol Hill Thursday morning and his attorney, Charles Cooper, informed Democratic leaders that the mustachioed foreign policy hawk would challenge them in court if they moved to subpoena him, according to a House Intelligence Committee official working on the impeachment probe. Advertisement “Unlike three other dedicated public servants who worked for him on the NSC and have complied with lawful subpoenas, Mr. Bolton would take us to court if we subpoenaed him,” the official said, referring to previous testimony by current and former National Security Council staffers Alexander Vindman, Fiona Hill and Tim Morrison. “We regret Mr. Bolton’s decision not to appear voluntarily," the official continued, “but we have no interest in allowing the administration to play rope-a-dope with us in the courts for months. Rather, the White House instruction that he not appear will add to the evidence of the president’s obstruction of Congress.” Bolton, like other current and former administration officials asked for testimony in the impeachment investigation, have been ordered by the White House to not comply, even if they’ve been subpoenaed, invariably arguing the probe isn’t legitimate or that they can be shielded from being deposed under executive privilege. There are two federal court cases ongoing that could give Democrats an upper hand in arguing that the White House defense is flawed. The first one involves Don McGahn, the former White House counsel whom Democrats have tried to compel testimony from since April. The judge in that case said she will likely issue a decision as to whether McGahn can testify by the end of this month. The second case involves Charles Kupperman, a former National Security Council deputy, who is facing a subpoena but, like Bolton, says he wants a court to settle whether he should follow the directives of the White House or Congress. It’s unclear if Bolton would be willing to testify if either of those two court cases are resolved favorably for the Democrats. Cooper, Bolton’s attorney, did not return a request for comment. Bolton is rumored to have extensive first-hand knowledge of Trump’s attempts to press Ukraine into investigating former Vice President Joe Biden and other Democrats before the 2020 election. The former national security adviser has been referenced dozens of times in previous testimony. David Dorsen, a former federal prosecutor in New York who served as an assistant chief counsel on the Senate Watergate Committee, said he believes Democrats have two reasons for choosing not to subpoena Bolton for testimony. “First off, they’re
Dems appear to give up on John Bolton testimony, say they won’t subpoena after he blows off impeachm
Democrats appeared to give up on getting John Bolton to testify in the impeachment inquiry Thursday, saying they won’t subpoena him after he blew off a voluntarily deposition and instead count his absence as evidence of obstruction on President Trump’s part. Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, didn’t show up as planned for a closed-door hearing on Capitol Hill Thursday morning and his attorney, Charles Cooper, informed Democratic leaders that the mustachioed foreign policy hawk would challenge them in court if they moved to subpoena him, according to a House Intelligence Committee official working on the impeachment probe. Advertisement “Unlike three other dedicated public servants who worked for him on the NSC and have complied with lawful subpoenas, Mr. Bolton would take us to court if we subpoenaed him,” the official said, referring to previous testimony by current and former National Security Council staffers Alexander Vindman, Fiona Hill and Tim Morrison. “We regret Mr. Bolton’s decision not to appear voluntarily," the official continued, “but we have no interest in allowing the administration to play rope-a-dope with us in the courts for months. Rather, the White House instruction that he not appear will add to the evidence of the president’s obstruction of Congress.” Bolton, like other current and former administration officials asked for testimony in the impeachment investigation, have been ordered by the White House to not comply, even if they’ve been subpoenaed, invariably arguing the probe isn’t legitimate or that they can be shielded from being deposed under executive privilege. There are two federal court cases ongoing that could give Democrats an upper hand in arguing that the White House defense is flawed. The first one involves Don McGahn, the former White House counsel whom Democrats have tried to compel testimony from since April. The judge in that case said she will likely issue a decision as to whether McGahn can testify by the end of this month. The second case involves Charles Kupperman, a former National Security Council deputy, who is facing a subpoena but, like Bolton, says he wants a court to settle whether he should follow the directives of the White House or Congress. It’s unclear if Bolton would be willing to testify if either of those two court cases are resolved favorably for the Democrats. Cooper, Bolton’s attorney, did not return a request for comment. Bolton is rumored to have extensive first-hand knowledge of Trump’s attempts to press Ukraine into investigating former Vice President Joe Biden and other Democrats before the 2020 election. The former national security adviser has been referenced dozens of times in previous testimony. David Dorsen, a former federal prosecutor in New York who served as an assistant chief counsel on the Senate Watergate Committee, said he believes Democrats have two reasons for choosing not to subpoena Bolton for testimony. “First off, they’re
0 Comments