Guess nobody's gonna subpoena Bolton ?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

Couldn't find any new news

https://www.thedailybeast.com/john-bolton-said-he-would-testify-before-the-senate-but-house-democrats-are-torn-about-demanding-it

Last news 2-6-2020

House Democrats are torn about whether they should call in former National Security Adviser John Bolton to testify following the acquittal of President Donald Trump in the Senate’s impeachment trial.

Snip
With Trump now acquitted and his office secure, House investigators could still issue their own subpoena. And many Democrats believe it remains vital that he testify about what he witnessed during the administration’s push to withhold U.S. security aid until Ukraine investigated Trump’s political rivals.

But there’s a fear among some Democrats that Bolton is primarily seeking to capitalize on the spotlight in order to promote his forthcoming tell-all book. What’s more, some key lawmakers believe Bolton’s account is no longer essential

John Bolton’s gonna come in front of us and say, the President said, don’t give out the aid until there’s an investigation,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT), a member of the Intelligence Committee, told The Daily Beast.“I don’t really believe we’re going to learn a lot more from John Bolton. I want to know what the hell Rudy Giuliani was doing, I want to know why Mike Pompeo didn’t stand up much more… I’m not saying I don’t want to hear from Bolton, I’m just saying, Bolton will tell us what we already know. And he will do it in a way mainly designed to sell his book.”

Himes’ skepticism isn’t shared throughout the party. But Democratic leadership has notably not made any overt moves that suggest imminent plans to issue a subpoena for Bolton in the 24 hours since Trump’s acquittal. Instead, they’ve signaled a desire to regroup, take a post-impeachment breather, and focus on other topics. All of which has contributed to a curious outcome: that the House might hold off on using its power to get answers to significant lingering questions about the conduct at the heart of the articles of impeachment against the president.

[Kingofalldems]

1. I trust the Speaker.

How about you?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

4. Omg not that meme again

[LakeArenal]

6. Same ole twist, by the same ole twisters?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

7. Lol! Yes! Uphill battle every time. How's life in

Your new Paradise?

[LakeArenal]

9. Sunny. Beautiful. Same ole same ole. 😉

[bluestarone]

2. Actually what good would it do now?

He had his fucking chance!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

5. Was he called as a witness anywhere? I know he said

He was willing. No subpoena, right?

[bluestarone]

10. He was willing ONLY in the Senate i think

Who would listen to him? (the senate rethugs already have their mind made up) He should have testified before the House long ago!!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

3. Nadler said likely.on Feb 5th

https://nypost.com/2020/02/05/jerry-nadler-says-its-likely-house-will-subpoena-john-bolton-to-testify
Jerry Nadler says House will ‘likely’ subpoena John Bolton to testify
By Mark Moore February 5, 2020 | 3:21pm | Updated
John Bolton
John Bolton AFP via Getty Images
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said Wednesday it is “likely” that Democrats will subpoena President Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton even though the Senate is expected to acquit the president.

“I think it’s likely, yes,” the New York Democrat told reporters. “When you have a lawless president, you have to bring that to the fore, you have to spotlight that, you have to protect the Constitution, whatever the political consequences.”

In a yet-unpublished manuscript, Bolton wrote that Trump told him last May to call Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to pave the way for Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, to meet with him to discuss investigations they sought into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter, the New York Times reported.

[wishstar]

8. Schiff said Bolton refused to provide an affidavit under oath to Senate during impeachment trial

Schiff said they contacted Bolton's counsel to ask if he would provide an affidavit stating his knowledge of Trump/Ukraine matters and Bolton declined and Schiff concluded that Bolton has decided to save his information for his book. Bolton had previously told House he wouldn't comply with a subpoena from the House unless a court ordered him to testify, so there's no point in subpoening him to the House since he wouldn't comply anyway.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

11. Thanks! Well, that sucks. Something about a formal

setting, sworn in before a government body, that carries so much more weight than a couple days of CNN and MSNBC book interviews and momentary outrage until trump tweets about a caravan threatening.

So, we will never hear from any of the closest to the Ukraine deal? That sucks too.