Dershowitz Makes Clear: Bolton's Book Allegations Linking Trump to Ukraine - Not Impeachable
A member of Alan Dershowitz’s own family told him to change his last name because he had the audacity to work with President Trump’s legal team. That’s how ridiculously political everything has become these days.
Whoever that family member was, he or she won’t be happy to hear what Dershowitz just said about former National Security Adviser John Bolton’s new book, which apparently says Trump intentionally withheld aid to Ukraine. From The Hill:
Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz on Monday said that former national security adviser John Bolton’s reported account of President Trump tying Ukraine military aid to investigations into Democrats would not constitute an impeachable offense.
Advertisement - story continues below“If any president had done what the [New York] Times reported about the content of the Bolton manuscript, that would not constitute an impeachable offense,” Dershowitz said during lengthy remarks from the Senate floor Monday night.
Dershowitz noted, “Let me repeat: Nothing in the Bolton revelations, even if true, would rise to the level of an abuse of power or an impeachable offense. That is clear from the history. That Is clear from the language of the Constitution.“
He added, “You cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using words like ‘quid pro quo’ and ‘personal benefit.’“
Liberal law professor Alan Dershowitz exposed purely partisan nature of Democrats’ weak case.
Both of Democrats’ impeachment articles are “standard-less” and totally rely on partisan interpretation. pic.twitter.com/VLJbXVbuEL
— Ronna McDaniel (@GOPChairwoman) January 28, 2020
Another:
Alan Dershowitz: Democrats' reliance on “subjective opinions” for impeachment is a dangerous precedent pic.twitter.com/jhSfEEjxd0
— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) January 28, 2020
Another:
Alan Dershowitz: "I would be making the very same Constitutional argument had Hillary Clinton, for whom I voted, been elected and had a Republican House voted to impeach her on these un-Constitutional grounds." pic.twitter.com/Novr5q74e3
— The Hill (@thehill) January 28, 2020
Check this out…
New Stmt from House Impeachment Managers: “There can be no doubt now that Mr. Bolton directly contradicts the heart of the President’s defense and therefore must be called as a witness at the impeachment trial of President Trump.” pic.twitter.com/nVJ9B0xl9U
— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) January 27, 2020
WORTH NOTING: The House managers in their statement tonight requested not just Bolton but his "notes" and other docs.
Bolton was a notoriously prolific note-taker and would likely have documented his interactions with the president (particularly if they're now in a book draft.)
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 27, 2020
BOLTON's lawyer seems to confirm the accuracy of the Times story: https://t.co/74oTiVuYVV
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 27, 2020
#BREAKING (4) Bolton’s team is not denying that his book manuscript says President Trump was planning to freeze aid to #Ukraine until their govt agreed to announce they were launching an investigation into the Bidens.
— Gillian Turner (@GillianHTurner) January 27, 2020
#BREAKING (3) Bolton’s team tells me they don’t know how the contents of his manuscript leaked to the #NewYorkTimes— asked how the draft made it to reporters when he’d only shared it with his editors and the #WhiteHouse Natl Security Council his spox says they won’t speculate
— Gillian Turner (@GillianHTurner) January 27, 2020
SCOOP: Bolton book draft, circulated to associates and sent to WH for review process, describes a convo w POTUS where he says he doesn't want to release withheld aid till Ukraine turned over material related to investigations @nytmike and me https://t.co/N3Tsce4gR7
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 26, 2020
Bolton claims in drafts of manuscript that Pompeo privately told him that there was no basis to what Giuliani said about Yovanovitch and that he questioned whether she was going after his other clients in her corruption crackdown https://t.co/N3Tsce4gR7
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 26, 2020
Bolton claims Mulvaney was present for at least one meeting Trump had by phone with Giuliani where Giuliani was talking about why Yovanovitch should be fired https://t.co/N3Tsce4gR7
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 26, 2020
Bolton writes that he told White House lawyers he was worried about Giuliani leveraging his Trump relationship for other clients https://t.co/N3Tsce4gR7
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 26, 2020
Bolton's motivations for testimony – he has a story he wants to tell, and he is concerned he'll be accused of holding stuff back to juice his book sales instead of speaking out https://t.co/N3Tsce4gR7
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 26, 2020
The revelations directly contradict Trump's claim that he never tied the hold-up of Ukrainian aid to his demands for investigations into his political opponent Joe Biden. https://t.co/7FCQknNtLy
— Axios (@axios) January 27, 2020
WH probably out of luck on executive privilege if Bolton gets a subpoena for documents/info and immediately turns over a draft of his book before Trump can object/litigate. (Again, House Intel can issue him a subpoena.)
— Ross Garber (@rossgarber) January 27, 2020
If John Bolton does not believe his conversations with the president are covered by any privilege claims, there is nothing stopping him from telling his story immediately, with or without Senate action. Op-ed, Medium post, something…
— Byron York (@ByronYork) January 27, 2020
New from John Bolton aide Sarah Tinsley: “Several weeks ago, the ambassador sent a hard copy of his draft manuscript to the White House for prepublication review by the National Security Council. The ambassador has not passed that manuscript to anyone else for review. Period.”
— Geoff Bennett (@GeoffRBennett) January 27, 2020
BREAKING: Statement from Bolton's lawyer Chuck Cooper. Story TK. pic.twitter.com/u3JOV7l5dD
— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) January 27, 2020
H/T: Twitchy
