News
news New biometric database can identify people through scars, tattoos and even their voice
news Cattle Are Being Mutilated And Killed In Eastern Oregon
news Insider Interview on Skinwalker Ranch History
news Squirrels Can Speak Bird
news US Navy pilot says mystery ‘dark mass’ emerged from ocean and swallowed torpedo
news Cognitive scientist says we see things as we need to, rather than as they are.
news A Movie You Control With Your Mind
news Radioactive Cloud That Blanketed Europe Traced to Russian Nuclear Facility
news Organization Says It’s Obtained ‘Exotic’ Metals Unknown to Science
news The frightening supernatural story of the Black Bird of Chernobyl
news Recent UFO Encounters With Navy Pilots Occurred Constantly Across Multiple Squadrons


Username:
Password: or Register
 
Thread Rating:
  • 12 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
He Man
Another day in paradise
User ID: 426524
11-07-2019 10:27 PM

Posts: 20,838




Post: #31
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
Advertisement
northerntomcat  Wrote: (11-07-2019 10:23 PM)
He Man  Wrote: (11-07-2019 10:01 PM)
I think Trump's lawyers would tell him to not foot legal bills like that. Makes him look guilty and adds to obstruction of justice charges.

Most people testifying before Congress have to pay for their own lawyers and the longer they delay the process the more they pay in lawyer's fees. Most want to get it over ASAP, then get on with their lives.

He misappropriates funds all the time as we see here.

Judge orders Trump to pay $2m for misusing charity foundation

A judge in New York orders President Donald Trump to pay $2 million for misusing his charitable foundation, the AP reports.

In December 2018, a second New York judge signed off on a deal to shut down Trump’s personal charity after a lawsuit exposed a “shocking pattern of illegality”.

Trump had used the charity to pay off legal settlements within his business and even to buy a painting of himself to hang in one of his golf clubs.

chuckle I mean you can't make this sh*t up.

Jhikpghf

And the idiots keeps supporting his criminality corruptions conman schemes etc. etc. Scream1

Making LOP Great again since 06-07-2013!

"Oh My God. This is terrible. This is the End of my Presidency.
I'm F'ed."
Donald Trump: 2017

[Image: JLaazQI.gif]

Mexico will pay for the pitchforks.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 412093
11-08-2019 12:36 AM

 




Post: #32
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
It's not an impeachment hearing, until the bipartisan House, votes to officially to follow thru with an actual impeachment. Until then, it's the "Liddle Schiff" clown show. Just like his whistleblower, isn't a whistleblower, until he testifies under oath, to bipartisan questioning. Until then, he will remain a dnc operative. Facts matter, unless you don't have them. Then it's called projecting fiction.
Quote this message in a reply
He Man
Another day in paradise
User ID: 426524
11-08-2019 12:41 AM

Posts: 20,838




Post: #33
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
LoP Guest  Wrote: (11-08-2019 12:36 AM)
It's not an impeachment hearing, until the bipartisan House, votes to officially to follow thru with an actual impeachment. Until then, it's the "Liddle Schiff" clown show. Just like his whistleblower, isn't a whistleblower, until he testifies under oath, to bipartisan questioning. Until then, he will remain a dnc operative. Facts matter, unless you don't have them. Then it's called projecting fiction.

The Federal court disagrees with your idiocy, loser. Scream1

Judge says impeachment inquiry is legal and justifies disclosing grand jury material

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/25/politics/...index.html

Making LOP Great again since 06-07-2013!

"Oh My God. This is terrible. This is the End of my Presidency.
I'm F'ed."
Donald Trump: 2017

[Image: JLaazQI.gif]

Mexico will pay for the pitchforks.
(This post was last modified: 11-08-2019 12:41 AM by He Man.) Quote this message in a reply
Isabella
Registered User
User ID: 421592
11-08-2019 02:31 AM

Posts: 15,502




Post: #34
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
northerntomcat  Wrote: (11-07-2019 09:22 PM)
Isabella  Wrote: (11-07-2019 08:21 PM)
Democrats say Bolton’s refusal to show up will become part of the evidence of Trump’s attempt to obstruct Congress.

"John R. Bolton, President Trump’s former national security adviser, did not show up Thursday for a voluntary interview as part of the House impeachment inquiry, but Democratic investigators said they would not subpoena him and would instead use his refusal to appear as evidence of Mr. Trump’s attempt to obstruct Congress.

Mr. Bolton, who regularly interacted with Mr. Trump directly as his top national security aide in the White House, would have been one of the most high-profile advisers to testify in the impeachment inquiry. Several other witnesses have described Mr. Bolton as being angry about the idea of holding up military aid to Ukraine in exchange for a demand that the country open an investigation into the president’s political rivals.

But an official with the House Intelligence Committee said Mr. Bolton’s lawyer had told them that the former national security adviser would file a lawsuit in federal court if he was subpoenaed, a legal challenge that would most likely take months to resolve. The official said that the committee did not want to allow the Trump administration to “play rope-a-dope with us” in the courts and slow down their inquiry.

In the first month of the impeachment investigation, Democrats made headway through the testimony of National Security Council officials and State Department diplomats who were involved in Ukraine policy. But unlike Mr. Bolton, those officials infrequently interacted with Mr. Trump.


A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Much of that testimony painted a damning picture of a president outsourcing America’s foreign policy to his personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, but gave little insight into what Mr. Trump said behind closed doors. Some Democrats and impeachment experts believe that if Senate Republicans are going to turn on Mr. Trump and convict him at an impeachment trial, investigators will need to develop new evidence about Mr. Trump’s involvement.

Had the investigators decided to compel Mr. Bolton’s testimony with a subpoena, it probably would have set off a lengthy court battle similar to one initiated by Charles M. Kupperman, Mr. Bolton’s deputy, who filed a lawsuit last month when faced with a subpoena from the committee and an order from Mr. Trump to not cooperate with investigators. On Wednesday, House Democrats pulled their subpoena of Mr. Kupperman out of concern that the litigation would slow down the impeachment investigation."


Mr. Kupperman’s lawyer, Charles J. Cooper, also represents Mr. Bolton."

Question:

So what is to stop others that have been subpoenaed from starting their own lawsuits thus stalling the entire impeachment?

They can try but it looks like the committees have enough proof from those who testified to proceed with their open testimonies next week?

It's not like if the court rules they need to honor the subpoenas they would tell the truth and not answer like Trump's written answers were to Mueller's questions.

Quote this message in a reply
Isabella
Registered User
User ID: 421592
11-08-2019 02:36 AM

Posts: 15,502




Post: #35
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
He Man  Wrote: (11-07-2019 08:19 PM)
Luvapottamus  Wrote: (11-07-2019 07:29 PM)
If you don't know what cleared means maybe you should read the original article, and share that instead.

WaPo requires a subscription. So I posted this OP instead.

Within a few hours other sites have WaPo's articles up.
Just copy/pate the WaPo title and enter it into google,I've found their complete articles this way many times, some sites have just a few paragraphs then the WaPo link.

Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 523362
11-08-2019 02:47 AM

 




Post: #36
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
Isabella  Wrote: (11-07-2019 08:21 PM)
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ  Wrote: (11-07-2019 08:01 PM)

Democrats say Bolton’s refusal to show up will become part of the evidence of Trump’s attempt to obstruct Congress.

"John R. Bolton, President Trump’s former national security adviser, did not show up Thursday for a voluntary interview as part of the House impeachment inquiry, but Democratic investigators said they would not subpoena him and would instead use his refusal to appear as evidence of Mr. Trump’s attempt to obstruct Congress.

Mr. Bolton, who regularly interacted with Mr. Trump directly as his top national security aide in the White House, would have been one of the most high-profile advisers to testify in the impeachment inquiry. Several other witnesses have described Mr. Bolton as being angry about the idea of holding up military aid to Ukraine in exchange for a demand that the country open an investigation into the president’s political rivals.

But an official with the House Intelligence Committee said Mr. Bolton’s lawyer had told them that the former national security adviser would file a lawsuit in federal court if he was subpoenaed, a legal challenge that would most likely take months to resolve. The official said that the committee did not want to allow the Trump administration to “play rope-a-dope with us” in the courts and slow down their inquiry.

In the first month of the impeachment investigation, Democrats made headway through the testimony of National Security Council officials and State Department diplomats who were involved in Ukraine policy. But unlike Mr. Bolton, those officials infrequently interacted with Mr. Trump.


A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Much of that testimony painted a damning picture of a president outsourcing America’s foreign policy to his personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, but gave little insight into what Mr. Trump said behind closed doors. Some Democrats and impeachment experts believe that if Senate Republicans are going to turn on Mr. Trump and convict him at an impeachment trial, investigators will need to develop new evidence about Mr. Trump’s involvement.

Had the investigators decided to compel Mr. Bolton’s testimony with a subpoena, it probably would have set off a lengthy court battle similar to one initiated by Charles M. Kupperman, Mr. Bolton’s deputy, who filed a lawsuit last month when faced with a subpoena from the committee and an order from Mr. Trump to not cooperate with investigators. On Wednesday, House Democrats pulled their subpoena of Mr. Kupperman out of concern that the litigation would slow down the impeachment investigation."


Mr. Kupperman’s lawyer, Charles J. Cooper, also represents Mr. Bolton."

So they purposely are not gonna use a subpoena just so they can use it as a excuse to blame trump for bolton not showing up..wtf kinda logic is this..that's shady as hell
Quote this message in a reply
Isabella
Registered User
User ID: 421592
11-08-2019 03:06 AM

Posts: 15,502




Post: #37
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
LoP Guest  Wrote: (11-08-2019 02:47 AM)
Isabella  Wrote: (11-07-2019 08:21 PM)
Democrats say Bolton’s refusal to show up will become part of the evidence of Trump’s attempt to obstruct Congress.

"John R. Bolton, President Trump’s former national security adviser, did not show up Thursday for a voluntary interview as part of the House impeachment inquiry, but Democratic investigators said they would not subpoena him and would instead use his refusal to appear as evidence of Mr. Trump’s attempt to obstruct Congress.

Mr. Bolton, who regularly interacted with Mr. Trump directly as his top national security aide in the White House, would have been one of the most high-profile advisers to testify in the impeachment inquiry. Several other witnesses have described Mr. Bolton as being angry about the idea of holding up military aid to Ukraine in exchange for a demand that the country open an investigation into the president’s political rivals.

But an official with the House Intelligence Committee said Mr. Bolton’s lawyer had told them that the former national security adviser would file a lawsuit in federal court if he was subpoenaed, a legal challenge that would most likely take months to resolve. The official said that the committee did not want to allow the Trump administration to “play rope-a-dope with us” in the courts and slow down their inquiry.

In the first month of the impeachment investigation, Democrats made headway through the testimony of National Security Council officials and State Department diplomats who were involved in Ukraine policy. But unlike Mr. Bolton, those officials infrequently interacted with Mr. Trump.


A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Much of that testimony painted a damning picture of a president outsourcing America’s foreign policy to his personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, but gave little insight into what Mr. Trump said behind closed doors. Some Democrats and impeachment experts believe that if Senate Republicans are going to turn on Mr. Trump and convict him at an impeachment trial, investigators will need to develop new evidence about Mr. Trump’s involvement.

Had the investigators decided to compel Mr. Bolton’s testimony with a subpoena, it probably would have set off a lengthy court battle similar to one initiated by Charles M. Kupperman, Mr. Bolton’s deputy, who filed a lawsuit last month when faced with a subpoena from the committee and an order from Mr. Trump to not cooperate with investigators. On Wednesday, House Democrats pulled their subpoena of Mr. Kupperman out of concern that the litigation would slow down the impeachment investigation."


Mr. Kupperman’s lawyer, Charles J. Cooper, also represents Mr. Bolton."

So they purposely are not gonna use a subpoena just so they can use it as a excuse to blame trump for bolton not showing up..wtf kinda logic is this..that's shady as hell

Quite simple, it's called "common sense "logic on why they won't even bother now to subpoena Bolton like they did with his aide Kupperman who filed the lawsuit which is what Bolton planned on also doing.


"But an official with the House Intelligence Committee said Mr. Bolton’s lawyer had told them that the former national security adviser would file a lawsuit in federal court if he was subpoenaed, a legal challenge that would most likely take months to resolve. The official said that the committee did not want to allow the Trump administration to “play rope-a-dope with us” in the courts and slow down their inquiry."

Quote this message in a reply
JIF
I know what's across the water
User ID: 455396
11-08-2019 03:09 AM

Posts: 1,040




Post: #38
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
He Man  Wrote: (11-07-2019 06:59 PM)
I assume that means as soon as he gets a subpoena from the house. But not perfectly clear on that.

This is not going to be good for Trump at all! chuckle

John Bolton ‘willing to defy the White House’ and testify in impeachment inquiry: report

"Former national security adviser John Bolton is reportedly “willing to defy” the Trump White House and serve as a witness in the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry.

The Washington Post, citing “people familiar with [Bolton’s] views,” reports that the former Trump national security adviser is willing to testify in the impeachment probe as long as he is legally cleared to do so."

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/11/john-bo...ry-report/

This all comes down to a case of Self Incrimination of sorts.

As an employee of the Executive Branch, the argument is:

Bolton risks prosecution/penalization for breaking Executive Privilege, which in turn could cost him his Security Clearance.

and

Bolton risks prosecution/penalization for defying a Congressional Subpoena.

It basically becomes a Damn if you do/Damned if you don't scenario, so it has been presented to a Federal Judge to make a Separation of Powers ruling.

I used to doubt psychology until I met so many of you suffering from Apophenia and Pareidolia.
Quote this message in a reply
Isabella
Registered User
User ID: 421592
11-08-2019 04:03 AM

Posts: 15,502




Post: #39
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
northerntomcat  Wrote: (11-07-2019 10:23 PM)
He Man  Wrote: (11-07-2019 10:01 PM)
I think Trump's lawyers would tell him to not foot legal bills like that. Makes him look guilty and adds to obstruction of justice charges.

Most people testifying before Congress have to pay for their own lawyers and the longer they delay the process the more they pay in lawyer's fees. Most want to get it over ASAP, then get on with their lives.

He misappropriates funds all the time as we see here.

Judge orders Trump to pay $2m for misusing charity foundation

A judge in New York orders President Donald Trump to pay $2 million for misusing his charitable foundation, the AP reports.

In December 2018, a second New York judge signed off on a deal to shut down Trump’s personal charity after a lawsuit exposed a “shocking pattern of illegality”.

Trump had used the charity to pay off legal settlements within his business and even to buy a painting of himself to hang in one of his golf clubs.

chuckle I mean you can't make this sh*t up.

The best part:Rofl

"Additionally, his three eldest children - Don Jr., Ivanka and Eric, all of whom sat on the board of the Donald J. Trump Foundation - agreed to undergo mandatory 'training on the duties of officers and directors of charities so that they cannot allow the illegal activity they oversaw at the Trump Foundation to take place again,' the attorney general's office said."Rofl

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...ation.html

Quote this message in a reply
Isabella
Registered User
User ID: 421592
11-08-2019 04:20 AM

Posts: 15,502




Post: #40
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
JIF  Wrote: (11-08-2019 03:09 AM)
He Man  Wrote: (11-07-2019 06:59 PM)
I assume that means as soon as he gets a subpoena from the house. But not perfectly clear on that.

This is not going to be good for Trump at all! chuckle

John Bolton ‘willing to defy the White House’ and testify in impeachment inquiry: report

"Former national security adviser John Bolton is reportedly “willing to defy” the Trump White House and serve as a witness in the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry.

The Washington Post, citing “people familiar with [Bolton’s] views,” reports that the former Trump national security adviser is willing to testify in the impeachment probe as long as he is legally cleared to do so."

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/11/john-bo...ry-report/

This all comes down to a case of Self Incrimination of sorts.

As an employee of the Executive Branch, the argument is:

Bolton risks prosecution/penalization for breaking Executive Privilege, which in turn could cost him his Security Clearance.

and

Bolton risks prosecution/penalization for defying a Congressional Subpoena.

It basically becomes a Damn if you do/Damned if you don't scenario, so it has been presented to a Federal Judge to make a Separation of Powers ruling.


About that Security Clearance of Boltons.
?

John Bolton may have been denied a White House security clearance
April 1, 2019

"President Trump may have let his questionable security practices slip beyond the family.

On Monday, House Democrats said a whistleblower told them at least 25 people headed for the Trump White House had been denied security clearances, but somehow ended up with clearances anyway.

The House Oversight and Reform Committee is now investigating those alleged security sidesteppers ] and National Security Adviser John Bolton is on the list, The New York Times reports.

Trump has been criticized for what some call seemingly lax security standards since early in his presidency. His son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has come under the most scrutiny, with a January NBC News report saying Kushner was denied clearance after an FBI background check, but that Trump's personnel security head granted Kushner top secret access anyway. Ivanka Trump, the president's daughter and senior adviser who's married to Kushner, faced similar skepticism.

After hearing whistleblower Tricia Newbold's account last month, House Oversight Committee Chair Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) requested summaries of just how Kushner, Ivanka Trump, and Bolton got their clearances. Newbold said she or someone else in the White House's Personnel Security Office denied clearances for at least two people who are now Trump "senior officials," per the Times. Kushner appears to be at least one of the officials, but the other, who was denied for "possible foreign influence," is unclear."

more:
https://theweek.com/speedreads/832547/jo...-clearance

Quote this message in a reply
JIF
I know what's across the water
User ID: 455396
11-08-2019 04:43 AM

Posts: 1,040




Post: #41
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
Isabella  Wrote: (11-08-2019 04:20 AM)
JIF  Wrote: (11-08-2019 03:09 AM)
This all comes down to a case of Self Incrimination of sorts.

As an employee of the Executive Branch, the argument is:

Bolton risks prosecution/penalization for breaking Executive Privilege, which in turn could cost him his Security Clearance.

and

Bolton risks prosecution/penalization for defying a Congressional Subpoena.

It basically becomes a Damn if you do/Damned if you don't scenario, so it has been presented to a Federal Judge to make a Separation of Powers ruling.


About that Security Clearance of Boltons.
?

John Bolton may have been denied a White House security clearance
April 1, 2019

"President Trump may have let his questionable security practices slip beyond the family.

On Monday, House Democrats said a whistleblower told them at least 25 people headed for the Trump White House had been denied security clearances, but somehow ended up with clearances anyway.

The House Oversight and Reform Committee is now investigating those alleged security sidesteppers ] and National Security Adviser John Bolton is on the list, The New York Times reports.

Trump has been criticized for what some call seemingly lax security standards since early in his presidency. His son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has come under the most scrutiny, with a January NBC News report saying Kushner was denied clearance after an FBI background check, but that Trump's personnel security head granted Kushner top secret access anyway. Ivanka Trump, the president's daughter and senior adviser who's married to Kushner, faced similar skepticism.

After hearing whistleblower Tricia Newbold's account last month, House Oversight Committee Chair Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) requested summaries of just how Kushner, Ivanka Trump, and Bolton got their clearances. Newbold said she or someone else in the White House's Personnel Security Office denied clearances for at least two people who are now Trump "senior officials," per the Times. Kushner appears to be at least one of the officials, but the other, who was denied for "possible foreign influence," is unclear."

more:
https://theweek.com/speedreads/832547/jo...-clearance

I am not agreeing with it.

However, considering everything POTUS has done has been surrounded with threats of legal retaliation, it is understandable.

It is really easy to avoid retaliation when your defense can be: I didn't want to testify...but I was ordered to do so by a Federal Judge, and my hands were tied.

Quote:The White House staff NDA appears to impose penalties for any unauthorized revelation of confidential information, defined as “all nonpublic information I learn of or gain access to in the course of my official duties.”

Trump has attempted to put his personal reputation, and that of his family above the law, and the country, which I personally view as a violation of his oath of office.

US Courts have been consistent in maintaining that NDAs cannot prevent an employee from reporting illegal conduct and aiding agency investigations. The National Labor Relations Board holds that non-disparagement clauses, as well as clauses that attempt to prevent employees from discussing with their co-workers the terms and conditions of their job, conflict with the rights of workers to engage in concerted activity.

Which essentially is what Bolton case is attempting to do.

In a more simplistic explanation, Trump is using NDA's to engage in witness tampering with the unspoken threat that speaking against Trump will result in civil litigation.

I used to doubt psychology until I met so many of you suffering from Apophenia and Pareidolia.
Quote this message in a reply
Isabella
Registered User
User ID: 421592
11-08-2019 05:03 AM

Posts: 15,502




Post: #42
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
He Man  Wrote: (11-07-2019 10:27 PM)
northerntomcat  Wrote: (11-07-2019 10:23 PM)
He misappropriates funds all the time as we see here.

Judge orders Trump to pay $2m for misusing charity foundation

A judge in New York orders President Donald Trump to pay $2 million for misusing his charitable foundation, the AP reports.

In December 2018, a second New York judge signed off on a deal to shut down Trump’s personal charity after a lawsuit exposed a “shocking pattern of illegality”.

Trump had used the charity to pay off legal settlements within his business and even to buy a painting of himself to hang in one of his golf clubs.

chuckle I mean you can't make this sh*t up.

Jhikpghf

And the idiots keeps supporting his criminality corruptions conman schemes etc. etc. Scream1

Just checked Trump's Twitter and so far he's been mum on Roger Stone's trial...chuckle
He just posted this.
WTF? 19 million from the Trumps?Rofl

[Image: EIzygZtWwAA4pN3.jpg]

Quote this message in a reply
Isabella
Registered User
User ID: 421592
11-08-2019 05:22 AM

Posts: 15,502




Post: #43
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
JIF  Wrote: (11-08-2019 04:43 AM)
Isabella  Wrote: (11-08-2019 04:20 AM)
About that Security Clearance of Boltons.
?

John Bolton may have been denied a White House security clearance
April 1, 2019

"President Trump may have let his questionable security practices slip beyond the family.

On Monday, House Democrats said a whistleblower told them at least 25 people headed for the Trump White House had been denied security clearances, but somehow ended up with clearances anyway.

The House Oversight and Reform Committee is now investigating those alleged security sidesteppers ] and National Security Adviser John Bolton is on the list, The New York Times reports.

Trump has been criticized for what some call seemingly lax security standards since early in his presidency. His son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has come under the most scrutiny, with a January NBC News report saying Kushner was denied clearance after an FBI background check, but that Trump's personnel security head granted Kushner top secret access anyway. Ivanka Trump, the president's daughter and senior adviser who's married to Kushner, faced similar skepticism.

After hearing whistleblower Tricia Newbold's account last month, House Oversight Committee Chair Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) requested summaries of just how Kushner, Ivanka Trump, and Bolton got their clearances. Newbold said she or someone else in the White House's Personnel Security Office denied clearances for at least two people who are now Trump "senior officials," per the Times. Kushner appears to be at least one of the officials, but the other, who was denied for "possible foreign influence," is unclear."

more:
https://theweek.com/speedreads/832547/jo...-clearance

I am not agreeing with it.

However, considering everything POTUS has done has been surrounded with threats of legal retaliation, it is understandable.

It is really easy to avoid retaliation when your defense can be: I didn't want to testify...but I was ordered to do so by a Federal Judge, and my hands were tied.

Quote:The White House staff NDA appears to impose penalties for any unauthorized revelation of confidential information, defined as “all nonpublic information I learn of or gain access to in the course of my official duties.”

Trump has attempted to put his personal reputation, and that of his family above the law, and the country, which I personally view as a violation of his oath of office.

US Courts have been consistent in maintaining that NDAs cannot prevent an employee from reporting illegal conduct and aiding agency investigations. The National Labor Relations Board holds that non-disparagement clauses, as well as clauses that attempt to prevent employees from discussing with their co-workers the terms and conditions of their job, conflict with the rights of workers to engage in concerted activity.

Which essentially is what Bolton case is attempting to do.

In a more simplistic explanation, Trump is using NDA's to engage in witness tampering with the unspoken threat that speaking against Trump will result in civil litigation.

You're right and the consequences can destroy a long career and leave you broken and broke.
Putting aside the delaying accusations by Democrats even if the court rule in favor of Congress and an appeal court too the witness could always pull a Cory Lewandowski.

I'm curious on the status of Bolton's Security Clearance and if it was denied and then given to him by Trump would it be valid now that he's out of the Trump administration?

Quote this message in a reply
Isabella
Registered User
User ID: 421592
11-08-2019 05:47 AM

Posts: 15,502




Post: #44
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
[Image: EIzygZtWwAA4pN3.jpg]
[/quote]




"HUMAN SCUM" in the WHITE HOUSE

Trump Fined $2 Million For Diverting Money From Vets Fundraiser to His Campaign

"A judge ordered President Trump to pay $2 million to a group of charities on Thursday, ruling that the president had broken the law by directing the proceeds from an event advertised as benefiting veterans to his presidential campaign instead.


The lawsuit stems from the wild days of the 2016 Republican primary. Because of a feud he maintained with Fox News at the time, Trump decided to skip a debate hosted by the network just before the Iowa caucuses in January 2016, and hold his own, competing event instead

— a televised fundraiser for veterans. Shockingly enough, it turned out the event wasn’t quite on the level. Rather than having the foundation run the event and direct all proceeds to the charities, as promised, Trump did something quite different. As New York State Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla put it in her decision on Thursday:

“Mr. Trump’s fiduciary duty breaches included allowing his campaign to orchestrate the Fundraiser, allowing his campaign, instead of the Foundation, to direct distribution of the Funds, and using the Fundraiser and distribution of the Funds to further Mr. Trump’s political campaign.”



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/...ar-BBWqP3w

(This post was last modified: 11-08-2019 05:48 AM by Isabella.) Quote this message in a reply
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ
☇☇Vocem sine nomine audivit!☇☇
User ID: 350320
11-08-2019 06:04 AM

Posts: 35,911




Post: #45
RE: Bolton willing to testify at impeachment hearing as soon as he is legally cleared
Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement









Contact UsConspiracy Forum. No reg. required! Return to TopReturn to ContentRSS Syndication