John Bolton is Now the Unexploded Hand Grenade

(By American Zen's Mike Flannigan, on loan from Ari.)

During the House Impeachment hearings, it had come out from Dr. Fiona Hill that John Bolton, after hearing the latest of Rudy Giuliani's duplicity in Ukraine, blurted out that the "president's" personal lawyer was a "hand grenade who's going to blow everyone up."

    Now, with Bolton's Senate testimony all but assured since McConnell now admits he doesn't have the votes to stop it, Bolton is now, ironically, the human hand grenade.

     And if the White House's past behavior is any indicator, and it infallibly is as behavior never lies, Trump and his flying monkey minions are already savaging the former National Security Advisor over his impending testimony. That can only mean they see him as a threat. Every time a former White House official or insider trots out a book, Trump inevitably sneers that they're liars, they're disgruntled ex-employees, they're just trying to sell a book, yada yada.

     And John Bolton does indeed want to sell a book. It's already been fast-tracked with a March 17 launch date. Thus far, the drafts that have been leaked to the press (obviously by the White House, perhaps even Anonymous, since Bolton is sending the drafts to the White House's National Security Council Office for clearance), contain nothing new about Donald Trump that we didn't already know.

    But if and when Senate Republicans cave to the mounting pressure to make Bolton testify, something they won't have try very hard to bring about as Bolton's said he's ready, willing and able to, that necessarily involves what he'll tell the Senate. Most importantly, it naturally begs the question of what he won't tell it.

     This is what I like to call the "Bob Woodward Syndrome."

     Bob Woodward, former star Watergate reporter, has been with the Washington Post for nearly half a century. On his Wikipedia page, he's still listed, risibly, as "an investigative reporter" and an associate editor with that paper. Yet for many years now, Woodward hasn't been an investigative reporter in any real sense. Still mining his countless contacts within the government that would make Sy Hersh drool with envy, Woodward has an uncanny knack for mining nuggets of what ought to be journalistic gold that, by rights, should go right into the WaPo.

    But Woodward doesn't do that. Instead, he puts them in one or another of an endless stream of books, as he has done since All the President's Men in the Nixon years to 2018's Fear. Woodward sits atop these juicy bits of information that would well serve the American people and Congressional investigators until the book's launch date, often years after they've lost their potency and relevance.

     I can perfectly see John Bolton doing this. The so-called revelations coming out of his book, that Trump withheld military aid on condition they announce an investigation into the Bidens and its own government's (debunked) involvement in meddling with the 2016 elections, are hardly revelatory and had been confirmed by many House witnesses. So the question is not what Bolton will say under oath but what he won't say for fear of denying future readers a reason to buy his upcoming book.

"We'd Like You to Do Us a Favor, Though..."

We've been hearing for months now that in exchange for witness testimony called for by the Democrats, they'll have to negotiate with the Republicans by allowing their witnesses to testify. Since last November, they've wanted Joe Biden, they want Hunter Biden, they want the whistleblower to come forward. Some Republicans, laughably, have even called for impeachment manager and House Intel Chair Adam Schiff himself to testify. 

    This is an impeachment trial. Only witnesses who can substantively add to or refute evidence should be allowed. This isn't nor should it be a hostage or prisoner exchange. Yet, the mainstream media seem to be OK with that, as if complex negotiations in these matters should be expected. In other words, Republicans want, dare I say it, a quid pro quo from Democrats.

     Of course, there's always the danger, especially on the Republican side of the aisle, that allowing Bolton would allow the flood gates to open and more witnesses would eventually come forward. They may look at allowing Bolton's testimony as triggering a safety valve. But if Bolton does testify and provides the damaging information both sides of the aisle expect, the pressure on the Republicans will just be starting.

     Because, after Bolton's testimony, assuming it's as damaging as the advance hype says it'll be, it'll just exert pressure on the Republicans, especially the 22 up for re-election this year, to explain to their non red meat base why they voted to acquit in spite of the overwhelming amount of evidence of Trump's guilt. It'll also tighten Trump's grip on the party whose heads he'd threatened to "put on a pike" if anyone voted to convict.

     Just a few hours ago, in their closing arguments, Trump's legal team of Dewey, Cheatham and Howe argued against the relevance of a Bolton round of testimony, which is a sure sign right there they're scared shitless of it as most people would be if an unexploded hand grenade dropped in their midst. It seems the only Republican who actually wants Bolton's testimony is Trump's erstwhile gadfly, Mitt Romney. If McConnell doesn't have the 51 votes necessary to block Bolton's testimony, you can be sure Romney's stuck his snout in the Big Blue Tent.

     The Senate's entrenched right wingers are all too conscious of the embarrassing goose egg in this so-called impeachment trial. That would be the zero signifying the number of witnesses who'd been allowed to testify this time as opposed to the 3 in the Clinton impeachment, 41 in Andrew Johnson's impeachment. In fact, according to Sen. Tammy Baldwin, in the 15 impeachment trials in US history, every single one had witnesses. Until now.

     It's that gaping vacuum at the testimony table that will literally have Bolton's name on it that's conspicuous, the invisible 8000 pound elephant in the room. But Bolton's testimony, coming from a man who was at Trump's elbow for months, could prove to be a lose-lose situation for the GOP. And, historically, as we'd seen in the '74 midterms and the 2000 general election, an impeachment had cost the GOP dearly in Congress and will surely prove so again this year.