NYT : Bolton Book Alleges Trump Lawyer Was In Room When Trump Asked Bolton To Pave Way For Giuliani Activity In Ukraine

By:  john-russell  •  2 months ago  •  21 comments

NYT :  Bolton Book Alleges Trump Lawyer Was In Room When Trump Asked Bolton To Pave Way For Giuliani Activity In Ukraine
More than two months before he asked Ukraine’s president to investigate his political opponents, President Trump directed John R. Bolton, then his national security adviser, to help with his pressure campaign to extract damaging information on Democrats from Ukrainian officials, according to an unpublished manuscript by Mr. Bolton.

New information published today by the NYT indicates that John Bolton's book contains passages asserting that, in May 2019, President Trump instructed John Bolton to phone Ukrainian president Zelensky and introduce him to Trump's desire that Zelensky meet with Giuliani. 

Trump has consistently denied that he ever knew what Giuliani was doing in Ukraine. 

The new information is also noteworthy because it alleges that Pat Cipollone, Trump's lead defense lawyer at the impeachment, was present at the discussion where Trump gave Bolton these instructions. 

Bolton says he disregarded Trump's orders and never made the phone call to Zelensky. 


jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
1  author  JohnRussell    2 months ago

The New York Times
Maggie HabermanMichael S. Schmidt
By Maggie Haberman and Michael S. Schmidt
Jan. 31, 2020, 12:00 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON — More than two months before he asked Ukraine’s president to investigate his political opponents, President Trump directed John R. Bolton, then his national security adviser, to help with his pressure campaign to extract damaging information on Democrats from Ukrainian officials, according to an unpublished manuscript by Mr. Bolton.

Mr. Trump gave the instruction, Mr. Bolton wrote, during an Oval Office conversation in early May that included the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, the president’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani and the White House counsel, Pat A. Cipollone, who is now leading the president’s impeachment defense.

Mr. Trump told Mr. Bolton to call Volodymyr Zelensky, who had recently won election as president of Ukraine, to ensure Mr. Zelensky would meet with Mr. Giuliani, who was planning a trip to Ukraine to discuss the investigations that the president sought, in Mr. Bolton’s account. Mr. Bolton never made the call, he wrote.

The previously undisclosed directive that Mr. Bolton describes would be the earliest known instance of Mr. Trump seeking to harness the power of the United States government to advance his pressure campaign against Ukraine, as he later did on the July call with Mr. Zelensky that triggered a whistle-blower complaint and impeachment proceedings. House Democrats have accused him of abusing his authority and are arguing their case before senators in the impeachment trial of Mr. Trump, whose lawyers have said he did nothing wrong.

The account in Mr. Bolton’s manuscript portrays the most senior White House advisers as early witnesses in the effort that they have sought to distance the president from. And disclosure of the meeting underscores the kind of information Democrats were looking for in seeking testimony from his top advisers in their impeachment investigation, including Mr. Bolton and Mr. Mulvaney, only to be blocked by the White House.

In a brief interview, Mr. Giuliani denied that the conversation took place and said those discussions with the president were always kept separate. He was adamant that Mr. Cipollone and Mr. Mulvaney were never involved in meetings related to Ukraine.

“It is absolutely, categorically untrue,” he said.

Neither Mr. Bolton nor a representative for Mr. Mulvaney responded to requests for comment. A White House spokesman did not respond to requests for comment.

Mr. Bolton described the roughly 10-minute conversation in drafts of his book, a memoir of his time as national security adviser that is to go on sale in March. Over several pages, Mr. Bolton laid out Mr. Trump’s fixation on Ukraine and the president’s belief, based on a mix of scattershot events, assertions and outright conspiracy theories, that Ukraine tried to undermine his chances of winning the presidency in 2016.

As he began to realize the extent and aims of the pressure campaign, Mr. Bolton began to object, he wrote in the book, affirming the testimony of a former National Security Council aide, Fiona Hill, who had said that Mr. Bolton warned that Mr. Giuliani was “a hand grenade who’s going to blow everybody up.”

Mr. Trump also repeatedly made national security decisions contrary to American interests, Mr. Bolton wrote, describing a pervasive sense of alarm among top advisers about the president’s choices. Mr. Bolton expressed concern to others in the administration that the president was effectively granting favors to autocratic leaders like Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey and Xi Jinping of China.

The New York Times reported this week on another revelation from Mr. Bolton’s book draft: that Mr. Trump told him in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter. That account undercuts a key element of the White House impeachment defense — that the aid holdup was separate from his requests for inquiries. Mr. Trump has denied the conversation took place.

Since that Times article, people who have reviewed the draft have further described its contents, including details of the May meeting. Mr. Bolton’s manuscript was sent to the White House for a standard review process in late December.

Its revelations galvanized the debate over whether to call witnesses in the impeachment trial, but late on Thursday, Republicans appeared to have secured enough votes to keep any new testimony out of Mr. Trump’s trial and to move toward a quick acquittal in the third presidential impeachment trial in American history.

The White House has sought to block the release of the book, contending that it contains classified information. The government reviews books by former officials who had access to secrets so they can excise the manuscripts of any classified information. Officials including Mr. Trump have described Mr. Bolton, who was often at odds with Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Mulvaney, as a disgruntled former official with an ax to grind.

Mr. Bolton has angered Democrats — and some Republicans — for remaining quiet during the House investigation, then announcing that he would comply with any subpoena to testify in the Senate and signaling that he is eager to share his story. Administration officials should “feel they’re able to speak their minds without retribution,” he said at a closed-door lunch in Austin, Texas, on Thursday, the NBC affiliate KXAN reported, citing unnamed sources.

“The idea that somehow testifying to what you think is true is destructive to the system of government we have — I think, is very nearly the reverse, the exact reverse of the truth,” Mr. Bolton added.

The Oval Office conversation that Mr. Bolton described came as the president and Mr. Giuliani were increasingly focusing on pushing the Ukrainian government to commit to investigations that could help Mr. Trump politically. At various points, Mr. Trump, Mr. Giuliani and their associates pressed Ukrainian officials under Mr. Zelensky and his predecessor to provide potentially damaging information on the president’s rivals, including Mr. Biden and Ukrainians who Mr. Trump’s allies believed tried to help Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Mr. Giuliani had just successfully campaigned to have the American ambassador to Ukraine, Marie L. Yovanovitch, recalled, convinced that she was part of an effort to protect Mr. Trump’s political rivals from scrutiny. Mr. Giuliani had argued she was impeding the investigations.

At the time of the Oval Office conversation Mr. Bolton wrote about, Mr. Giuliani was planning a trip to Kyiv to push the incoming government to commit to the investigations. Mr. Giuliani asserted that the president had been wronged by the Justice Department’s Russia investigation and told associates that the inquiry could be partly discredited by proving that parts of it originated with suspect documents produced and disseminated in Ukraine to undermine his onetime campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, whose work in Ukraine became a central focus of the Russia inquiry.

Mr. Giuliani, a private consultant with a range of international clients, had said none were involved in the Ukraine effort, Mr. Bolton wrote, adding that he was skeptical and wanted to avoid involvement. At the time, Mr. Giuliani was working closely with two Soviet-born businessmen from Florida, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, to carry out the shadow Ukraine effort.

After pushing out Ms. Yovanovitch, Mr. Giulian turned his attention to other American diplomats responsible for Ukraine policy. During the Oval Office conversation, he also mentioned a State Department official with the last name of Kent, whom Mr. Bolton wrote he did not know. Mr. Giuliani said he was hostile to Mr. Trump and sympathetic to George Soros, the billionaire philanthropist who has long been a target of the far right.

George P. Kent, a top State Department official who oversees Ukraine policy, went on to be a key witness in House Democrats’ impeachment investigation, testifying that claims by Mr. Giuliani’s allies of Mr. Soros’ wide influence in Ukraine were used to smear Ms. Yovanovitch.

Mr. Bolton left the Oval Office after 10 minutes and returned to his office, he wrote. Shortly after, two aides came into his office, saying Mr. Trump had sent them out of a separate meeting on trade to ask about Mr. Kent, Mr. Bolton wrote.

The conversation that Mr. Bolton describes was separate from another one that Mr. Bolton wrote about, where he observed Mr. Mulvaney and Mr. Trump talking on the phone with Mr. Giuliani about Ukraine matters. Mr. Mulvaney has told associates he would leave the room when Mr. Trump and Mr. Giuliani were talking to preserve their attorney-client privilege, and his lawyer said earlier this week that Mr. Mulvaney was never in meetings with Mr. Giuliani and has “no recollection” of the first discussion.

Around the time of the May discussion, The Times revealed Mr. Giuliani’s efforts and his planned trip to Ukraine. Mr. Giuliani said at the time that Mr. Trump was aware of his efforts in Ukraine, but said nothing else about any involvement of Mr. Trump or other members of the administration. The disclosure created consternation in the White House and Mr. Giuliani canceled his trip.

A day after the Times article was published, Mr. Giuliani wrote a letter to Mr. Zelensky, saying he was representing Mr. Trump as a “private citizen” and, with Mr. Trump’s “knowledge and consent,” hoped to arrange a meeting with Mr. Zelensky in the ensuing days. That letter was among the evidence admitted during the House impeachment inquiry.

1.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

c'mon...obviously no need to hear from Bolton.

Whatever could he really add, to give context , First Hand context, to what Trump and one of his lead attorneys, and cabinet members, discussed two months prior to his infamous July 'perfect' phone call.

We could have this testimoney by Bolton, all under oath, right now if the GOPussies would/could prove they had balls.

but,   probably they won't.

this way, they can try and keep it a he said, but we said.

let's get all of these LYING scumbags under oath, and see which one LIES THE LEAST !

1.2  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

Alexander's not interested. Now, Murkowski stood up. And the millions of cheerleaders who changed the channel don't give a hoot. Today's Doomsday, tomorrow's still gonna be Saturday.

Vic Eldred
1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago
according to an unpublished manuscript by Mr. Bolton.

Provided by whom? Who is leaking this on the final day of the trial?  The manuscript is in the hands of the NSC. Can't they perform their duty to the Constitution?

Who are these Intelligence officials doing all this leaking?


1.3.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3    2 months ago

Vanna White is in on your conspiracy too? 

Vic Eldred
1.3.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.1    2 months ago

Is this what they mean by "throw the book at 'em"?

1.3.3  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.2    2 months ago
Is this what they mean by "throw the book at 'em"?

Waiting for the chants to just burn 'em. It's coming...

Vic Eldred
1.3.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  r.t..b... @1.3.3    2 months ago

That would be coming from the progressives who hate free speech and free thought

1.3.5  WallyW  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.4    2 months ago

Wait until all the spontaneous planned demonstrations begin once the acquittal vote is in

Vic Eldred
1.3.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  WallyW @1.3.5    2 months ago

Yup, that too

Right now the dems are plotting:

"Democratic senators will put forth two motions that will force a debate on the two big looming votes -- witnesses and the articles of impeachment -- which would automatically extend the time of the trial. They propose that the debate be out in the open, rather than in a closed session.

The motions would need the support of 51 senators to pass."


I smell Romney

Don't forget the prospect of the President having a State of the Union Address before being exonerated. Any decent person has to find these progressives politicians repulsive.

Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1.3.7  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.4    2 months ago
That would be coming from the progressives who hate free speech and free thought

You're progressive?  Whooda thunkit?

Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1.3.8  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.4    2 months ago


1.3.9  r.t..b...  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.3.8    2 months ago


Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1.3.10  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  r.t..b... @1.3.9    2 months ago

Thank you, and backatchya.

I do, however, tend to get my knickers in a twist too quickly.  That can be seen in my sassy comments of late.  I'm thinking of giving them up for Lent.  My knickers, not my comments.

1.3.11  r.t..b...  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.3.10    2 months ago
giving them up for Lent.  My knickers

A bit of fresh air never hurts...

...butt keep the commentary as fresh as necessary in these dank and fetid environs. Enjoy the remainder of your weekend, sister. 

1.4  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 months ago

OMG!  Another effen "bombshell"!   jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif   jrSmiley_76_smiley_image.gif

2  author  JohnRussell    2 months ago

Pat Cipollone has problems. Ethical problems. 

2.1  MrFrost  replied to  JohnRussell @2    2 months ago
Mr. Cipollone

If he was a fact witness, he will likely be disbarred. He will be going through some things. 

3  author  JohnRussell    2 months ago

MSNBC is reporting an interesting hitch.   The possibility that the final vote on impeachment wont be taken until after the Super Bowl and the State Of The Union address.  Next Wednesday.  Supposedly McConnell has told people this.  Awaiting confirmation. 

3.1  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @3    2 months ago

I 'spect that's a stick in the eye of the Nance for having invited him after announcing impeachment


It Is ME
4  It Is ME    2 months ago

The NYT is a funny sort.

"They", like the Democrats in congress, have this "Drip, Drip, Drip Fetish", just to keep things going for the TDS movement. jrSmiley_42_smiley_image.gif

Funny, how the NYT's are the ONLY ONES to receive supposed "Info" on a book that's still being reviewed by "Government. jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif


Who is online

56 visitors