After months of the Dems behaving as if John Bolton’s testimony would have somehow been the nail-in-the-coffin in Trump’s impeachment trial, the former national security adviser finally broke silence to disabuse people of that notion.
Bolton at Vanderbilt University this week, and said that impeachment efforts against President Trump were “grossly partisan,” while clarifying that his testimony wouldn’t have altered the president’s acquittal in the Senate.
“Bolton contended that the House ‘committed impeachment malpractice,’ drawing some grumbling from the audience, saying ‘the process drove Republicans who might have voted for impeachment away because it was so partisan,’” reports the Associated Press.
Prior to the Senate impeachment trial, The New York Times reported on a leaked manuscript of Bolton’s book about his time working in the Trump administration. In the book, Bolton reportedly alleged that President Trump told him to freeze the $391 million in military aid to Ukraine until officials agreed to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden’s corruption and 2016 election meddling, as reported by the Daily Wire.
The leak prompted Senate Dems to demand that Bolton be called to testify in the impeachment, which Republicans blocked from happening. Though Bolton said he didn’t expect to have his testimony stopped, he ultimately believed it would have made no difference.
“People can argue about what I should have said and what I should have done,” Bolton said. “I would bet you a dollar right here and now, my testimony would have made no difference to the ultimate outcome.”
Bolton was appearing with Susan Rice, former Obama national security adviser, who said that her own book was subject to pre-clearance by the White House, adding nothing caused her “to refuse to share information with Congress or the public that I thought was of national import.”
“I can’t imagine withholding my testimony, with or without a subpoena,” Rice said. “I also can’t imagine, frankly, in the absence of being able to provide that information directly to Congress, not having exercised my First Amendment right to speak publicly at a time when my testimony or my experience would be relevant.”