Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
MovieMadness

Why the federal court needs to just allow the John Bolton book release

Recommended Posts

Why the federal court needs to just allow the John Bolton book release

In a hearing to stop former national security adviser John Bolton from releasing his book, an exasperated Judge Royce Lamberth seemed to throw up his hands over demands for an injunction, stating the horse “seems to be out of the barn.” Lamberth is right and wrong. He is right that an injunction makes little sense as the administration did nothing while the book was printed and sent to warehouses and to the media. Lamberth is wrong that there is not a good option because there is. It would be to let Bolton sell the book, let the critics of President Trump purchase it, and let the federal government keep the profits.

The case is tricky because Bolton is in clear violation of his nondisclosure agreement, which includes a provision for approval prior to publication. I have signed such nondisclosure agreements for decades for my national security work and, each time, I still swallow hard in reading the language on review. Moreover, the courts tend to defer to the classification claims of the executive branch. Bolton admits he did not receive approval since he believed, not without reason, that the administration was slowing the process in order to delay the book release before the election.

There is certainly every indication that Bolton did exactly what the White House hoped he would do. The administration did nothing as thousands of copies of “The Room Where It Happened” were printed. So if the book does contain sensitive classified information, it hardly seems credible as intelligence agencies believed the Russians would not dare try to breach the Barnes and Noble warehouse guarded by a single night watchman or, on the other hand, borrow a copy from any journalist in town.

Adding to this mystery, the book actually did pass a classification review, but it was suddenly subjected to a highly irregular secondary review. That duplicative review was performed by the National Security Council senior director for intelligence, Michael Ellis, who had been on the job only two months and declared portions of the book classified. Further, the Justice Department admitted Ellis did not have “original classification authority” until a day after he finished his review of what Bolton wrote.

None of that supports the act of prior restraint of a publisher, even if the court accepts the classification authority. Such prior restraint raises free speech issues, notably if the administration seeks to block the release of a book alleging that the president is unstable and unfit. It is even more problematic when the book is readily available to the media. After all, the day that Lamberth was considering an injunction against the book, there were journalists like John Roberts standing in front of the White House reading from it. No one in the courtroom was unimpeachable, so the solution is to give them all what they richly deserve.

Bolton will get his book out despite violating trust with the president, his nondisclosure agreement, and federal classification laws. For that success, he could lose his profits and even his liberty. By waiting for Bolton to run, the Justice Department gave him just enough rope to hang himself. Given the prior notice of classified content, it could bring a criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act, though such prosecutions are rare and difficult. The real goal would be the profits. It has happened before. Navy Seal Matthew Bissonnette used the pen name Mark Owen to write “No Easy Day” about the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden. He paid the federal government more than $6 million to avoid prosecution.

*************************************************

For many years the Democrats hated John Bolton, calling him many names like war **** and neo-con. But now that he is going to release a book critical of President Trump, guess what? They absolutely love him now. He is a real patriot they say, forgetting how they hated him before. So no matter what happens, if it against President Trump, they support that person 100%. And if Trump walked on water, they would claim he couldn't swim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, MovieMadness said:

Why the federal court needs to just allow the John Bolton book release

In a hearing to stop former national security adviser John Bolton from releasing his book, an exasperated Judge Royce Lamberth seemed to throw up his hands over demands for an injunction, stating the horse “seems to be out of the barn.” Lamberth is right and wrong. He is right that an injunction makes little sense as the administration did nothing while the book was printed and sent to warehouses and to the media. Lamberth is wrong that there is not a good option because there is. It would be to let Bolton sell the book, let the critics of President Trump purchase it, and let the federal government keep the profits.

The case is tricky because Bolton is in clear violation of his nondisclosure agreement, which includes a provision for approval prior to publication. I have signed such nondisclosure agreements for decades for my national security work and, each time, I still swallow hard in reading the language on review. Moreover, the courts tend to defer to the classification claims of the executive branch. Bolton admits he did not receive approval since he believed, not without reason, that the administration was slowing the process in order to delay the book release before the election.

There is certainly every indication that Bolton did exactly what the White House hoped he would do. The administration did nothing as thousands of copies of “The Room Where It Happened” were printed. So if the book does contain sensitive classified information, it hardly seems credible as intelligence agencies believed the Russians would not dare try to breach the Barnes and Noble warehouse guarded by a single night watchman or, on the other hand, borrow a copy from any journalist in town.

Adding to this mystery, the book actually did pass a classification review, but it was suddenly subjected to a highly irregular secondary review. That duplicative review was performed by the National Security Council senior director for intelligence, Michael Ellis, who had been on the job only two months and declared portions of the book classified. Further, the Justice Department admitted Ellis did not have “original classification authority” until a day after he finished his review of what Bolton wrote.

None of that supports the act of prior restraint of a publisher, even if the court accepts the classification authority. Such prior restraint raises free speech issues, notably if the administration seeks to block the release of a book alleging that the president is unstable and unfit. It is even more problematic when the book is readily available to the media. After all, the day that Lamberth was considering an injunction against the book, there were journalists like John Roberts standing in front of the White House reading from it. No one in the courtroom was unimpeachable, so the solution is to give them all what they richly deserve.

Bolton will get his book out despite violating trust with the president, his nondisclosure agreement, and federal classification laws. For that success, he could lose his profits and even his liberty. By waiting for Bolton to run, the Justice Department gave him just enough rope to hang himself. Given the prior notice of classified content, it could bring a criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act, though such prosecutions are rare and difficult. The real goal would be the profits. It has happened before. Navy Seal Matthew Bissonnette used the pen name Mark Owen to write “No Easy Day” about the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden. He paid the federal government more than $6 million to avoid prosecution.

*************************************************

For many years the Democrats hated John Bolton, calling him many names like war **** and neo-con. But now that he is going to release a book critical of President Trump, guess what? They absolutely love him now. He is a real patriot they say, forgetting how they hated him before. So no matter what happens, if it against President Trump, they support that person 100%. And if Trump walked on water, they would claim he couldn't swim.

Please provide a quote from one Democrat politician or Dem here at this forum,  where they say they now love John Bolton.   

You can't.   

Instead you just don't wish to admit that it is conservatives like Rush and Hannity etc..  that used to LOVE bomb-bomb-Iran Bolton and now don't since,   like so many other conservatives that were part of Trump's corrupt administration,  he is exposing Trump for what he is;  an incompetence,   only-cares-about-himself,   serial liar.      

PS:  Most Dems I know still hate Bolton because he didn't testify when the House was holding the impeachment hearings  (I disagree with them here, since it was Pelosi that didn't wish to call him, since Trump would have blocked Bolton from appearing and that would have delayed the impeachment).

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MovieMadness said:

 

*************************************************

For many years the Democrats hated John Bolton, calling him many names like war **** and neo-con. But now that he is going to release a book critical of President Trump, guess what? They absolutely love him now. He is a real patriot they say, forgetting how they hated him before. So no matter what happens, if it against President Trump, they support that person 100%. And if Trump walked on water, they would claim he couldn't swim.

Wrong.

And BTW, are you of the belief that Trump can walk on water?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John Bolton now a 'hero' to Democrats

Money, ego, revenge and the seduction of being a media darling is pretty powerful stuff, and, John Bolton is proving he's not immune.

Former National Security Council adviser Bolton was once the "boogeyman" of foreign policy for the left, someone whom they considered ruthless. Indeed, Bolton was once described by the New York Times editorial board as "dangerous.” The New Yorker called him a "warmonger," and Vox labeled him a "hawk" (which is not a compliment from Vox.)

Suddenly, the “boogeyman” is now a “hero” to the left, as a manuscript for his new book got leaked to the Times, and his publisher followed the leak with pre-order book sales on Amazon (convenient timing, of course.)

"We ought to not only have John Bolton testify, but we ought to see what he wrote down in his notes at the time," Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said.

Then, you have folks in the liberal media saying Bolton’s revelation is a "bombshell" and "game over" for President Trump. They all want Bolton to be called as a witness, and even some key Republican senators, like Susan Collins from Maine, are considering it.

The Democrats are proving how disingenuous this entire ordeal, this sham impeachment, really is. It’s about stripping away the votes of 63 million Americans. It's not about the issue at hand. They don't care two-bits about Ukraine. Heck, President Obama's administration never even provided Ukraine with the financial support it needed. Obama's administration gave Ukraine blankets while Vladimir Putin took over Crimea.

************************************************

This was written in January, and he was already a hero to Democrats back then.  I know the truth stings, but it's a healthy thing.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You continue to be wrong.  While Dems are happy Bolton exposes Trump’s incompetence and  corruption, they continue to loathe his neo-con tendencies, and feel he is no patriot.  He should have testified to Congress re. Trump’s impeachable crimes, but wouldn’t do in in the House, and the GOP senators wanted to hear nothing from him.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MovieMadness said:

John Bolton now a 'hero' to Democrats

Money, ego, revenge and the seduction of being a media darling is pretty powerful stuff, and, John Bolton is proving he's not immune.

Former National Security Council adviser Bolton was once the "boogeyman" of foreign policy for the left, someone whom they considered ruthless. Indeed, Bolton was once described by the New York Times editorial board as "dangerous.” The New Yorker called him a "warmonger," and Vox labeled him a "hawk" (which is not a compliment from Vox.)

Suddenly, the “boogeyman” is now a “hero” to the left, as a manuscript for his new book got leaked to the Times, and his publisher followed the leak with pre-order book sales on Amazon (convenient timing, of course.)

"We ought to not only have John Bolton testify, but we ought to see what he wrote down in his notes at the time," Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said.

Then, you have folks in the liberal media saying Bolton’s revelation is a "bombshell" and "game over" for President Trump. They all want Bolton to be called as a witness, and even some key Republican senators, like Susan Collins from Maine, are considering it.

The Democrats are proving how disingenuous this entire ordeal, this sham impeachment, really is. It’s about stripping away the votes of 63 million Americans. It's not about the issue at hand. They don't care two-bits about Ukraine. Heck, President Obama's administration never even provided Ukraine with the financial support it needed. Obama's administration gave Ukraine blankets while Vladimir Putin took over Crimea.

************************************************

This was written in January, and he was already a hero to Democrats back then.  I know the truth stings, but it's a healthy thing.

Nothing that you posted indicates Dem politicians now love Bolton or view him as a hero.    The only comment by a Dem pol is this one by Schiff:

"We ought to not only have John Bolton testify, but we ought to see what he wrote down in his notes at the time,".

Anyhow,   why would this so called  "truth" sting any Dem or Trump hater?       E.g.  Ok it is the truth;  We love Bolton now.    BFD?   

That doesn't change anything.     AGAIN:  another former well known conservative,   and former member of the Trump admin is saying Trump is a clown and serial liar.  

THAT isn't an opinion (like your so-called "truth"),  but a fact!       I know the truth stings!   (Ha ha).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Won't matter.............IT'S OUT.........

 
 

(THREAD) I'm reading John Bolton's book The Room Where It Happened, and in this thread I'll tell you a lot about it so you won't have to buy or read it.

I'll also discuss the larger problems with coverage of Trump that the book's content raises. I hope you'll read on ...........

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1274843414778073094

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr6666 said:

Won't matter.............IT'S OUT.........

 
 

(THREAD) I'm reading John Bolton's book The Room Where It Happened, and in this thread I'll tell you a lot about it so you won't have to buy or read it.

I'll also discuss the larger problems with coverage of Trump that the book's content raises. I hope you'll read on ...........

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1274843414778073094

:rolleyes:

Well I skimmed over the first 40 points that Seth made about the Bolton book--

And a few things do stand out--

*1) Bolton is indeed the narcissistic **** that we always knew he was.....

2) Bolton is the Machiavellian warmonger that we always knew he was ... 

3) Bolton's  belligerent tendencies are dangerous because he is extremely intelligent, dedicated to his principles and well-organized---yeah, what else is new.....

4) Bolton gives evidence and credence to the fact that trump is indeed a racist and a misogynist-- nothing new here.....

5) Jared Kushner is a dimwit idiot--really nothing new there either ... 

Honorable Mention

Bolton was extremely jealous of Rex Tillerson and Pompeo, since he wanted to be Secretary of State, so he tries to make them look particularly bad.

The best he can do with Pompeo is to out him, saying something similar to what Tillerson had said about trump.

But instead of comparing trump to a moron, like Tillerson said--

 Bolton claims Pompeo handed him a note during the 2018 Singapore meeting with

North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un-

Writing that:

"trump was so full of ****". --

Well, there's certainly nothing new about that..... LMREO

 

*Bolton is what he's always been-

He's so consistent and straightforward in his opinions that it would be hard not see him for what he is. 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...