[Jim Noble]

A news report about an “unpublished manuscript” is not evidence

No, of course it's not evidence - but that's not why it was published.

It's Bolton's testimony that's evidence, and there need to be three more Republicans who request it for it to be admitted. Now there will be not three, but ten.

Why do you imagine Democrats in both the House and the Senate have been demanding Bolton, and only Bolton, over and over since August?

As soon as the White House stupidly adopted the "I didn't do it" defense, instead of the correct "I was perfectly within my rights to do it", this outcome was inevitable.

Bolton will testify, the GOP will crumble, and that will be that.

[Alberta's Child]

See my last post. If this comes down to conflicting statements between John Bolton and President Trump, I can’t think of any GOP Senators — including Mitt Romney — who would go out on a limb and publicly support Bolton. It’s political suicide to support an unlikeable long-time Swamp @sshole over a populist President.

This whole charade is comical because Ukraine has already received everything that was allocated to it by Congress.

It’s no different than you lending me your car for a week, and then calling the police TWO MONTHS LATER to report that I stole it because I returned it a day late. When the police come to your house to investigate the car theft and they find your car in your driveway in perfectly good shape, they ought to drop you down the stairs on your head and maybe even shoot your dog in the process.

[Sacajaweau]

The Dems know that if Bolton testifies, he will absolutely kill the Dems case.

The Dems will instruct a couple of their own to vote against witnesses. They know damn well that we will call the whistle blower....and Schitt.

[Political Junkie Too]

Why do you imagine Democrats in both the House and the Senate have been demanding Bolton, and only Bolton, over and over since August?

This is the scenario I laid out a few weeks ago:

---

If the President is seeking opposing opinions that cover the whole spectrum of possibilities, but each advisor is unaware of the questions asked of others, what would an advisor who was asked only about the negative scenarios testify to when subpoenaed?

They only know less than half of what was really going on.

---

If Bolton only knows what he thinks the President "preferred," and as the President's National Security Advisor Bolton is only asked about the consequences of taking negative actions while leaving the positive discussions to other advisors, how would cherry-picking Bolton's testimony in isolation be received?

The solution is not to demand other witnesses to rebut Bolton's testimony, it is to deny any witnesses and make the House to their own job properly.

-PJ