From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.trump,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: Re: Background on the Michael-John Bolton affair
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 10:06:25 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 2025-08-27 07:27, NoBody wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 15:18:22 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2025-08-26 07:32, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2025-08-25 04:30, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:03 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2025-08-24 07:24, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:33:45 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2025-08-23 11:26, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Interesting reading.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> " At the center of the Justice Departmentâs reopened probe of John
>>>>>>>>> Bolton is whether President Donald Trumpâs former national security
>>>>>>>>> adviser, and more recently staunch critic, broke the law when he
>>>>>>>>> shared what Trump administration officials believe was classified
>>>>>>>>> information with people not authorized to have it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A 2020 criminal investigation into Bolton originated from
>>>>>>>>> allegations that Bolton had shared portions of his book draft with
>>>>>>>>> people not authorized to handle sensitive information before he
>>>>>>>>> obtained final approval from the government that is required ahead
>>>>>>>>> of publishing any book, according to a person briefed on the probe.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The FBI obtained emails that appeared to show Bolton was working on
>>>>>>>>> his book manuscript while still at the White House, and that he was
>>>>>>>>> sharing early portions with his representatives who were helping to
>>>>>>>>> get it published, according to the person.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The early manuscript portions included material that was restricted
>>>>>>>>> by federal law governing classified documents, the person said.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> CNN has reached out to Bolton and his attorney for comment on the
>>>>>>>>> FBI emails. "
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/23/politics/john-bolton-2020-
>>>>>>>>> investigation
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And 4 year long investigation found...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...what?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Biden administration shut it down as it wasn't in their interest.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Duh.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The deep state!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL!
>>>>>
>>>>> CNN is the deepstate? That fact is contained later in the article I
>>>>> cited
>>>>>
>>>>> Dang dude...
>>>>
>>>> CNN reporting on it being shut down doesn't make them the ones who shut
>>>> it, does it?
>>>
>>> Looks like you've lost your marbles for sure. No one said anything
>>> about the deep state but you.
>>
>> And you're the one who said the "Biden administration shut it down" as
>> if that wasn't because there was nothing to be found.
>
> In your dreams.
>
>
> "After President Joe Biden took office in 2021, the Bolton probe was
> shut down that June âfor political reasons,â a senior US official told
> The Post Friday."
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/how-john-bolton-s-controversial-2020-memoir-sparked-first-federal-probe-of-ex-trump-national-security-adviser/ar-AA1L2xOW
An anonymous "senior US official" told the NY Post?
Could you choose a more biased source?
And reporting this in 2025 and you don't think that that's at the behest
of Trump?
Read what's in the very next paragraph, doofus:
'A Justice Department effort to recoup profits from the book was also
set aside after attorneys for Knight submitted a letter to the federal
judge overseeing that case, claiming she had been pressured by the Trump
White House to falsely declare âThe Room Where It Happenedâ contained
classified information.'
That's someone speaking without the cloak of anonymity.
More:
'In an 18-page letter submitted in the case on Tuesday, Knight claimed
that after she and her team went through several rounds of reviewing the
manuscript with the help of Bolton's attorneys, they were able to remove
all of the classified information. But soon thereafter political
appointees in the executive branch took "extraordinary actions" to
pressure her into reversing that assessment.
According to the letter, the NSC's "designedly apolitical process" for
prepublication review of former employees' works was "commandeered by
political appointees for a seemingly political purpose." Knight claimed
that officials from the White House and the NSC legal department tried
to "get her to admit that she and her team had missed something or made
a mistake," which "could then be used to support their argument to block
publication."'
<https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/judge-in-john-bolton-case-was-unimpressed-with-nsc-officials-claim-that-white-house-politicized-review-of-tell-all-book/>