Davin News Server

On Sun, 31 Aug 2025 22:35:57 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>On 2025-08-31 09:59, NoBody wrote:
>> On Sat, 30 Aug 2025 12:46:46 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2025-08-28 07:14, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 10:06:25 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 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 Department’s reopened probe of John
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bolton is whether President Donald Trump’s 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 “for political reasons,” 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?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are you now denying that the probe was not dropped by the Biden
>>>> administration???
>> 
>> Silence (of course).
>
>Because it's moot.

Good grief.  And you still barely acknowledge the fact of the matter.

>
>Do you suppose they could have dropped the investigation because there 
>was nothing there to find?

Laughter!
You're more than welcome to cite your theory.

>
>After all, it's not like Bolton was a friend to Biden's administration, 
>now was it?
>

You were whining previously about "the deep state"...

>> 
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And reporting this in 2025 and you don't think that that's at the behest
>>>>> of Trump?
>>>>
>>>> Laughter!
>>>>
>>>>    Because the media is so friendly to 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 “The Room Where It Happened” contained
>>>>> classified information.'
>>>>
>>>> So?
>> 
>> Silence (of course).
>
>So you don't think there's a problem with someone being pressured by the 
>Trump's administration to declare something she knows to be false, and 
>that the administration fired her for that?

You are welcome to present evidence that her claim is true.

>
>Knight has been in your federal government since 2011, and was promoted 
>to the position first the position of Director and then Senior Director 
>of the National Security Council...
>
>...BY DONALD TRUMP.
>

So?

>And then she won't say what he wants her to say and she's suddenly fired.

Laughter!

>
>> 
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> So classified information was made available to the publishers???
>>>>
>>>> That itself is a crime.
>>>>
>>>> Game over.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm sorry, but where does it say that any classified information got as
>>> far as the publishers.
>> 
>> Isn't that what the investigation is about???
>
>Is it? Because if there actually WAS classified information IN THE BOOK, 
>this would already be a slam-dunk.
>

Oh look goal post move noted.  Back to the information that was shared
with the publishers please.

>So why isn't Bolton already arrested?

Aren't you in favor of ful investigations before arrest?

My...

>
>> 
>>>
>>> What it DOES say is that Knight and her team reviewed the manuscript
>>> BEFORE it was sent to the publishers.
>> 
>> The investigation will tell us.
>
>No, it won't. An investigation into Bolton will not tell you when Knight 
>and her team reviewed the manuscript...

The crime would be sharing it with the publishes, whether read or not.

But you know that.

>
>...but this letter will:
>
>'The review started with Ambassador Bolton's submission of the 
>manuscript on December 30, 2019. Upon the first reading, it was apparent 
>to Ms. Knight that the manuscript contained voluminous amounts of 
>classified information and that it would take a significant effort to 
>put it into publishable shape. The ensuing review ultimately became the 
>most intensive pre-publication review process in recent memory at the NSC.'
>
><https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/7216196/Letter-Re-US-v-John-Bolton.pdf>
>

So Michael John apparently has committed a crime.  When will you call
for his arrest?