From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.trump
Subject: Re: Background on the Michael-John Bolton affair
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2025 14:06:16 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 2025-09-02 07:25, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> " 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?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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.
>>
>> It's a fact that the investigation was dropped.
>
> About time...
The only one who lacked the understanding of the situation was you.
>
>>
>> It is not a fact that it was dropped for any improper reason.
>
> Laughter!
Based on what?
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>
>> That IS my theory, and you have nothing that contradicts it.
>>
>
> And you're welcome to cite it. Until then it's wild speculation on
> your part.
You're welcome to cite anything that disproves it.
Loser, PusseyCat says that means it's true until you disprove it...
...right?
>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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"...
>>
>> No, you'll find I was making fun of those who claim there is a "deep state".
>
> Well since I don't take part in that, why did you feel the need to
> bring it up?
To laugh at you.
>
>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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 âThe Room Where It Happenedâ 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.
>>
>> You are welcome to present any evidence that it isn't.
>>
>
> Laughter!
>
> It was her affirmative claim.
Yes, and?
>
>> She was writing to a judge in a legal proceeding and that is more than
>> your anonymous sources, isn't it?
>
> Two different subjects that you're trying to mesh together.
Ummmm...nope.
You've presented anonymous sources claiming one thing, and you've
claimed without any evidence at all that classified material was sent to
Bolton's publisher.
I've presented someone writing to the court who states clearly that
Bolton's book was vetted before it was sent to his publisher.
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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?
>
> Silence.
What more needs to be said?
She was a trusted member of the federal government for decades.
>
>>>
>>>> And then she won't say what he wants her to say and she's suddenly fired.
>>>
>>> Laughter!
>>
>> It's what happened.
>
> So she says. In any case, if you don't follow your boss's direction,
> you're likely to not have a job for very long so I don't see your
> point.
You agree she was fired, right?
So what's your explanation for her being fired pretty much immediately
after refusing to lie for Trump?