When the House of Representatives wanted Bolton to come and chat a bit, he balked and deferred to the courts to decide if a subpoena could be enforced.

There was speculation in the media that Bolton was just trying to delay his testimony until his book came out. If everyone knew what was in the book because it was now part of his testimony, maybe he'd sell fewer books.

Apparently, he put his personal financial interests above national interests of justice and national security.

If the Senate decides that no witnesses that did not testify before the House can be called to testify before the Senate, it's too late for whatever Bolton has to say to be considered in the impeachment trial.

And apparently, Bolton is the one person with first-hand knowledge of I-1's intent. Per the NYT, it's in his book.

So, just like I-1, Bolton appears to have put his interests ahead of ours and as a result we lurch ever closer to an authoritarian dictatorship.


Sad!

I haven't really looked, but is there a reason that people that refused to show up after being subpoenaed didn't sit in jail?

I haven't looked at the individual cases, but I believe that each refusal had a "reason" behind it. Plus the WH said "we aren't cooperating, period."

At that point I think it would go to court to get resolved on a subpoena by subpoena basis, and the House decided not to go that route. So no jail.

This is such a clusterf**k.