Democrats are calling on former National Security Adviser John Bolton to testify after the New York Times reported that his new book on his time in the White House will say that President Trump said to Bolton “he doesn’t want to release withheld aid till Ukraine turned over material related to investigations”:

New Stmt from House Impeachment Managers: “There can be no doubt now that Mr. Bolton directly contradicts the heart of the President’s defense and therefore must be called as a witness at the impeachment trial of President Trump.” pic.twitter.com/nVJ9B0xl9U — Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) January 27, 2020

The House Managers want Bolton to testify and his notes:

WORTH NOTING: The House managers in their statement tonight requested not just Bolton but his "notes" and other docs. Bolton was a notoriously prolific note-taker and would likely have documented his interactions with the president (particularly if they're now in a book draft.) — Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 27, 2020

John Bolton’s lawyer issued this statement that does not contradict what the NYT reported:

BOLTON's lawyer seems to confirm the accuracy of the Times story: https://t.co/74oTiVuYVV — Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 27, 2020

#BREAKING (4) Bolton’s team is not denying that his book manuscript says President Trump was planning to freeze aid to #Ukraine until their govt agreed to announce they were launching an investigation into the Bidens. — Gillian Turner (@GillianHTurner) January 27, 2020

Bolton’s lawyer says he does not know how the book draft got to the NYT:

#BREAKING (3) Bolton’s team tells me they don’t know how the contents of his manuscript leaked to the #NewYorkTimes— asked how the draft made it to reporters when he’d only shared it with his editors and the #WhiteHouse Natl Security Council his spox says they won’t speculate — Gillian Turner (@GillianHTurner) January 27, 2020

Here’s a summary of the NYT via Maggie Haberman:

SCOOP: Bolton book draft, circulated to associates and sent to WH for review process, describes a convo w POTUS where he says he doesn't want to release withheld aid till Ukraine turned over material related to investigations @nytmike and me https://t.co/N3Tsce4gR7 — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 26, 2020

Bolton claims in drafts of manuscript that Pompeo privately told him that there was no basis to what Giuliani said about Yovanovitch and that he questioned whether she was going after his other clients in her corruption crackdown https://t.co/N3Tsce4gR7 — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 26, 2020

Bolton claims Mulvaney was present for at least one meeting Trump had by phone with Giuliani where Giuliani was talking about why Yovanovitch should be fired https://t.co/N3Tsce4gR7 — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 26, 2020

Bolton writes that he told White House lawyers he was worried about Giuliani leveraging his Trump relationship for other clients https://t.co/N3Tsce4gR7 — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 26, 2020

Bolton's motivations for testimony – he has a story he wants to tell, and he is concerned he'll be accused of holding stuff back to juice his book sales instead of speaking out https://t.co/N3Tsce4gR7 — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 26, 2020

Dems, needless to say, are giddy over it:

The revelations directly contradict Trump's claim that he never tied the hold-up of Ukrainian aid to his demands for investigations into his political opponent Joe Biden. https://t.co/7FCQknNtLy — Axios (@axios) January 27, 2020

But there is still the question of executive privilege:

WH probably out of luck on executive privilege if Bolton gets a subpoena for documents/info and immediately turns over a draft of his book before Trump can object/litigate. (Again, House Intel can issue him a subpoena.) — Ross Garber (@rossgarber) January 27, 2020

Or not:

If John Bolton does not believe his conversations with the president are covered by any privilege claims, there is nothing stopping him from telling his story immediately, with or without Senate action. Op-ed, Medium post, something… — Byron York (@ByronYork) January 27, 2020

Well, there goes tomorrow’s news cycle:

John Bolton has the evidence. It’s up to four Senate Republicans to ensure that John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney, and the others with direct knowledge of President Trump’s actions testify in the Senate trial.https://t.co/JbazBaYdRU — Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) January 26, 2020

The NYT is breaking a very big story that under normal circumstances would cause Senators to unanimously request to hear from those with first hand knowledge of what the President did. — Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) January 26, 2020

This is an excellent question https://t.co/XIRTb1CKSk — Preet Bharara (@PreetBharara) January 27, 2020

This makes pretty clear to me that Bolton’s pubslisher/editor have seen the draft, eviscerating exec privilege claims. Less clear to me WH counsel has seen draft, notwithstanding speculation. But Cipollone should be made to answer whether they have. https://t.co/gFevnkjKsW — Preet Bharara (@PreetBharara) January 27, 2020

***