John Bolton’s Moral Cowardice
A television interview promoting his book further reveals what an awful man he is.
Former National Security Advisor John Bolton was on ABC News last night hawking his tell-all book. He doubled down on being a loathsome human being.
The headline (“Bolton says he hopes Trump is 1-term president, warns country imperiled by his reelection“) story is a strong one:
President Donald Trump’s longest-serving national security adviser John Bolton condemned his presidency as dangerously damaging to the United States and argued the 2020 election is the last “guardrail” to protect the country from him.
In an exclusive interview with ABC News, Bolton offered a brutal indictment of his former boss, saying, “I hope (history) will remember him as a one-term president who didn’t plunge the country irretrievably into a downward spiral we can’t recall from. We can get over one term — I have absolute confidence, even if it’s not the miracle of a conservative Republican being elected in November. Two terms, I’m more troubled about.”
In the interview with ABC News Chief Global Affairs Correspondent Martha Raddatz and in his new book, “The Room Where It Happened,” Bolton paints Trump as “stunningly uninformed,” making “erratic” and “irrational” decisions, unable to separate his personal and political interests from the country’s, and marked and manipulated by foreign adversaries.
None of that is new news, of course, but it’s a powerful statement coming from a lifelong Republican who had a front-row seat for the dumpster fire. But, even here, the weasel Bolton falls short.
“I don’t think he’s a conservative Republican. I’m not going to vote for him in November — certainly not going to vote for Joe Biden either. I’m going to figure out a conservative Republican to vote in,” he told Raddatz.
So, Trump is a “stunningly uninformed” and “erratic” man who will, if re-elected, “plunge the country irretrievably into a downward spiral.” The only hope of preventing that is elect Joe Biden in November. But Bolton won’t do that?
And, of course, this compounds the fact that he’s waited months to go public with this, hoping to profit from sales of a book.
Last fall after resigning — Trump said he was fired — he rejected a request to testify before the House and said he would testify only if a judge ordered him to obey a subpoena. The House declined to issue the subpoena to avoid a legal battle. Bolton later said he would obey a subpoena if one was issued by the Senate, but the Republican-controlled Senate did not issue one.
Bolton now said his testimony wouldn’t have mattered, while also accusing House Democrats of “impeachment malpractice” for not taking their time and widening their inquiry’s scope to include potentially impeachable offenses that Bolton only alleges publicly for the first time in his book.
“I didn’t think the Democrats had the wit or the political understanding or the reach to change what, for them, was an exercise in arousing their own base, so that they could say, ‘We impeached Donald Trump,'” he said, adding “that conduct (is) almost as bad and somewhat equivalent to Trump.”
Bolton told Raddatz he now has “an obligation to let the American people know what it’s like in the White House and what their leader is doing.”
But pressed about what public obligation he had at the time, he again turned to how the probe was initially conducted.“It’s not my obligation to help the Democrats out of their own problem. My judgment was that I was prepared to testify. But I think now this is actually a better time to tell the story because now the American people can look at it in the context of the most important political decision we make as a nation every four years,” he said.
The Republican-controlled Senate ultimately voted not to call any witnesses to testify in Trump’s trial, but Bolton now argues it wouldn’t have made a difference.
“Minds were made up on Capitol Hill, and my feeling was in the midst of all the chaos that had been created, this would have come and gone, and nobody would have paid any attention to it,” he said.
At one level, Bolton is right: his testimony would certainly not have been enough to get two-thirds of a Republican-majority Senate to vote to remove Trump from office.
Yet, this is a man who claims to be on a mission to save the Republic from an unstable lunatic getting a second term and yet he still clings to a childish partisanship where doing so is helping the Democrats? And, indeed, that impeaching Trump for crimes he admits are crimes is simply a partisan act of “rousing the base” that’s almost as bad as the crimes themselves?
At best, the man is a coward and a self-serving egotist who cares more about his viability in a future Republican administration than he does the country.
Makes you wonder why Republicans paid so much attention to him over the years, doesn’t it?
While i would never encourage someone to break the law, if one wanted to read Boltons book without giving him money, Twitter and Reddit are absolutely awash with links to help you do just that.
Is anyone surprised? Bolton has never been known for his integrity, and this just falls in the same basket.
Bolton’s on a mission to save the Republic, so long as that doesn’t benefit the Democratic Party.
Less than an hour ago, Trump Tweeted that:
“I gave John Bolton, who was incapable of being Senate confirmed because he was considered a wacko, and was not liked, a chance.”
So…Trump hired Bolton not because he was competent, but because Trump felt sorry for him. Right. Uh-huh.
Yes. I agree. But James, please take this question in the spirit intended – not as an attack, but an earnest attempt to understand.
If Bolton is at best a moral coward for putting his party over his country, how is he different from the other Trump supporters you know who you’ve defended as partisans who are still decent people? You’ve noted in the past that a lot of these people don’t pay attention to politics, so they can’t be expected to turn on their party based on things of which they are not aware. Is it that simple? If so, what do we owe these people to make them aware of the threat?
Wait. Give the guy some credit.
Remember that that people like me, a Democrat, made him the poster child for what was wrong with the Bush Administration. That guy was pilloried for his role in invading Iraq, and rightly so.
And, if I can be so bold, he firmly believed in what he was doing was correct, necessary, and for the benefit of the USA. Through and through post-Reagan conservative. Wrong, but to quote The Big Lebowski: Say what you will, it’s an ethos.
So, yes, for him to come out and say these things in public is great, as he may sway a few of the “real” conservatives not to vote for Trump. The Dems already know, and the Trump Republicans won’t care. But if a percentage of GOP can vote none-of-the above or Pat Paulson, or mighty mouse, great again.
To be upset that he may make a buck-or-two off a book that goes into real detail on exactly the shortcommings of 45? Doesn’t seem to bother me a bit. I’m OK with that.
— ( moderation because I misspelled my handle ) —
@Scott F.:
The overwhelming number of people who still self-identify as Republicans do not agree with Bolton’s premise that Trump is a danger to the Republic. Many dislike him personally, see him as imprudent and erratic, or otherwise wish he were more “normal.” But they think he’s preferable to electing Democrats. I disagree with them strongly but can understand how many of them still think that way, for reasons Steven Taylor has laid out in dozens of posts here.
Bolton is different because he has flat-out declared Trump is a “stunningly uninformed” and “erratic” man who will, if re-elected, “plunge the country irretrievably into a downward spiral.” And, yet, he doesn’t have the moral courage to therefore endorse Joe Biden?
@James Joyner:
I wholeheartedly disagree. I think anyone still self-identifying as a Republican, and supporting Trump because of it, is just as guilty of moral cowardice as Bolton is.
What you describe are nothing more than rationalizations.
These people have chosen party over country and need to rationalize that cravenly immoral decision.
@James Joyner:
John Bolton’s lacks any moral courage. Full stop.
And that has proudly been on display for years (at least since he proudly wrote about his intentional dodging of the draft in an earlier memior – https://taskandpurpose.com/analysis/john-bolton-trumps-new-war-consigliere-dodged-already-lost-vietnam-war).
So color me unsurprised by John Bolton continuing to demonstrate what an empty, shitty human being he remains. The only question is whether or not this finally puts a nail in his political career.
@Scott F.: If I may add something to your question. And in the same spirit of inquiry, not attack. OK, at the fringe there are people who think Democrats are literally demons. A lot of Evangelicals and some Catholics think abortion is murder and must be outlawed. Country club and corporate Republicans think Ds will raise their taxes, and they’re right. Charles Koch thinks Ds might actually do something about AGW. And John Bolton thinks Ds won’t
bomb Iranhire John Bolton. But in general, and for Rs of your acquaintance, James, what is it they find so hateful about Democrats? Why is it so hard to see Ds as a legitimate alternative?ETA: Hadn’t seen your response to Scott F, but my question still stands. Dr. T speaks to deep partisanship, but he has not, as far as I recall, addressed the visceral dislike of Ds that so many Rs express. It’s a psych question, not poli sci.
Having only seen the headlines I still boldly call attention to the long-suffering Republic of Korea government’s claim that Mr Bolton does a rotten job of reporting the Trump-Kim Jeong Un negotiations.
And will repeat as a general caution that many R’s who’ve been associated with this abomination of a government will be publishing self-excusing books. What we said after Watergate when Nixon’s memoirs were published with hopes of rescuing his reputation and bank account:
DON’T BUY BOOKS BY CROOKS!
@mattbernius: Noted Mr Bolton’s cowardice the other day on these pages. Would point out that he actually did his own work in finding a refuge from actual shooting associated with his preferred foreign policy. Unlike — well, former President George W Bush who got into the ANG because Daddy. Maybe that’s something.
@James Joyner:
And, to add to that, his opinion is based on first-hand knowledge from having worked in the WH. It makes his position not to testify and to hold this information for personal monetary gain to be all the worst. And yes, the notion that he can’t vote for Biden is over the top if his assessment of Trump is to be taken at face value.
@CSK:
I am dying to see the campaign ad that opens with Trump statements about how his administration will have all the best people, then relentlessly juxtaposes his glowing praise of the people he is appointing with his subsequent statements about them on their way out.
@DrDaveT:
I would relish such an ad. This might be something for the Lincoln Project to consider.
I have never seen an explanation from Cult45 of why their hero seems to hire so many wackos, incompetents, losers, and maniacs.
Before “Courage” even enters the equation, it implies that someone perceives a personal responsibility to take an action. Bolton talks a lot and when he gets power, he exercises that power. But he has never shown any indication that he takes responsibility for anything.
Put another way, you can’t be a moral coward if you have no morals.
@James Joyner: Thank you for this reply.
I understand the dynamic you describe and I completely concede the points you and Steven have made about the power of partisan identification in a binary system. I, myself, acknowledge the draw as I struggled with and ultimately voted for Bill Clinton despite his personal character and subsequently grudgingly accepted those who re-elected the younger Bush despite him being out of his depths in the office. It is easy to grasp how differences in policy and character can be made secondary to team support when there are only two teams that matter.
But, Trump is a whole new sort, as has been duly noted by OTB posters and commentariat. From his chumminess with authoritarians and willingness to sell the country’s interests to benefit himself on the foreign policy front, to his emboldening of the most destructive racist elements of the US populace at home, he represents the crossing of a line. When a singularly corrupt and destructive leader can be allowed by blind, willfully ignorant tribalism, it is a big problem – a different problem than Trump, but perhaps just as dangerous to the future of the country.
To be fair, he lives in Maryland and thus his vote is meaningless.
But his solution of not voting for either “the guy I don’t like” vs “the guy who would ruin the country” in what’s realistically a head-to-head matchup is still like wiping your ass with a stick and insisting you won’t still smell like crap.
Moreover, Bolton’s admissions shows why it’s probably ill-advised to think in terms of getting “disaffected Republicans” to cross over. Bolton can’t vote for Biden because he still, in the dark night of his soul, supports all the CRAP that goes with electing
aristocratsoligarchsdespotic fascistsconservatives to office–the kids in cages, the tax breaks for the rich, the parking of profits in foreign countries to further avoid laughably low tax rates, gutting the safety net for the poor, curtailing civil rights, voting restrictions for minorities, the list is near endless. And he’s good with all of it.A friend says:
Damn. Seth Abramson:
@Scott F.:
@James Joyner:
Yeah, not buying that. Sure, the more you know, the more culpable you may be, but that’s a matter of small degrees. When we look back at history and judge people of an era for, say, slavery, we ask, ‘could a person at that point in time understand that he was committing a moral evil?’ In the Roman world no one thought slavery was evil. In 19th century America the truth was out there for all to see.
I’d suspect, James, that your circle is largely college-educated. Does a college-educated person in the USA in 2020 have all the evidence he needs to conclude that Trump is evil? Of course. So these good people are ignoring evidence, right? They are looking away. What are they? They’re Good Germans.
Now, do I think Dr. Mengele is higher on the evil ladder than some Bavarian who blocked his nose against the stench rolling out of Dachau? Sure. Does that excuse the Good Germans, those silent collaborators with evil? No.
So, no, James, your Trump supporting friends are not decent people. There’s nothing decent about them, they’re cowards at best. At best.
Bolton is making the same argument that stereotypical Bernie Bros make: “I’m not going to make a real choice, because I’d rather remain pure.” It’s an ideological position, not a political one, because politics is about the art of getting things done. Politics requires act, not agent, morality. It’s what Max Weber described brilliantly in his essay, “Politics As A Vocation,” the “slow boring of hard boards” required to achieve important outcomes in an imperfect, uncertain, and challenging world.
Not only is that search for purity offensive to the goals of politics, Bolton apparently thinks that there isn’t anything like collective responsibility:
Obviously, the impeachment and trial was the forum for everyone’s problem.
Of course, I’m giving a self-serving blowhard credit for having a well thought-out political philosophy, instead of just mouthing a series of deflections for his irresponsibility.
@Michael Reynolds:
I think at least some of those people would say that Biden, and whoever ends up bring his v.p., represents an even greater evil than Trump.
@CSK:
Yes, and the Nazis claimed the Communists were worse. And the entire civilized world at that time still got behind bombing the shit out of Nazis.
It is not possible to make a rational argument that Biden is a worse man with worse policies than Trump, not without having first achieved a high level of moral depravity. Trump supporters are bad people. Full stop. I don’t care if they’re stupid bad people, or gullible bad people, they serve an evil cause.
@Michael Reynolds:
I have no friends who are Trump supporters; I do have a few relatives (by marriage) who are Trumpkins, which just goes to prove the truth of the old saying about how it’s possible to choose one’s friends, but not one’s relatives.
I try to understand the Trump-lovers. As far as I can tell, what they see is not what I see: an oaf, a boor, a boob, a sexual predator, a malevolent, self-serving know-nothing buffoon with a dangerously skewed psyche who thinks he can run the United States the way he ran–so to speak–his ramshackle business “empire.” They see a strong, brilliant, plain-spoken man who loves them and loves this country, and has done nothing but good for it.
Are they better or worse than those who’ll vote for Trump because they believe that, dreadful as he is, he’s less bad than Biden?
@CSK:
Um…I know I’m preaching to the choir…but there is absolutely nothing, in that vision of the man, supported by the facts on record.
@CSK: Vastly worse. There’s a difference between (1) making a choice you wish you didn’t have to make, in full knowledge of an individual’s flaws, and (2) seeing a person who isn’t really there, a moral and intellectual titan instead of “an oaf, a boor, a boob, a sexual predator, a malevolent, self-serving know-nothing buffoon.”
I’m just repeating what I was saying earlier in this thread: in politics, you have to make an informed choice among imperfect options, with an honest assessment of the likely consequences of each one.
@Daryl and his brother Darryl:
I know there isn’t. But if you go over tp a site such as Lucianne.com, that’s all you see: constant tributes to Trump’s staggeringly powerful intellect, his superb ethical sense, his deep devotion to faith and family, his unparalleled knowledge of domestic and foreign affairs, his abiding love for faith, family, and country…All I can do is shake my head in disbelief. This is what they see. This is what they think.
@Kingdaddy:
Yet that is what they claim to see: a moral and intellectual titan.
@CSK: Keeps coming back to “can’t fix stupid.” In this case, one can add “can’t fix delusional” if one wishes. Either way, or both, I’m not sure that better/worse is a workable qualifier/quantifier. This may well be a “light/darkness” comparison. (And no, I don’t like that condition either.)
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
I really do wonder what Cult45 is seeing. At Tulsa, even those of us who only watched the clips saw a grossly obese, lumbering, senile old man with cotton-candy bleached hair and bronze make-up obsessed with demonstrating that he could walk and hold a glass with one hand. Cult45 saw a masterful performance by a brilliant man at the top of his game, wise, good-humored, witty, eloquent.
@CSK: Your answers lie within.
@CSK:
Children taken from their mothers, put in cages as a deliberate intimidation tactic, and then lost. Anyone who can swallow that has no moral compass. Ditto anyone who obsessed over Benghazi then looked the other way at Trump’s continuous attacks on our own counter intelligence and obstruction of justice.
And anyone who thinks Trump loves anything is either an idiot, or deliberately lying to themselves. I have some pity for the complete idiots, none for those who willingly surrendered their judgment to a cult of personality.
When we look back at say, Nazi collaborators, do we give them a pass for thinking Hitler loved them?
@Michael Reynolds:
Surrendered their judgment? I can’t believe they ever had any judgment. Remember that most of the Trump-slobberers once felt the same way about Sarah Palin, the Saint Joan of Wasilla.
Interesting that they don’t remember that she dumped them when they were no longer useful to her, as will Trump.
@Kingdaddy: This reminds me of people trying to decipher SCOTUS decisions and getting obsessed about some Platonic Constitution. Everything’s horse-trading, guys. The original Founding Fathers were horse-trading to get everyone to sign off on the original Constitution, and if you read SCOTUS decisions it’s pretty obvious that the individual Justices make decisions according to their gut and then look for the justification afterwards.
Can you have moral cowardice without first having morals?
Asking for a nation…
Seriously, though, I’m not going to judge what is in Bolton’s heart. His actions have always put himself first, and this is just one more example. Whether he has no morals or is an objectivist who extols Rational Self-Interest, or whether he believes in putting his country first and fails at it… I don’t care.
I will gladly do it. Actions speak louder than any utterance he may ever make and his actions say he is slime. I don’t care why.
In other words, Supreme Court Justices do what Thurgood Marshall honestly admitted, “You do what you think is right and let the law catch up.” Now, I’m sure there are plenty of people who disagree with that as a judicial philosophy, but it would be nice if more people admitted that this is basically what all Supreme Court Justices do…
I think he was correct that his testifying would not have changed GOP Senate votes. They weren’t going to risk losing a primary. Writing a book and releasing it closer to the election was probably more effective in trying to hurt Trump. Given the attention span of voters, even this was probably too early. Maybe if it causes a series of investigations and then a surprise release of new info a week or two before the election it might help.
Steve
It’s probably for the best.
If I were Joe Biden, I wouldn’t want Bolton’s endorsement.
On the Steven Colbert show tonight, John Bolton has repeatedly affirmed that only Democrats have agency. Republicans didn’t vote to impeach because Democrats didn’t woo them correctly. It’s all the Democrats’ fault. The facts in the case are irrelevant. Guilt is irrelevant.
As much contempt as I have for Trump, it’s hard to see how Bolton isn’t actually worse. The Boltons of the world created Trump.