Bolton Blasted by Friend, Told To Withdraw Book Immediately

A former top aide to John Bolton made a compelling case why the once-National Security Advisor to President Donald Trump should not release his tell-all book until after the 2020 election.

The New York Times reported on Sunday that Trump told Bolton in August that he wanted to put a hold on $391 million in military assistant until Ukraine agreed to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, as well as other alleged interference by Ukrainians in the 2016 election, according to an unpublished manuscript of Bolton’s book, due to be released in March.

Fred Fleitz, who describes himself as a friend of Bolton and served as his chief of staff in both the Trump and George W. Bush administrations, believes his former boss is setting a bad precedent if Bolton allows his book “The Room Where It Happened” to be published before the upcoming presidential election.

“Given the importance of protecting a president’s confidential discussions with his senior advisers, I strongly disagree with Bolton’s decision to release the book before the November presidential election and call on him to withdraw it from the publisher immediately,” Fleitz wrote in an Op-Ed for Fox News.

Reparations-Backing California Candidate Run Out of Black LA Neighborhood Over His ‘Devil Blue Eyes’

Murder-suicide probe underway after alleged Tom Selleck impersonator scam targeted woman

Mamdani faces a Muslim problem ahead of Gracie Mansion protest

Thom Tillis Unloads on Hegseth, Ken Paxton in Weekend Tantrum as GOP’s Establishment Wing Faces Extinction

Graham Platner vows to ‘come after’ Bezos as Senate hopeful escalates billionaire tax fight

Woman killed by flying restaurant umbrella in freak accident at South Carolina lakeside restaurant

Ousted Senate Republican digs in against Trump, takes jab at leadership style

Democrats’ Official X Account Forced to Delete Horribly Disrespectful Memorial Day Post – But We’ve Got the Original

Jake Auchincloss denies supporting Collins in Maine Senate race after opposing Planter bid

Redistricting push in South Carolina fails after state Senate bails

RFK Jr barehands a pair of snakes on Dr Oz’s patio in wild video

NBA star places massive bet on Spencer Pratt in LA mayoral race

AOC Quietly Takes First Steps Toward Potential 2028 Presidential Run: Report

Federal judge blocks Alabama redistricting plan in blow to Trump

Markwayne Mullin goes off on Dems’ ‘garbage’ Memorial Day ‘political stunt’ at ICE facility

“Presidents must be able to candidly consult with their advisers without worrying they will leak these discussions to the press or obtain high-dollar book contracts to publish them,” he continued.

“A book by a former national security adviser ahead of a president’s reelection bid may set a dangerous precedent since it could discourage future presidents from seeking advice from expert advisers on sensitive national security matters.”

Fleitz offered the example of former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who stepped down from his post in the Obama administration in June 2011.

Gates waited until January 2014, after President Barack Obama’s re-election, to release his book “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War,” which detailed what the former DOD secretary believed to be serious incompetence among the commander in chief’s national security team, including then-Vice President Joe Biden.

Fleitz wrote that the reason Gates waited was that he “did not want his internal knowledge of the workings of the Obama administration and his interactions with President Obama to affect the outcome of the 2012 presidential election.”

“Gates established a principled precedent on how senior advisers to presidents should write about their experiences,” Fleitz argued. “Given Ambassador Bolton’s long and distinguished record of government service, I believe it is vital that he follow this precedent.”

Conservative commentator Mark Levin sees the release of the alleged details from Bolton’s book manuscript as another example of a “politically timed leak,” which in the end really should have no bearing on Trump’s impeachment trial.