If the book gets out he's broken the law
and I would think that he would have
criminal problems I hope so.
[Voice of Adrienne Arsenault] This is the book that Donald Trump tried
to prevent Americans from reading.
John Bolton's far from kind assessment of Donald Trump's presidency.
That's highly classified information
this guy's writing things about
conversations and maybe he's not telling
the truth he's been known not to tell
the truth, a lot.
The book is filled with accusations against Trump,
calling the president quote "stunningly uninformed,"
"unfit for office" and "a danger to the
Republic."
Once an ambassador to the United Nations,
John Bolton also served
three previous American presidents.
You are going to do a fantastic job and i
appreciate you thank you.
On April 19, 2018 Bolton became Donald Trump's third national security adviser in 15 months.
In his book, Bolton says he quickly saw a
president who only cared about re-election,
adding that quote "obstruction of justice was a way of life" and that
Trump gave quote "personal favors to
dictators he liked."
Bolton's book has done the unheard of in Washington,
he's managed to unite both Republicans and
Democrats in their anger.
My take on him it's the big live Bolton and its book deal Bolton.
He's doing it for the money that's
pretty clear.
He chose loyalty over patriotism
and so is gonna make money
off of his book I guess.
We also have questions of our own
about Trump's relationship with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
and the arrests of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou.
I spoke  with Ambassador John Bolton earlier this afternoon.
Ambassador thank you for taking time for us today.
I wanted to start if I could with the White House
briefing yesterday because the press
secretary told reporters that President
Trump had never been briefed about these reports of Russian bounties being paid
to the Taliban to kill U.S. or coalition
troops.
Can you set the record straight for us please?
Well I can't really comment on news reports that have
come out about about my briefing the
president.
What I think I can say is that
this possible threat by the Russians is
something that needs to be taken seriously.
If the information bears out.
The Russians want the U.S.
and coalition forces out of
Afghanistan, out of Iraq out of Syria,
out of Eastern and Central Europe if they
can get away with it, out of Ukraine
out of a lot of places.
And a direct threat to American service members and
obviously to others in the coalition is
something that that really one cannot
blink at.
Now if evaluation of information has to take place great,
let's have the evaluation but
let's also act on it if it turns out to be serious.
Did you ever briefed the
President on it?
You know I just -- one day
I'll say no comment and the press
will take that to mean no comment.
I'll be a happy man
Is it credible though that the president would not know this?
It's credible the president wouldn't
know a lot of things.
I try and explain in the book
I'm sure is mystifying to many people,
but president misses a lot of things.
He's not as they say a detail
person.
Maybe that's the way he was successful
at real estate I don't think
it's the way a president should behave
in important international geostrategic
affairs,
but that's the way he does things.
In the book, you know, it's pretty
striking to hear you you talk about how
Trump is in your estimation a danger to
the Republic what was the moment where
where you felt that first?
Well it was it was a growing sensation I didn't have one
particular Eureka moment it was sort of
a long succession of disappointments
and growing concern.
I'm very confident, by the way, that that the United States
can survive a one-term Trump presidency.
I think we can correct the damage that's been done,
but certainly in the national
security field where I'm concerned
I think the damage has been considerable
although reparable I just don't want to
see more happening.
This will be, by the way, the first time in my adult life that
I will not vote for a Republican for
president.
You know I'm interested as a Canadian,
you know you do write about
Canada in here and and you particularly
write about the arrest of Meng Wanzhou.
I'm curious why was Canada asked to arrest her
and not other countries that also have
extradition treaties with the United
States.
Well, part of the dilemma for any
law enforcement exercise is you have to
make sure your case is ripe before you
try and arrest somebody.
So I think the logistics simply were that at the at the
time the decision was made it was
learned that she was going to get on a
flight to Vancouver and that's when the
request for extradition was made.
I understand that I am curious though,
I have copies of her passport here the
arrest was sworn and sealed on August
22,
she was picked up in Canada in December,
but there are stamps in this
passport between that time for the U.K.,
for France or Belgium all these
countries have extradition treaties
with the United States.
You know I can't
answer the question it's not something
that that I would normally be familiar
with in any case,
it wasn't because we were trying to put some burden on Canada.
Being an alumnus of the Justice Department myself,
I know a lot of these things are purely logistical.
This is not a political decision by the Justice Department.
I think you can appreciate why I'm asking though,
because from this side of the border there there is
I suppose a perception that Canada might
have been played as the country most
likely to be compliant.
I'd have to I'd have to believe that that's a conspiracy theory.
I wouldn't look at it that way at all.
Further in the book I think page yeah 308 you you write about Mike Pence,
Pompeo, yourself pressuring Trudeau to
stand firm on the extradition what did
what did that look like?
Well, I don't think we pressured him at all
I think he was quite rightly concerned
that China had taken custody of two Canadian citizens for no reason at all.
In fact I think arrested one of them in the middle of night,
broke into his apartment.
And that's an example and this was certainly
an argument that that I made in
in conversations with Canadians
and others, if this is the way China behaves now,
imagine how they'll behave when they become even more powerful.
Obviously they were picking on Canada,
rather than arresting American citizens.
I don't consider that pressuring Canada,
I thought it was reassuring Canada we
weren't going to let the Chinese
get away with this.
And so it's 560 plus days now that
Michael's Spavor, Michael Kovrig have
been in detention.
When you said that the matter of their detention
would be brought up at every opportunity what did you actually do?
The State Department has been raising it and it's been spoken
of publicly in the administration
including after I left.
Meng has been fighting her extradition very vigorously
that has certainly dragged things out for a long period of time,
but I think it would be a mistake to say that somehow
there's an equivalency between arresting
somebody for committing massive
financial fraud for violation of the
American sanctions against Iran
versus China just arbitrarily arresting two
Canadian citizens for no reason whatever.
you know as a Canadian, I'm also an
American,
but as Canadian you see that
Prime Minister Trudeau seems to
go out of his way to not upset
the president has that been noticed at all?
Well, I think it's it's it's not easy for any foreign leader,
especially from American allies to deal with this anomalous president.
And they've each behaved in their own ways and I think
Prime Minister Trudeau has behaved in a
responsible fashion.
But is the United States at this point
a reliable ally for Canada under this president?
Look, the fundamental relations between two countries really do transcend
the vagaries even of an election of a
national leader
and that's why I think negative consequences caused by
the Trump presidency can be overcome.
The position of the United States in the world
has not fundamentally changed.
Those who are anti-american will pick on Trump as an example of America in decline
and they would be wrong.
You have a unique window into the operations of this administration,
why should Canada put its citizens,
its trade at risk for a country and a leader
who seems unwilling to return the favour?
Look, if you want to disavow the United
States,
if you want to leave NATO if you want to get rid
our protection militarily, please feel free to go ahead and do it.
Canada can do that if that's what you want.
The issue here in dealing with China,
is whether free countries will stand together against this
authoritarian threat or they won't.
We're going to stick I hope with a consistent
policy of tried to prevent China from
taking advantage of its economic clout,
which is what it's trying to do now in
this present controversy.
How does Canada get its Canadians home from China at this point?
Look, I think we all want to get them home as soon as possible,
America has had its share of hostages
around the world as well.
If you don't like it ma'am you're free to go ally with China,
if that's what you think your
country wants to do.
Think about that long and hard.
Sorry, I'm actually asking for a some analysis on what the right approach might be?
You've got to take a long-term perspective,
what the Chinese have done is outrageous.
There's no question about it.
What do you think they will do if you give in to that behaviour?
Let me ask you a question.
Well, that's the advantage of sitting
where I am right now,
I'm asking you for analysis.
I think Canadians feel like they're out
of good ideas at this point and they're
looking for some.
Persistence, persistence, persistence.
Thank you for your time.
I hope we didn't take too much of it.
