On Wednesday afternoon, investigators in the House impeachment inquiry issued summons to two men whose testimony could be critical to driving home the impact of the issues under consideration. Both have, so far, been invited to testify voluntarily, through if these appearances follow recent trends, the voluntary requests could easily become subpoenas should either the witnesses or the White House object to the testimony.
One of those invited, former national security adviser John Bolton, is extremely familiar for the ultrahawkish path he has cut across two Republican White Houses. In his most recent NSC role, Bolton seemed to clash frequently with the equally hot-headed Donald Trump. But while it seems that Bolton was somewhat isolated from Trump, his name has appeared over and over in the testimony that has appeared so far. Bolton’s reaction to the meeting that was held in his office at which Gordon Sondland pressed for Ukraine to conduct investigations was part of a key day in the sequence of events.
John Eisenberg, the other person who got a summons on Wednesday, is much less well-known, but he has also been a central figure in several different ways. When either Fiona Hill or Alexander Vindman talks about going to “the NSC’s lead counsel,” the person that they are not naming is Eisenberg. He’s a man who spends all day, every day, working in a SCIF and dealing with both critical security information and complaints like those raised by Hill and Vindman. He’s notoriously secretive. And he also happens to be the person who sent the transcript of Trump’s conversation with the Ukrainian president to the tightly controlled national security serve—a server under his control. Between that action and the inaction Eisenberg apparently displayed when confronted about some of those issues, it is easy to believe that he was engaged in something very like a cover-up.
Eisenberg is slated to appear on Nov. 4. Bolton is currently scheduled for Nov. 7. Whether either man will appear on his date is not known.