elections with foreign interference. that takes power away from the american people. this president has chosen to put his purge interests ahead of the national interest. it is overwhelming evidence of the scheme led by the president, led by his personal lawyer rudy giuliani to corrupt the american elections. no president has ever, ever, ever obstructed congress in the manner that we ve seen from president trump. the president abused his power, and is a continuing threat, not only to democracy, but to our national security. republicans meantime attacked the substance of witness testimony, and republican congressman john rat cliff was brushed back by democrat val demmings after he suggested the whistle-blower distorted the contends of the july 25th phone call of the president with ukraine. the democrats have built this
it s effective in, effective to his face, and shows that he believes he did nothing wrong and effective for the democrats because they will find, in their eye, allies, because they will find a lot wrong with that and we haven t seen a full transcript and we have seen a partial transcript. and i want to take a look at what the republican congressman john rat cliff thinks about the president s fireside chat idea. i don t think the president should have to do. that i m happy when the president addresses the american people directly but we shouldn t be wasting any more time on this. john, what do you make of that response? is there a responsibility that republicans think a stunt like this could backfire? it could be indicative of that. as emily just alluded to, this is not a transcript, we shouldn t call it a transcript, it is a sum riff the july 25th call, and in the summary itself, it is damning, because it does provide direct evidence that trump urged ukraine s president to inve
for ukraine, in order to pressure its government to carry out investigations for his political benefit, trump yesterday in a tweet quoting republican congressman john rat cliff wrote that quote neither ambassador taylor or any other witness has provided testimony that the ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld. you can t are a quid pro quo with no quo. matt mccarty made similar arguments on tuesday. the democrats were not able to establish that ukraine was aware that military aid was temporarily withhold, they will of course be able to not prove some extortion the president is claimed to be engaged in. there is a claim of quid pro quo of president trump with the president of ukraine on july 25th. we ve found what they said in here, on august 29th, ukraine found out that the money was being held up from politico. however, the new york times