raised were slightly different than don mcgann. cupperman is a national security official. cupper man, you know, filed the lawsuit seeking guidance. cupper man wasn t asking the court to tell him not to come testify. to the contrary, he was seeking the court s guide answer to facilitate his cooperation. and ultimately the committee with drew the subpoena. yet which raises questions on whether the committee is interested in getting to the bottom of some of these issues. right. instead the intelligence committee has chosen to rely on ambassador sondland and his testimony. i think they rely 600 times in their i tell you what i did, i on this point, i yesterday, i
agency counsel or look in camera. once you get the ball rolling usually it leads to positive results and historically allowed the congress to do its work. were any of those things done here? no. in fact, they decided we are not going to subpoena certain people that are important, is that fair to say? we are not going to court to enforce them so these folks that are caught in the inter-branch struggle. that s an unfortunate position for any employee. one concerning thing dr. cupperman who was described as a solid citizen and good witness. he filed a lawsuit in the face of the subpoena. judge leon was assigned to it. the issues were different than the mcgahn issues.
he is the white house counsel. cupperman is a national security official. cupperman filed the lawsuit seeking guidance. cupperman was not asking the court to tell him not to testify. he was seeking the court s guidance to facilitate his cooperation. and the committee with drew the subpoena which raises questions about whether the committee is really interested in getting to the bottom of some of these issues. right. instead the intelligence committee has chosen to rely on ambassador sonland and his system. i think they rely 600 times in their report. i tell you what i did. on this point, yesterday, i
document production and blocked witnesses from testifying. and therefore, he s obstructing their probe. what s wrong with that argument? this is even more ridiculous if we re going to make a comparison. look, the president does not forfeit constitutional prerogatives merely because an impeachment has commenced. he isen tie l tellshe is he o withhold the information. the president s advisers including mr. bolton and mr. cupperman have taken it to court. the democrats are eluding litigation. how can you possibly stick the president with obstruction charge because he s asking, and his people are asking article three of the judiciary for definitive adjudication, stick him with obstruction and he disagrees and doesn t follow supreme court adjudication of this issue. going to court is as american as
document production and blocked witnesses from testifying. and therefore, he s obstructing their probe. what s wrong with that argument? this is even more ridiculous if we re going to make a comparison. look, the president does not forfeit constitutional prerogatives merely because an impeachment has commenced. he isen tie l tellshe is he o withhold the information. the president s advisers including mr. bolton and mr. cupperman have taken it to court. the democrats are eluding litigation. how can you possibly stick the president with obstruction charge because he s asking, and his people are asking article three of the judiciary for definitive adjudication, stick him with obstruction and he disagrees and doesn t follow supreme court adjudication of this issue. going to court is as american as