ukraine. state department officials catherine croft and christopher anderson each met behind closed doors with house investigating committees. anderson was special adviser for ukraine negotiations until this past july. in his opening statement he said bolton warned him about rudy s efforts to influence trump on ukraine. croft took over for anderson in july after spend twog years as a director covering ukraine over on the national security council. this morning she told lawmakers that lobbyist robert livingston, you may remember this man, long-time republican congressman from louisiana, he is the former house speaker elect during the time of president clinton s impeachment, that he pushed to remove the one-time u.s. ambassador to ukraine, marie yovanovitch, calling her an obama holdover. eyre also learning more about what lieutenant colonel alexander vindman told members of congress during his testimony
intelligence briefers are heartened by what we all listen to. the intel chiefs on capitol hill laying out the facts, but d despite trump s eyre, what are the con quenss they stop laying out the facts for this president. two dangers. the first is that he will make decisions based not on real information, but on his own insixties, which are not always good. two things that concern people in that connection are that he wants a deal with north korea so badly that up coming, he may agree to a bad deal. the second immediate concern is a trade deal with china and what might happen in another summit with xi where as one official put it just this morning to me,
she just destroys them. despite his approximate imthe toy one of the president s most ferocious defenders, conway has slashed president trump in recent months. this week, he established checks and balances, a group of conservative lawyers who publicly question the president s adherence to the law. he has also chided trump on twitter, with tweets like this one questioning the president s comprehension of the law. and he s written op-eds including this one, says trump s appointment of his acting attorney general is quote, illegal. but until recently, he d avoided the president s eyre. you mean mr. kellyanne conway? he s just trying to get publicity for himself. he says he took the president s broadside in stride, saying he also calls himself mr. kellyanne conway. today, his wife changed her twitter bio to read the kellyanne conway and kellyanne conway s husband. he admitted his wife is not a
another company we have to set up, we re going to have to put the money in. this sounds to me from the vantage point of someone just hearing the tape as two people who have a routine, who have a pattern, a way of dealing with these things. the other thing that i m hearing is that to the extent to which this is yet another attempt to clear someone out of the way to make a payment so as not to interfere with his campaign, it is a illegal campaign contribution. if it came from the national enquirer company, it s a corporate contribution, which is illegal. if it came from trump, in other words, if trump reimbursed him, then it s an unreported campaign expenditure. but in any case what we re doing is seeing a pattern. a pattern of deception of the american people. a pattern of campaign-related payments that have been disguised and hidden until now. our trump experts eyre in new york do not look shocked yet by what they have heard on this tape tonight.
hearing? first of all, i m hearing two people who have a way of discussing these things that is not unique, that is not a first-time occurrence, that is not a surprise. does anyone think this is the only time other than the stormy daniels situation in which this kind of arrangement went on? this is matter of fact. this is how we deal with it. oh, we have this one, we have another company we have to set up, we re going to have to put the money in. this sounds to me from the vantage point of someone just hearing the tape as two people who have a routine, who have a pattern, a way of dealing with these things. the other thing that i m hearing is that to the extent to which this is yet another attempt to clear someone out of the way to make a payment so as not to interfere with his campaign, it is a illegal campaign contribution. if it came from the national enquirer company, it s a corporate contribution, which is illegal. if it came from trump, in other words, if trump reimbursed him