heard. and this is really critical because as congress is trying to fill out the story here with the evidence to determine that this was really about donald trump s personal interests, not about the nation s interests, this is really going to the heart of going around the official process that diplomats go through, george kent, who we know we re going to hear from next week, made it very clear, he was one of the ukrainian experts. he was sidelined, he was told to lay low, is what we re hearing. all of this goes to, if it s really about the national security interests of the united states, if it s really largely about corruption, and remember, we already heard that the experts said, no, ukraine has made sufficient progress on corruption to release these funds that congress proofapprovf it s really about that and not the president s personal interests, why would you go to the personal lawyer and not the experts, and why would you
majority of house members that certain articles of impeachment should be adopted. i don t think we will see any surprise witnesses in the future. i heard that john bolton saidly testify if a court clears the way, but that will take awhile. is his testimony worth waiting for? that is an excellent quest n question. he potentially as the deepest insights at least in terms of how the national security process was working with respect to potential policy options or considerations on ukraine policy, and also just by the stint of his position, sitting in the west wing and having
sideline the experts and career diplomats? that s why this is so relevant to the impeachment inquiry, because it goes directly to the defense that might be mounted that this wasn t about his personal interests. to the defense, jeremy peters, that the president has mounted and one of the things he s said repeatedly is this is a bunch of anti-trumpers as if they had some sort of coordinated plan, deep state plan to get together and get him out of office, it s interesting to me, apart from the critical facts of those meetings, the demeanor, right? because the american people are going to be watching this and they ll be judging how credible these people are, are they indeed out to get donald trump. dr. hill says she was very shocked and very saddened to read the record of the july 25th call between president trump and president zelensky. and she called the call really kind of my worst fears and nightmares in terms of being an effort to subvert the national
go. maya wiley, along the folks who have beenth following this closely. we can understand how these things stood in. it is not necessarily though easy if you have not been following it. my question to you is how do democrats need to approach this. it becomes clear simple and understand how to make the point they wanted to make. public hearings where the public adhere directly from experts exactly what the normal process is. what did not happen here in terms of normal process and what was so deeply concerning to national security and so clearly about the president s personal interest. that s essentially the story of if there was nothing wrong here, if this was really about the country and aroundbo national security,l why were the typica
just about corruption, corruption in general. it s not just about corruption if it s about his political campaign. and that s what the details in these transcripts sound like they re telling us, although i haven t read them yet. the other thing, jeremy peters, today, and we ve heard this consistently from the president, consistently from his supporters, when they re asked about details they sort of pivot to the whistle-blower and they have negative things to say, obviously, about the whistle-blower, about the process. vindman says in these transcripts that are released, that i am not the whistle-blower. these are corroborating statements made by people supporting what the whistle-blower initially had to say. that s exactly right, chris. this is why republicans i talk to are so worried about the way this process has unfolded so far. number one, you have a president of the united states and a white house that doesn t really have an effective message to push back on this to the demo