of abuse. and it also says we know thatjeffrey epstein trafficked countless girls. so this is a couple things, is saying this happened, i accept that this happened, jeffrey epstein did this and i was associated with him. it then goes on to say prince andrew regrets his association with jeffrey to say prince andrew regrets his association withjeffrey epstein. it is not an admission of guilt but it is not an admission of guilt but it is not an admission of guilt but it is not something i would expect to see in an out of court is not something i would expect to see this. out of court is not something i would expect to see this. it it of court is not something i would expect to see this. it is of court is not something i would expect to see this. it is somewhere in like this. it is somewhere in between, i think. and in some ways you can see that that wording, because virginia giuffre had always said it s about accountability for her. there is some degree of account of nullity and the settl
because if we do, it s basically carte blanche for this president and anyone who comes after him, but are we also prepared to say that congress will tolerate the complete stonewalling of an impeachment inquiry or our oversight, because if we do, it will mean that the impeachment clause is a complete nullity and more than that, our oversight ability is really an ability in name only. but if that s your view and you ve also said that this week s testimony, quote, goes right to the heart of the issue of bribery, and you ve also said that what you ve seen is, quote, far more serious than what nixon did, explain to me how you have not come to the conclusion that the president should be impeached? i mean, it sounds like he should be impeached. well, i certainly think that the evidence that s been produced overwhelmingly shows serious misconduct by the president. but i do want to hear more from my constituents and i want to hear more from my colleagues. this is not a decision i ll be maki
to put their country, their constitution above the party or the person of the president because i don t think he represents what the republican party used to stand for. if the facts aren t contested and your committee is writing up the report and as of now you don t have any scheduled witnesses or depositions, do you think president trump should be impeached? i want to discuss this with my constituents and my colleagues before i make a final judgment on it. but there are a couple of important things we need to think about and one is are we prepared to say that soliciting foreign interference conditioning official acts like $400 of taxpayer money and white house meetings to get political favors is compatible with the office because if we do, this is basically carte blanche for this president and anyone who comes after him and are we also prepared to say that congress will tolerate the complete stonewalling of an impeachment inquiry or our oversight because if we do it means that the
oversight ability is also a nullity. i know where you are on the whistleblower and the leaf you really don t need to hear from the whistleblower anymore. but you did blej that the intelligence committee would hear from the whistleblower in some form or another. are you going to fulfill that pledge? we had a deep interest in having the whistleblower testify until two things happened. one, we were able to prove everything in the whistleblower complaint with witnesses that had first-hand information. and second, the president and his allies effectively put that whistleblower s life in danger. the president said the whistleblower and others should be treated as a traitor or a spy. and we ought to use the penalty we used to use for traitors and spies. that s the death penalty. so here s the thing, chuck. we don t need the whistleblower s secondhand evidence anymore. it would only serve to endanger this person and to gratify the president s desire for retribution, and that s not a good e
will it benefits their lives. well the 2300000 people of saddam overage registered for the refrain damn are looking to exercise their constitutional right they say that they have a right to demand for autonomy and they have a right to that so they re hoping that they ll get autonomy they ll be an independent regional state and with that they ll be able to manage their own local resources because they have been saying that they are part of a very big south a nation s initial nullity region and of and of that they have to really struggle to get resources with the other people so they hope that with that independence they ll be able to fend for themselves if i may use that word and be able to express themselves as an ethnic group in the right way ok but some are warning that this could destabilize the country we ve already seen violence in the run up to this vote on wednesday what s to be said of us well if you. after speaking to the people of saddam