President zelensky decided that they were not going to issue thatt statement that Rudy Giuliani wanted to include burisma in the 2016 elections, there was no white house meeting. It soon became clear to them that the Security Assistance was also at risk. And that took on a renewed importance for them. Well, following the 25th call, the t july 25th call, ambassador sondland and volker worked closely with mr. Giuliani and the ukrainians to help draft a statement that the president could make, president zelensky. Wasnt that right . Yes. And the report said they worked closely and there were also phone calls with the white house around the same time that they werear working closely. Do you know what that statement was supposed tou say according to mr. Giuliani and the u. S. Officials . Well, the key difference is that it had to include that ukraine would do the investigations of burisma which equalled theic Biden Investigatn in the 2016 ukraine
interference. But was there concern about doi
Were not going to issue that statement that Rudy Giuliani wanted to include burisma in the 2016 elections, there was no white house meeting. Soon became clear to them that the Security Assistance was also at risk and that took on a renewed importance for them. Following the July 25th Call, it had to include that they would do the investigations of burisma which equaled the Biden Investigation into the ukraine interference. Was their concern about doing
the investigations or what . Where they supposed to make a statement about it . Ambassador sondland very clearly testified that all he ever heard mr. Giuliani or anyone say is that they only needed the public announcement of the investigation. Without that Public Statement that there would be no white house meeting. Yes. I was struck by how clear the evidence seems to be on this point and id like to play another example. Was they were a quid pro quo . As i testified previously with regard to the requested white house call, the answer is
I thought the threat to our nation was wellarticulated earlier today by Professor Feldman when you said, if we cannot impeach a president who abuses his office for personal advantage, we no longer live in a democracy, we live in a monarchy or we live under a dictatorship. My view is that a people cannot depend on the fairness of will be absolutely nothing compared to the shredding of our democracy. After the events of ukraine unfolded, the president claimed the reason he requested an investigation into his political opponent and withheld desperately needed military aid for ukraine was supposedly because he was worried about corruption. However, contrary to the president s statements, various witnesses including Vice President pence special advisor Jennifer Williams testified that the president s request was political. Take a listen. Speak of the july 20 for phone call was unusual because in contrast to other presenter because ive observed, it involved discussions would appear to be had
Whatwe that means, its to use e power of the office to obtain an improper personal benefit while ignoring orfi injuring the national interest, or acts in ways that are grossly inconsistent with and undermine the separation of powers that is the foundation of our democratic system. Now, this question of whether the president engaged in abuse of power came up before when this congress considered the impeachment of president nixon. And president nixon famously said, if the president does it, it is notde illegal. And this body rejected that because thats not so. That goes directly contrary to what the founders said. But President Trump has said the same thing in responding to the prior investigation by the Department Of Justice and defending his conduct. Heres what he said. I have an article 2 where i have the right to do whatever i want as president. That he has the right to do whatever he wants as president. That is as wrong as when president nixon said a similar thing. That is not what
Usaa. What youre made of were made for tonight, several developing stories as we come on the air. After President Trump takes aim at the head of the cdc, dr. Robert redfield, and what he said about a potential vaccine and timeline, the nations top doctors tonight come to dr. Redfields defense. And what dr. Anthony fauci is saying about when millions of americans will likely get a vaccine. The president offering his own timeline, much closer to the election. And all of this as the u. S. Now nears 200,000 american lives lost. Tonight here, a Reality Check. Abc news reaching out to the leaders, the scientists leading more than a half dozen vaccine trials. So, what do they say about when there could be a vaccine and when americans could get it . Also, the new obstacles for schools. New York City Schools and the setback. And the pastor who told members of his own congregation they didnt have to wear masks now reportedly in the icu, battling the virus. The remnants of Hurricane Sally. The st