Tweet and propo kbgate the idea that interference by russia was a hoax. And we all remember the debacle in helsinki, i wish i had heard just some of the righteous indignation that we had heard in the committee today when the president questioned that fundamental conclusion of our intelligence agencies. But of course they will silent when the president said that. They will show indignation today, but they will cower when they hear the president questioning the very conclusions that our Intelligence Community has reached. But we saw Something Interesting also today. My colleagues sought to use you, dr. Hill, to besmirch the character of Colonel Vindman. And i thought this was very interesting. It certainly wasnt unexpected i could not tell was very
interesting for this reason. They didnt really question anything Colonel Vindman said. After all what he said is what you said. He was in that July 10th Meeting. He heard the same quid pro quo, the same comments by sondland. If you want this m
also in the war room. that s absurd. they don t accept the documentary evidence, all the text messages about quid pro quos, are we really saying and that s crazy, and if my worst nightmare is the russians will get it, i ll quit. they don t accept the documents, the few documents that we have from the state department that weren t produced by the way by the state department where sondland communicates directly with the secretary of state about this investigative interest of the president, and they don t accept the documents either, i guess the documents are also hearsay. now, might be a little more convincing if they were joining us in demanding that the documents be produced, but, of course, they re not. and we know why not. because the documents are like that one we saw on the screen, they implicate others including secretary pompeo. so, of course, donald trump and secretary pompeo don t want us to see those documents. but apparently that s all
they re not going to look to the russians. they re not going to look to the chinese. they can t look to europe with all its problems. they still look to us and increasingly they don t recognize what they see. because what they see is americans saying don t engage in political prosecutions. and what they say back is, oh, you mean like the bidens and the clintons that you want us to investigate? what they see, they don t recognize. and that is a terrible tragedy for us, but it is a greater tragedy for the rest of the world. now, i happen to think that when the founders provided a mechanism in the constitution for impeachment, they were worried about what might happen if someone unethical took the highest office in the land and used it for their personal gain
secretary pompeo don t put us to see those documents. apparently it is all hearsay. even when you actually hear the president, mr. holmes, that is all hearsay. we can only rely on what the president says, and there, we shouldn t even rely on that either. we shouldn t really rely on what the president said on the call record. we should imagine he said something else. we should imagine he said something about actually fighting corruption inside of what he actually said, which was i want you to do us a favor, though. i want you to look into this 2016 crowd strike conspiracy theory, and i want you to look into the bidens. we should not rely on that because that s hearsay. that is absurd. that would be like saying, you cannot rely on the testimony of the burglars during watergate, because it is only hearsay. or you cannot consider the fact that they tried to break in because they got caught.
that even though she did lose democrats, republicans stood firm, democrats, on a single strayer. it goes on to. in terms of what happens next, we did not hear from adam schiff whether he s going to announce anymore witnesses. i very much doubt it. why are you in such a rush? why don t you wait to see what happens in this lawsuit in early december to find out whether or not john bolton wouldn t he be an important witness? i don t get the sense that that will happen. and something that nancy pelosi and adam schiff and a lot of the top democratic leaders are going to discuss and figure out what to do. then they are going to have to right a report. it will obviously be two very different reports, the majority report, they will both be sent to the judiciary committee. they have to decide what to do. one big difference in the judiciary committee according to the house resolution is that