What does the president want to know . Did he ask about ukraines efforts to battle corruption . Of course not. Did he ask how the war with russia was going . Not a chance. On the phone, his voice loud enough, President Trump asked sondland, is hes going to do the investigation . The answer was clear. He ensured trump that the ukrainian president was going to do it and that he would do anything you asked him to. If that wasnt telling enough, my colleagues, in a conversation that followed, an american Diplomat Dining with sondland asked if it was true that President Trump didnt give a blank about ukraine, sondland agreed, saying the president cared only about big stuff. The diplomat noted that there
was big stuff in ukraine, like a war with russia. Sondland replied that the president cared only about big stuff that benefits him personally. Like the Biden Investigation that mr. Giuliani was pushing. In that short conversation, we learned everything we need to know about the 45th president
Whether you think thats good or bad and matches the abuse of powers is an open question. And then he goes through and argues he doesnt see what he calls a statutory crime. And well see that debate as well. There are people youre going to hear from who are going to say its got to be an actual felony and then there are going to be other people pointing out the constitution doesnt require that. It has words like treason, bribery and high crimes. So were going to get into the weeds here, but the big picture is keep your eye on which witnesses and exchanges are talking about the serious question of whats impeachable. The other noise you can try and tune out as with any hearing. Mr. Wiesman, your last words of advice as we settle in to watch the legal experts. I think its very important to keep your eye on the facts and the law. And i think one of the things that the public is rightly upset about is the rule of law not being applied. And so i think the quote you read is fun, its sort of catc
Other important things that are going undone. Within this committees own jurisdiction we should be addressed in the opioid epidemic. We could be working together to find a solution to our immigration and asylum challenges on our southern border. We could be protecting americans for having their intellectual property and jobs stolen by Chinese Companies and we could be enhancing Election Security just to name a few things. Congress as a whole could be working on rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. Providing additional tax relief to the nations middle class families and providing additional security to our people here at home and abroad. Instead, here we are spinning our wheels once again on impeachment. What a waste. The American People deserve so much better. I yield back. The Gentleman Yield back. Thank you, mr. Chair. I take no pleasure in the fact that we are here today. As a patriot who loves america,
it pains me that the circumstances forced us to undertake this grave and sol
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
And the controlling law. Use of an obstruction theory from the Mueller Report would be unsupported, unsupportable in the house and unsustainable in the senate. Do you remember writing that . Yes, i do. Why did you write that . Because i think its true. The fact is that this was reviewed by main justice. The special counsel did not reach a conclusion on obstruction. He should have. I think his justification quite frankly was a bit absurd on not reaching a conclusion. But the attorney general, Deputy Attorney general, did and they came to the right conclusion. I dont think this is a real case for obstruction. But then this body would be impeaching the president on the basis of the inverse conclusion. I dont believe it would be appropriate. The gentlemans time has expired. Ms. Dean. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Words matter. In my earlier life, professors, i was a professor of writing. I taught my students to be
careful and clear about what they put to paper. That is a lesson that the framers