judiciary didn t call a single solitary fact witness. they called more fact witnesses for the watergate impeachment than they did for the trump impeachment. the record is already in, it s full. let s vote. send it to the jury and let s vote. sean: i actually could be persuaded either way,, in that i actually think these people are so nuts that let the house of representatives, whoever they appoint, let them do whatever they want to do. then, once they have the votes, the 51 votes, i would assume, call the roll, get it out of there.s but then, investigate the whistle-blower.e, then the congenital liar schiff. then hunter and joe. we really care about quids and pros and quos, then joe is right there. what i tell clients, you can say whatever you want after thee trial is over. you want to say something about the judge, the police, you want to say something about anyone,
say, yes, there was definitely a quid pro quos at the heart of this whole thing. now, of course, they turn on the president s own ambassador. we don t have to rely on his word. i started to mention this before because he had a lunch with david holmes who was the senior state department official at the u.s. embassy in kiev. they went to a restaurant and ambassador sondland got president trump on the phone and afterward holmes could hear the conversation. thiser is all uncontradicted by other witnesses who were there. and essentially ambassador sondland said to him, zelensky loves your ass and you ll get exactly what you want from him. afterwards holmes says, well, what is it we can get from him? well, it s the big stuff.
he understood immediately how important that word was, and he had to tell him oh, no that s what s in the transcript, that s what he actually said. exactly, lawrence. i wrote that the washington post and indeed my book impeached that came out last week because of the central point, which is all you need to understand whether donald trump should be impeached and removed is to read the transcript of the july 25th call. because in that call you see not one but two different quid pro quos. the withholding of aid and the holding of a the prevention of a white house meeting all until that favor is done for the president so that he can get dirt on his political rival. and, you know, the essence of impeachment has always been as was said by a congressman in 2008 when a president puts his personal interests above those of the american people, and that congressman was mike pence then sitting in congress now the vice president. that s always been the standard. this july 25th phone call
we do have some video here. i guess we don t have it. neal, i was going to show this video that you remind said us of. it s 60 minutes video in which kevin mccarthy is asked about the, you know, we need you to do us a favor, though, and kevin mccarthy says he didn t say though, he didn t say though. he understood immediately how important that word was, and he had to tell him oh, no that s what s in the transcript, that s what he actually said. exactly, lawrence. i wrote that the washington post and indeed my book impeached that came out last week because of the central point, which is all you need to understand whether donald trump should be impeached and removed is to read the transcript of the july 25th call. because in that call you see not one but two different quid pro quos. the withholding of aid and the holding of a the prevention of a white house meeting all
into potentially two articles of impeachment when we get down that line here. the actual actions of the white house regarding ukraine, withholding of the aid, the conditioning of white house meeting, those two sort of quid pro quos, not to go back to speaking latin here then the obstructi obstruction. all of this laid out in a 300 page report that s 150 pages of content and another 150 pages of notes. so democrats showing their work here as we go through this and to be frank with you, i m just beginning to dig into this. it s a pretty dense almost academic document here and i think i can just say that that also speaks to why democrats found those public hearings so important. we learned this if mueller. americans, by and large, are not going to sit down tonight and read a 300 page report, but they ll watch these hearings, they ll listen to these witnesses and democrats hope that will keep them in line in supporting this inquiry. they re laying out their argument here and what i ve