turned in his chair and refused to look at the picture. convinced larry hall was hiding something, miller became obsessed with making a case against him. days later, back in illinois, miller turned up a huge lead. he found witnesses who vividly remembered hall from a revolutionary war re-enactment in the georgetown area the very weekend before jessie was abducted. to them, hall stood out for his bushy muttonchops side burns, but also for playing a soldier who was fighting the wrong war. he was wearing a civil war uniform and he had a civil war hat. at a revolutionary war re-enactment? exactly. armed with this new information, deputy sheriff miller returned to wabash for a second crack at hall. this time, he pressed his suspect harder, stressing that hall s fellow re-enactors had
there is something wrong with him. so he made up my phone call. he made it up. he made up a phone call and then when i released it everybody was embarrassed. now there is this thing when adam schiff did kind of a dramatic re-enactment, a paraphrase of the president s phone call. i don t think he was lie being it but it is probably not politically the smartest thing. but the president has a timeline issue here. he does. so i ve heard that schiff s rendition was exaggerated and trump is reasonable to be miffed about it but trump is saying that schiff spoke and then he outsmarted schiff by releasing the transcript the next day or sometime after. not what happened. trump released the transcript first. his complaint about schiff was that he had the transcript released. and it is a lie that makes him look better and adam schiff look worse. that is one hypothesis. and he released one issue he
as tense as he watched. but when the president came before the cameras today, he declared victory. i just noticed one thing, and i would say, that means, it s all over. reporter: the president seized on one small sliver of ambassador gordon sondland s testimony regarding a september phone call in which he says he asked president trump what he wanted from ukraine. i just said, what do you want from ukraine? and he said, i want nothing. i want no quid pro quo. i just want zelensky to do the right thing. reporter: reading from his own handwritten notes, the president delivered a reenactment of sondland s testimony. so he s going, what do you want? what do you want? i hear all these theories, what do you want? , right? and now, here s my response that he gave, just gave. ready? you have the cameras rolling? i want nothing. that s what i want from ukraine. that s what i said. i want nothing. i said it twice.
and i m i m glad it s on display because we ve heard so much about those institutions being demoralized and i know that at embassies around the world, they re watching these ambassadors. and military installations, they re looking at guys like lieutenant colonel vindman, who we ll hear from next week, and they re being reminded about what an oath means. about what integrity means and you re note getting it from the white house. we re seeing kind of a reenactment, restaging of the iron curtain today with the oligarchs replacing the old nomenclature. the old big shots of the soviet union. and we re seeing a tyranny by putin. against anybody in the near empire, which they re trying to reclaim. we see it all happening. what side of that fight is the president of the united states on? for that fight for the bad side? or our side, trying to prevent it? which side is he on? well, let the people judge for themselves. you re a member of congress. you re on the intel committee. what side
whistle-blower controversy. good afternoon. things are going to get personal tonight on the house floor. republicans attempt to go after house intelligence chairman adam schiff hoping to censure him. schiff has become a target in the face of the impeachment inquiry. republicans are blasting him for his reenactment of president trump s conversation with ukraine s president during an open hearing. they are also taking aim after schiff left the charge lead the charge claiming the trump campaign included with russia in the 2016 election. as far as explanation initially claiming no contact with the whistle-blower, before the complaint was issued per republican andy biggs of arizona is leading this fight against schiff. he is the guy who said there was absolute clear evidence of collusion and it turns out that wasn t true. he s gone forward time after tied with misleading statements right on up to the opening statement he gave in his own hearing. so it isn t that we view him as