The whistleblower made falseht statements, the whistleblower got caught with chairman schiff. Remember chairman schiff, the person that the democrats instead of the House Judicial Committee which has spent a full week on this, thats not who has been in charge. They put in charge was the person that got caught with the whistleblower. Have you spoken directly with the whistleblower . No, we have not. Wed like to. That wasnt true. The person that said he had evidence of the first fake impeachment scam, collusion with russia, had evidence of that collusion and didnt have it. The person who in the course of that read into the record the steele dossier because the people needed to know what happened about the truth of what happened. We heard about the truth of what happened with the steele dossier this week when the Inspector General said it was all garbage, rubbish, all made up. Yeah, thatad chairman schiff. And now he got caught not being truthful about a whistleblower who, as i told you t
because this, again, is a letter signed by more than 500 constitutional scholars. i think some of the confusion my colleagues have been struggling with is the difference between impeachable offenses and violations of the criminal statute. they write, impeachment is a remedy for grave abuses of the public trust. impeachment is an especially essential remedy for conduct that corrupts elections. the primary check on a president is political. if a president behaves poorly voters can punish him or her at the polls. a president who corrupts the system of elections seeks to place himself beyond the reach of this political check. as the constitutional convention george mason described impeachable offenses as attempts to subvert the constitution. corrupting elections subverts the process by which it makes the president democratically accountable. put simply if a president cheats in his effort at re-election trusting the democratic process tora serve as a check through tt
president of ukraine because he had some secret anti corruption agenda that actually wasn t related to the bidens, that wasn t related to rehabilitating the totally discredited russian conspiracy theory that it was ukraine and not russia that interfered in our campaign in 2016. come on. get real. be serious. we know exactly what happened here. 17 witnesses. it s uncontradicted. there s no rival story, no rival story at all. our colleagues will not even tell us whether in theory they think it would be wrong for the president of the united states to shake down foreign governments, to come and get involved in our presidential campaigns in order to harm the president s political opponents. they won tpo even tell us in principle whether they think that s wrong because they think it s too dangerous at that point. we know they don t accept the facts, we know they don t accept
halt the aid. the president instructed all witnesses from the administrationfr not to testify and withheld all relevant documents from house investigators. on october 3rd when asked by a reporter what he hoped president zelensky would do following their d july 25th call, preside trump told the american public and the world, well, i would think that if they were honest about it they d start a major investigation into the bidens. it s a very simple answer. on october 17th at a press briefing in the white house acting chief of staff mick mulvaney said president trump absolutely mentioned corruption related to the dnc server this connection with the security assistance during his july 25th call, and that that server was part of, quote, why we held the money up, end quote. upon taking a question from a reporter attempt to ing to clar the acknowledge many of a quid
he still agreed to meet with them. article 2 section four of the united states constitution says the president and vice president shall been he moved for convictn ofd treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. we don t have that here. one that is outlined in a criminal statute. for example, nixon was accused of a criminal act, bill clinton three. these were crimes that not tried in the house of representatives could have been tried in a criminal court. this standard of criminality, as mr. turley explained, although criminality is not required, clarity is nnecessary. that comes from a complete and comprehensive record that eliminates exculpatory motivations or explanations. the democrats couldn t find any criminal act on the part of the president. instead of relying on historical precedent of criminality they decided to impeach him for abuse of power, a vague phrase that appears nowhere in the constitution when discussing