Yes, i believe so. Okay. And this is just investigation, generally making a public to of openness generally. Right . I think by august 11th, mr. Castor, i think we were talking about 2016 and burisma. The investigation generally was really early in the but do we know that Secretary Pompeo knows that . I think so. Why . Only because i think councilor breakable was briefed on all of these things. By who, by you . I think ambassador volker, by myself. Does not he testified to. I didnt know he testified. Ambassador volker. Oh, okay. He didnt testified that he briefed mr. Brechbuhl. This email to the secretary, he is talking about the statement
which by the way, you said that the statement didnt go anywhere. Ambassador volker said it wasnt a good idea. Mr. Yermak said it wasnt a good idea. The secretary, it relates to a generic openness subject. Right . Yeah, i think the secretary that was on the july 25th call. Which obviously i was not on and i didnt know about. But you use this email to
or sondland said and what did bill taylor said was wrong. that is not the argument. it is just they ve created an if alternate reality. and rudy giuliani is away and the white house strategy carried to thenth extreme. and this is what jackie was alosing to. the white house has spent two months decrying this process seeking to cast it as illegitimate despite that not being the case so there was no reason to believe they would come and sit before the house judiciary committee to play ball and especially to the outset to bill s point they haven t engaged on substance because it doesn t look good for the president so they ve made this a process driven argument to try to present the inquiry as politically motivated and that is the message to the base and perhaps to independents if they think that impeachment is not
and you worked at clinton white house during impeachment yeah. and he didn t cooperate with everything and didn t tell the truth about everything, but you guys you don t have to say it. i just did. but the white house generally felt compelled to turn ore documents and to over witnesses. absolutely. and to take the process seriously. as bill was saying, whether you like it or not, or agree with it or not, this letter is just another abomination in not taking it seriously, in just rejecting the premise that congress has any authority to hold the executive branch accountable and that has been the president s stance frankly from day one that i m the president so anything i do can t possibly be illegal. we ve heard him say that a few times. and in addition to undermining not just the process, but the people. they don t want to have to account for some of the things they ve said about vindman and sondland who maybe deserves it, but fiona hill, so i m just
kaitlan collins, thanks so much. let s talk about this. that is kind of disingenuous. they haven t cooperated with anything. i get that this gives them a good talking point, writing the articles before responding and before the hearing on monday but they weren t going to participate. no. and they don t want engage. we talked about this. they don t want to deal with the facts. it is appalling and republicans still barely the idea that the republican party has gone along with this and no republican will stand up and say look make your case, white house, and explain why fiona hill is wrong playing into russian s hands and explain why ambassador sondland didn t understand something or that didn t result in great damage to the country and those would be arguments based on a common set of of uncontested facts. what single fact in anyone s testimony does the white house now contest? what did fiona hill or vindman
he said that before the committee. maybe he should have. it s the incompetence and ridiculousness of appointing this clown in the first place is extraordinary. sorry, i don t take notes when the president is telling me what to do. what is that. one of the problems sara and susan suggested, this supposed september 9th call was supposedly at one point a response to ambassador taylor raising the response in the text it s kind of crazy to hold out military aid in exchange for getting this meeting. if sondland didn t even have this call which he then is later supposed to have come back and said, oh, the president said no quid pro quo, it further weakens the case there was a clear message from the white house there was no quid pro quo. let me get jeffrey to react to the senator from louisiana, going back and forth whether there was ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election, said there