influential implementing policies that stymied their interests in ukraine? or advocating for some sort of environment or policies that would be averse to them? i think that, umm, just the general idea that obviously u.s. ambassadors, u.s. embassies, one of our most important functions is to facilitate u.s. business abroad, right, whether it s trade, whether it s commerce. that s one of the things that we do. and but, you know, everything has to be above board. we believe in a level playing ground but we obviously advocate for u.s. business. these two individuals, with hindsight, what we learned later, were looking to open up a new energy company, exporting liquified natural gas to ukra e
president trump sought to ukraine. exploit that ally s across the responsibilities i have had in public service, vulnerability and invite ukra e ukraine s interference in our ukraine is the highlight. and so secretary pompeo s offer elections. whether president trump to return as chief of the conditioned official acts, such as a white house meeting or u.s. mission was compelling. since i left ukraine in 2009, military assistance on ukraine s the country had continued to willingness to assist with two turn towards west. political investigations that but in 2013, vladimir putin vlad would help his re-election campaign. and if president trump did was so threatened by the either, if whether such an abuse of his power is compatible with prospect of ukraine joining the european union that he tried to the office of the presidency p. bribe the ukrainian president. this triggered mass protests in the matter is as simple and as the winter of 2013 that drove terrible as that. that president to fl
transition of power from the obama administration to the trump administration and i want to remind adam schiff and all the slow learners on msnbc and cnn, the president sets foreign policy, it doesn t make a difference if you don t agree with it. i don t care if a former obama ambassador from the ukraine says they forced me out, too bad. we elected this president, he appoints whoever he wants and if he wants to treat ukraine in a certain way, he is free to do it. meanwhile ukraine got the military ate obama wouldn t give, the president of the ukrae says what quid pro quo? they go to bureaucrats who no one has ever heard of in the state department to say i don t think the president should have done that did you talk? no. did you witness? no. did you have any first-hand? no. did you listen the phone call? yet, i don t think the transcript is right. what is going on here? this is another hoax being
the way roger stone is trying to defend himself on multiple felony counts in court is that by claiming that this company, crowdstrike, is secretly ukra e ukrainian and russia didn t hack the election. they have some sort of ukrainian connection. the ukrainians wanted to blame the russians. the democratic party hacked itself. that is how roger stone is trying to beat his felony charges in court. just this past week the judge in his case threw out an effort to suppress all the fruits of the search warrants in his case because of roger stone s claim that all those search warrants were based on false allegations against russia and russia is innocent and crowdstrike s lost servers in ukraine might explain all of it. this is an off the deep ending claim. it really is not working for roger stone in court and it s not working in the court of public opinion either. russia really did attack our election.
hearing from the president and what he knows in just a matter of minutes. our leland vittert has been working in that region until recently and made contacts there and has a statement from the separatists themselves. reporter: exactly. remember the separatists originally put out that they believe they shot down a ukra e ukrainian cargo plane around the time the malaysian airliner fell from the sky. that was originally the separatists statement and then they put out another statement effectively on their twitter page, social media page associated with these separatists, denying it saying it was ukrainian government. they just issued a statement to one of our folks there still in ukraine. they are saying ukrainian assault men shot down this plane. the prosecution office of the people s republic is investigating. they also say this. this is where it gets interesting. airspace above the republic, which is what they call themselves there in the eastern part of ukraine, is the territory