you don t have to watch it. here to respond, congressman steve scalise. sitting there listening to this! congressman, let s go to you. you are spearheading the effort to whip votes against impeachment. do you reach out to any of your democrat pals? it sad to see what the party has become and what the social and move into taking over in the democrat side, no moderates, and the liberals surely. it s a socialist party and you are seeing it play out. with these articles of impeachment, there are no barack obama didn t help ukraine. laura: i don t think anybody else cares about ukrai ukraine. i was there in 1983. no one cares. everybody knows this is a farce. it s a farce, a sham, losing in the court of public opinion miserably. democrats who want to vote no but can t because they know aoc
have national security backgrounds and went out on a limb to write an op-ed in the washington post calling for an impeachment inquiry, and i think that they will stick with the party. now, i could be wrong. i don t have a crystal ball but it s been interesting to me to see just how unified the democrats have been throughout this process. let s face it, we have a lot of evidence amassed by the intelligence committee and we re all going to get a look at it in what i expect to be a coherent and dramatic narrative about the president s conduct with respect to his pressure campaign in ukrai ukraine. so i think that they re going to hang tough. there will be a lot of advertising, as you say, but i ve had one democrat, tom malnowsky say if i lose and vote my conscience, i m okay with that. we re going to watch this tv narrative continue. the last episode, if you will,
behalf. not only contradicting what the president said in the past but also what his aides said. in the july transcript of the call that the president ordered to be released, he urges the ukrainian leader not once, twice, but three times, to speak to giuliani. talking about the debunked theory of ukraine interfering in the election instead of russia. the president is now telling bill o reilly in a new interview, he wasn t the one that told giuliani to do his dealings in ukraine. you have to ask that to rudy. i know he was going to go to ukrai ukraine. i think he canceled a trip. rudy has other clients other than me. that goes against what the president said in that july phone call with the ukrainian leader, and a les what gordon sondland, the ambassador to the european union, testified, that aides were instructed to work with giuliani. a lot of parallels what the president said about michael
credible and told mr. giuliani so? thank you, mr. chairman. first of all, the allegations themselves including those against ambassador yovanovitch did not appear to me to be credible at all. i know her to be an incredibly competent professional, someone i have worked with for many, many years. the suggestions that she was acting in some inappropriate manner were not credible to me. i have known vice president biden for a long time. those accusations were not credible. separate from that, i was also aware of the political situation in ukraine. we had a situation where president appeared to not be in a favorable position going into elections where it was increasingly apparent candidate zelensky was going to win. as is often in the case of ukraine, a change in power would mean a change in prosecutorial powers as well.
that giuliani wanted? it refers to the statement that he and yermak discussed. a text message between you and mr. yermak who is the same aide that giuliani met in madrid. if you could read what you wrote at the top at 5:02:00 p.m.? i wrote that i agree with your approach. use that to get the date and president zelensky can go forward with it. once we have a date, we will call for a press briefing, announcing upcoming visits and outlining vision for the reboot of u.s.-ukraine relationship including other things burisma and election meddling investigations. what did you respond? sounds great! that is the date for the