he doesn t come to the same conclusions, but he s not somebody he s a former republican staffer who had been in the congress for a long time. wasn t really somebody that was that experienced in foreign affairs and dealing with the national security council. but he reports facts that are basically on all fours with all the other witnesses. i mean, i think what we ve seeing here is an investigation in real time. this was not like watergate where the house judiciary committee had everything presented to them by our office and by the senate select committee that had done an investigation before. so what s really interesting here is we are watching this all come together in real time because once they get a little piece of information, they investigate it some more and we keep learning more. jill, 45 seconds to you on this. so having been through this before, where is the prosecution
to the u.s. foreign policy interest and were about his own personal agenda. and what s also important to understand is that the president wants to make this about one call and what we learned from the past week is that this is basically a scandal that goes back a full year in terms of their desire to remove marie yovanovitch, the smear campaign against her. kind of all the back-channel meetings that were happening. the sidelining of career officials. this wasn t just one phone call. and even on this one phone call, obviously you have you will see there s some disagreement as to what the implication of it was. but the fact that this eventually was moved to a different server i think suggests on someone s part that it was problematic. but i think you need to take a look at this whole picture and the fact that the ukrainians understood and we know that from george kent s testimony and bill taylor s testimony, they understood that a demand was being made of them. and they were basically
facts established that there was this effort by donald trump s team, led by giuliani, to in fact extract this cfrom ukraine and investigation. on friday, i think the dispositive moment was there was 60 seconds with ambassador yovanovitch where he said why were you dismissed? and she said i wasn t given a reason. and he said would you have supported an investigation into crowd strike? she said no. would you support an investigation into the bidens? no. would you have supported withholding aid? she said no. it painted a picture not only on wednesday that there was this effort donald trump was running but by friday with ambassador yovanovitch, there was an effort to remove people who were in his way. and now, add on the testimony we have apparently over the weekend that, in fact, there is a witness to the president s own voice. the facts are there, richard. what we will end up at the end of the day as a country, this is on us. we will know what the facts are.
will try to bring forward on tuesday. and what they may bring up. let s start with morrison. again, both of these two individuals on the call. so they re very important. what do you expect from morrison here based on the way that garrett had laid it out for us? i think the top takeaway from tim morrison s deposition is that he gave democrats another data point to connect this to the president. he said that gordon sondland, the u.s. ambassador to the european union told him that he was acting on the president s orders essentially and that he was in constant communications with the president. that dove tails with what we heard last night from david holmes, a u.s. embassy official in ukraine who said he overheard a phone conversation between gordon sondland in person with donald trump on the phone here in washington during which they talked about this idea of ukraine pursuing these investigations. it s it s another data point that gives democrats a way to connect this to the president