Tweet and propo kbgate the idea that interference by russia was a hoax. And we all remember the debacle in helsinki, i wish i had heard just some of the righteous indignation that we had heard in the committee today when the president questioned that fundamental conclusion of our intelligence agencies. But of course they will silent when the president said that. They will show indignation today, but they will cower when they hear the president questioning the very conclusions that our Intelligence Community has reached. But we saw Something Interesting also today. My colleagues sought to use you, dr. Hill, to besmirch the character of Colonel Vindman. And i thought this was very interesting. It certainly wasnt unexpected i could not tell was very
interesting for this reason. They didnt really question anything Colonel Vindman said. After all what he said is what you said. He was in that July 10th Meeting. He heard the same quid pro quo, the same comments by sondland. If you want this m
testify. but recall, richard, as joyce said, through a totality of the evidence, a firm case of impeachable behavior. this entire fact pattern started with the president s admission around september 22 or 23. he said why would i give money to a corrupt nation? and when pressed on it, he said, of course, i wanted to make sure that our people, mainly the bidens, weren t contributing to corruption in the ukraine. so we have the confession followed by the corroborating testimony. the house has what it needs. the question is, you know, schiff has said if they don t get the testimony, they ll consider it further evidence of obstruction. i do think if you re going to move forward and and you want to draw a finer point on the fact you didn t get cooperation from the white house, they need to move more clearly into that space. maybe even pass a sense of the house that they are going to move impeachment articles on december 15th. they want testimony from bolton, pompeo, and mulvaney. they want
to mean by the drug deal that mulvaney and sondland were cooking up? i took it to mean investigations for a meeting. did you go speak to the lawyers? i certainly did. investigations for a meeting in her lovely accent that i won t even try to replicate, quid pro quo. john bolton needs to testify. not simply for the congress, not for adam schiff but for the american people. he was at the center of the president s national security power. it is clearly corroborated from the witnesses over the past two weeks that john bolton himself had concerns about the president s behavior. this is an unusual case that is being made. it s intriguing, counter intuitive because we actually have the confession at the front end. donald trump on september 22nd said to the american people i wanted to make sure the bidens, he named them by name, weren t contributing to corruption in the ukraine. what we ve heard the last two weeks isn t leading to a