Not just biden. Th of course they are. And theres no evidence of that. But theyre going to keep at thetrying because that is the argument that they they want to Fuzzymuddy The Waters Out Te Muddy the waters, not fuzzy them, muddy the waters out. That, by the way, is a tactic that Vladimir Putin and other authoritarian dictators s use. But thats their strategic objective to make it all seem the same. S no there you have it. Theres no evidence of any of this because i say theres Noth Evidence this of this. And oh, by the way, Vladimir Putin and ther tire is thes same tired trope thats dominated the dim Bulbnated Thsr on the left since 2016. But its not surprisinisg doing so given what has been revealed on a near daily basis. As this program briefly laid out last night, the devin any archer transcript obliterates any defens e joe biden and his lackeys have been offering. And further, archer recently told Tucker Carlson the claimsan biden didnt have any knowledge of his sons Business Deali
Return for the 2016 dnc server and burisma investigation. When you heard burisma, you didnt see it as code for biden, the bidens . I did not. When did you know that. Your testimony saying that burisma included the bidens when the readout came out. My testimony wasnt specific with regards to the date. September . I dont recall the date. If i told you that the Legal Definition of bribery was an event of offering, giving, soliciting or receiving of any item of value and the means of influencing an action of an individual holding a public or legal duty. Do you believe that not only was it quid pro quo but it was bribery. Not a lawyer and im not going to characterize what
something was or wasnt legally. You also said in your Opening Statement that Secretary Perry and yourself, as well as Ambassador Volker worked with giuliani on the ukraine matter, and express direction of the president. Is that right . You also go on to say that we did not want to work with giuliani, simply put we played t
more about obama s pre-presidential life than anybody alivy alive. and the one common theme is that these astounding revelations that the dreams alom my father unquote, memoir was completely fabricated. almost nothingmo in it in is ac. it s only it could only happen in america with this media thatle i never investigated, never even interviewed some of the key people in obama s life until garrow did. and then he s trying lookout. back at the obama presidency, which he didn t really write about. he wrote about the early years org yearg of obama, and he comes to the conclusion that everything he was worried about in the biography was reified in the presidency, lod he says it was a complete failure, that he looks atok the red line syria thatdete he didn t honor, that destroyed deterrence. the iranrrthe iran deal th deald to weaken israel and our middle east friendsn th in the gulf atn the benefit of the shia crescentt. . k at and again, when you look at the ukraine matter, he suggestsi
what s been interesting is that republican sources told me pompeo getting mixed up in the ukraine matter, his role at the state department has come under scrutiny by house democrats. republicans tell me that hasn t dented at all how much they want him to run. they don t think that hurts him in kansas. they still think he is the best candidate to take on that seat, particularly as the post article mentioned, if kris kobach stays in the race, because he is the reason he s a hard-liner, particularly on immigration, a controversial figure, he is partly the reason why the kansas governor is controlled by the democratic party right now. why is being a senator from kansas better than being secretary of state for running for president? i think it s being secretary of state with this white house. he sees it as he s got what he needed out of it, a credential to run for president, he s much better off in the senate. i don t think he s doing this to
something was or wasn t legally. you also said in your opening statement that secretary perry and yourself, as well as ambassador volker worked with giuliani on the ukraine matter, and express direction of the president. is that right? you also go on to say that we did not want to work with giuliani, simply put we played the hand that we were dealt. what you mean by that and more broadly what did you think would happen if you did not play that hand? i think what you re asking me is, well, you asked it. what would happen if we didn t. it was very fragile with ukraine at the time. there was no new ambassador. the old ambassador had left. there is a new president. we thought it was very, very important to shore up the relationship. in fact you actually said, you go on to say will understood that if we refused to work with