Public Impeachment Hearings

Rep. Zeldin calls for impeachment hearings to be postponed

https://youtu.be/aYHSaB4hBE4?t=90

Trump impeachment inquiry: Three Republican claims fact-checked
By Jonah Fisher in Kyiv & Reality Check team | BBC News

Long article:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50424322

Classic:
_____________________________________________________________________

Ratcliffe: No witness has used the word bribery
• Nov 19, 2019

Rep. John Ratcliffe, notes that Democrats have called Trump's conduct "bribery" and then pulls out a mountain of papers of deposition transcripts. He says at no point have witnesses described his conduct as "bribery" in the last six weeks. He says the word appears only once -- and that's in relation to former Vice President Joe Biden's alleged conduct.

Jim Jordan Backs Schiff Into a Corner on Exposing the Whistleblower
• Nov 19, 2019

Jim Jordan clashed with Rep. Adam Schiff in an impeachment hearing today as Adam Schiff refused to let Lt. Col. Vindman reveal who he leaked information about President Trump's phone call to. Schiff said it might expose the "Whistleblower", but Jim Jordan shot back reminding Schiff that he claimed he didn't know who the "Whistleblower" was.

Schiff Interrupts Nunes As He Goes After Leaks, Whistleblower | MSNBC
• Nov 19, 2019

Rep. Nunes asked both Jennifer Williams and Lt. Col. Vindman, point-blank, whether they leaked, or directed anyone to leak, any information surrounding the July 25 call between Trump and Zelenskiy. After repeated attempts, Chairman Schiff eventually interrupted and reminded everyone that the hearings would not be used to "out the whistleblower."

Published 49 mins ago
Trump says 'it's all over' for impeachment inquiry after Sondland testimony
By Andrew O'Reilly | Fox News

President Trump addresses the testimony of Ambassador Sondland.

President Trump on Wednesday said that Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland’s testimony before the House Intelligence Committee should exonerate him of any claims of wrongdoing in the ongoing impeachment inquiry into him.

Speaking to reporters before departing on a scheduled trip to Texas, Trump claimed that Sondland’s testimony means “it’s all over” for the proceedings and that the House inquiry into Trump should come to a halt.

“I just noticed one thing and that would mean it’s all over,” Trump said on the White House lawn before reading from handwritten notes taken during Sondland’s testimony.

Sondland testified about a conversation with Trump where he asked the president what he wanted from Ukraine.

“And it was a very short, abrupt conversation,” the ambassador said. “He was not in a good mood. And he just said, ‘I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.’ Something to that effect.”

Ambassador Sondland: 'Trump never told me aid was conditioned,' it was my 'personal guess'

While Trump argued that Sondland’s statement proves there was no quid pro quo between his administration and Ukraine -- the matter at the heart of the impeachment probe -- Sondland gave a more nuanced account.

He confirmed he never heard directly from Trump on a quid pro quo linking military aid for Ukraine to politically advantageous investigations.

But Sondland said “we all understood” that a meeting at the White House for Ukraine’s president and a phone call with Trump would happen only if President Volodymyr Zelensky agreed to an investigation into the 2016 U.S. election and the Bidens. And he said he came to presume aid was linked to investigations too.

He said he sent an email on July 19, just days before the July 25 call at the center of the impeachment inquiry, where he laid out the issue in detail to members of the State and Energy departments and White House staff.

Sondland added: "It was no secret."

Sondland testified later that he worked with Trump’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, on Ukraine at Trump’s “express direction” and pushed a “quid pro quo” with Kiev because it was what Trump wanted.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., called Sondland’s testimony “a very important moment in the history of this investigation'' and said it showed “for the first time that knowledge of this scheme was pervasive.’’

Temple wrote:

Trump as of now is fucked, royally..
He will be impeached but-
the senate will set trump free..
Nonetheless, trump will be impeached, if not removed.
I can see him resigning as soon as
he creates a reason that won't pertain to his impeachment.

Trump 2020. Plan for it.

Impeachment inquiry: Five key moments from Sondland hearing
4 hours ago | BBC

The fourth day of televised impeachment hearings has heard arguably the most important testimony yet.

The Democratic-led inquiry is trying to determine if President Trump improperly brought pressure on Ukraine to force it to investigate one of his political rivals, former Vice-President Joe Biden.

On Wednesday, US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland said not only was there a "quid pro quo" but he and other officials were acting under direction from the president himself.

Here are the key five moments with analysis from the BBC's North America reporter Anthony Zurcher.

1. 'We did not want to work with Mr Giuliani'
The impeachment saga involves a vast cast but one of the central figures is President Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani. In his opening remarks Mr Sondland said he, the Secretary of Energy Rick Perry and Kurt Volker, former special representative to Ukraine, worked closely with Mr Giuliani at President Trump's behest.

What he said: "Secretary Perry, Ambassador Volker and I worked with Mr Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine matters at the express direction of the President of the United States. We did not want to work with Mr Giuliani. Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. "

Anthony's take: There have been some efforts by the president's defenders to paint Rudy Giuliani as operating in Ukraine independently of the White House. This makes some sense, given his penchant for vocal and sometimes unsteady television appearances, along with testimony from others that he was the one putting the greatest pressure on Ukrainian officials to open investigations that could harm Democrats and the Bidens. Giuliani's image has also been tarnished by the indictment of two of his business associates and reports of criminal investigations into his own activities.

Right off the bat, however, Sondland draws a direct line from Donald Trump to Giuliani. If anyone wanted to be involved in Ukrainian policy, Sondland said, they were going to have to work with the former New York mayor. It was just that simple.


2. 'Communications with Pompeo'
There have also been questions over what Secretary of State Mike Pompeo knew. Mr Sondland said he kept in contact with him and the National Security Council (NSC), a key advisory council to the White House.

What he said: "We kept the leadership of the State Department and the NSC informed of our activities. That included communications with Secretary of State Pompeo."

Analysis: Another White House defence has been to characterise Sondland himself as a foreign policy freelancer and that he may have been mischaracterising what the president wanted and was operating a "shadow" foreign policy outside of the normal channels.

Sondland countered that he was the proper channel because the president wanted him to be - and that he was keeping Mike Pompeo, then-National Security Advisor John Bolton, acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and other White House officials appraised of all his activities. He even noted that he told Vice-President Mike Pence of his concerns that US aid to Ukraine was being withheld (something the Pence's office has since denied).

"Everyone was in the loop," Sondland said. "It was no secret."

This was, in other words, an administration-wide policy - and Democrats have been quick to note that many of those administration officials have refused to testify in the impeachment hearings.

3. 'The July 26 phone call'
US official David Holmes has claimed he heard Mr Sondland and President Trump discussing if Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was going to start the Biden investigations over the phone on July 26. Sondland did not mention the phone call with Mr Trump in his first testimony. He would address it directly this time.

What he said: "Actually, I would have been more surprised if President Trump had not mentioned investigations, particularly given what we were hearing from Mr Giuliani about the President's concerns."

Analysis: One of the big revelations from acting US Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor's testimony last week was that an aide, now known to be David Holmes, overheard a 26 July phone call between Trump and Sondland.

Sondland, in his Wednesday morning hearing appearance, confirmed this phone call and that the two men discussed "the investigations" the president wanted Ukraine to launch.

Although Sondland says he didn't know at the time, the day before that call Trump had directly asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate one of his political rivals, Democrat Joe Biden.

The president has repeatedly said that he barely knew Sondland, but according to this testimony the two knew each other well enough to have an unsecure phone call moments after he met Ukrainian officials.

4. 'Two plus two equals four'
Mr Sondland said he believed military aid was held up to put pressure on Ukraine. He said he had never directly heard Mr Trump link the withholding of military aid from Ukraine with his desire for the country to launch investigations that might benefit him but said he could draw that conclusion.

What he said: "President Trump never told me directly that the aid was conditioned on the meetings. The only thing we got directly from (Trump's personal lawyer Rudy) Giuliani was that the Burisma and 2016 elections were conditioned on the White House meeting. The aid was my own personal, you know, guess, based again on your analogy two plus two equals four."

Analysis: Sondland was very clear in his testimony that a White House visit by Ukrainian President Zelensky was conditioned on Ukraine launching investigations that could be politically helpful to Trump.

"Was there a quid pro quo?" Sondland asked. "As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes."

What Sondland said he did not initially understand, however, was that US military aid to Ukraine was also being held to increase pressure on Ukraine.

Under questioning, he testified that while he was not directly told why military aid was being held up, it eventually became as obvious to him as "two plus two equals four".

Republicans say that this is unfounded speculation on Sondland's part and fiercely contest the conclusion. That's because while it would be troubling if a White House visit was being used to pressure Ukraine, it's significantly more serious if congressionally authorised aid to a nation fighting a war for its survival was at play, as well.

5. 'He had to announce the investigations'
Mr Sondland said Mr Trump had wanted Ukraine's investigations to be announced but he had never heard anyone say that they had to start. He only heard that they needed to be announced.

What he said: "He had to announce the investigations, he didn't have to do them as far as I understand. I don't want to characterise whether they were of value or not, again through Mr Giuliani, we were led to believe that was what he wanted."

Analysis: Donald Trump's defenders have characterised the pressure being applied to Ukraine as simply part of a larger administration effort to combat corruption in nations that receive US foreign aid.

Under questioning, however, Sondland agreed that the key goal for which they were pushing, at the behest of Rudy Giuliani, wasn't necessarily a thorough and complete corruption investigation on the part of the Ukrainians. Instead, it was simply the public announcement of such an investigation.

This, Democrats are sure to argue, is because there was a purely political motive for this investigation push. It would give the president a means to attack the man who could be his Democratic adversary in the 2020 presidential campaign, Joe Biden.

Beyond that, in the colourful words of diplomat David Holmes in his testimony Saturday, Trump couldn't give an expletive about what happens in Ukraine.

The hearing is a total waste of redundancy.

Temple wrote:

directorate wrote:

The hearing is a total waste of redundancy.

That's how impeachment inquiries go..
but-
nonetheless, it will impeach trump.
he is dirty cruppet..

Cruppet is a street in Paris France.

How would you know how dirty it is??

NOVEMBER 21, 2019 / 5:49 PM / UPDATED 2 HOURS AGO
Trump wants Senate trial, expects Joe Biden to testify: White House

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump wants an impeachment trial to go forward in the U.S. Senate because he would receive due process there and he expects Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden would be among the witnesses, a White House spokesman said on Thursday.

“President Trump wants to have a trial in the Senate because it’s clearly the only chamber where he can expect fairness and receive due process under the Constitution,” spokesman Hogan Gidley said in a statement.

“We would expect to finally hear from witnesses who actually witnessed, and possibly participated in corruption - like Adam Schiff, Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and the so-called Whistleblower, to name a few,” Gidley said, referring to House of Representatives Intelligence Committee Chairman Schiff, who is leading an impeachment inquiry into Trump.

Temple wrote:

///

If Trump is basing his win or loss on ratings, he’s in trouble.

The ratings woulda hit 25 million if Trump was starring in them

______________________________________

Impeachment TV Ratings See Slight Uptick
Over five days, the hearings have averaged 12 million viewers.
NOVEMBER 22, 2019 3:42pm PT by Rick Porter

Over five days, the hearings have averaged 12 million viewers.

Five days of impeachment hearings on President Trump's withholding of aid to Ukraine were a steady draw for daytime news viewers.

The five days averaged 12 million viewers across all the networks that aired them. The first day had the highest viewership of 13.8 million, per Nielsen.

It fell off for the second and third days before a slight uptick for Thursday and Friday's coverage. To compare, the impeachment average is slightly below the July 24 Robert Mueller hearing (13 million).

Fox News led as the most viewed outlet, closely followed by MSNBC in the daytime audience race and ahead of CNN and broadcasters ABC, CBS and NBC.

Nielsen's figures measure in-home viewing; third-party measurement by Tunity Analytics estimates out-of-home viewing over the first three days of hearings averaged an additional 2.3 million more viewers.

In new Yahoo News/YouGov poll, most voters think Trump committed abuses — but are split on impeachment
Yahoo News
ANDREW ROMANO
Nov 22nd 2019 6:31PM

As two weeks of televised impeachment hearings and wall-to-wall coverage came to a close, a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll showed that a majority of registered voters believe Donald Trump abused his powers as president of the United States. But the country remained divided over the question of whether he should be impeached as a result.

The poll was conducted Nov. 20 to Nov. 22. There were five days of televised House Intelligence Committee hearings, ending Thursday, Nov. 21.

When asked to say whether they believe Trump did or did not commit specific acts in connection with Ukraine — the subject of the House impeachment inquiry — 58 percent of registered voters said they believe the president “asked a foreign leader to investigate a political opponent”; 51 percent said they believe he “withheld military aid to Ukraine until they agreed to conduct the investigations he wanted”; and 51 percent said they believe he “abused his powers as president.” (Respondents were not asked about any other allegations against Trump.)

These results suggest that a majority of registered voters have been largely convinced by the case House Democrats are making in Washington: that Trump pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son by using nearly $400 million in military assistance as a quid pro quo — and that he overstepped the bounds of the presidency in the process.



Yet only 48 percent of registered voters said they favor impeaching Trump or removing him from office — slightly more than the 45 percent who opposed impeaching or removing him, but less than a majority.

The remaining 7 percent were undecided whether Trump should be impeached or removed, a sign that some registered voters may still be persuadable. And while Republicans and Democrats have largely made up their minds about removal — 83 percent of Republicans oppose it; the same percentage of Democrats are in favor — independents are less certain: A slight plurality of them (40 percent) said Trump should be removed, while another 23 percent said they’re still not sure.

Americans are even divided by party over what they believe the likely outcome of the impeachment inquiry will be. Overall, only 11 percent believed that Trump will be removed from office; a plurality (41 percent) expected impeachment in the House followed by acquittal in the GOP-controlled Senate. That’s a view shared by a majority (54 percent) of Democrats. Yet a majority of Republicans (56 percent) believe that Trump won’t be impeached at all.

These disparities may reflect the fact that Republicans are paying less attention to the impeachment inquiry than Democrats. Fifty-six percent of Democrats said they have been following the congressional hearings “very closely” or “somewhat closely”; among Republicans, that number was 11 percentage points lower.

Regardless, Americans say impeachment will play a big role in how they vote in next November’s congressional elections. Asked to rate how important their current representative’s impeachment vote will be in their decision about casting their own vote for Congress, Democrats and Republicans were in rare agreement, with 74 percent in both parties saying it will be either “very important” or “somewhat important.”

Yahoo News and YouGov surveyed 1,500 U.S. adults online. The margin of error is ±2.8 percent.

House Democrats release final transcripts from impeachment depositions
BY OLIVIA BEAVERS - 11/26/19 05:04 PM EST

House Democrats on Tuesday released the remaining witness transcripts from their impeachment inquiry into President Trump.

The three House committees that led the closed-door depositions released interviews with Philip Reeker, the acting assistant secretary of state in charge of European and Eurasian Affairs, and senior Office of Management and Budget (OMB) official Mark Sandy.

The document release comes as the House Intelligence Committee plans to work through the Thanksgiving holiday to compile a report for the House Judiciary Committee to use in determining whether to draft articles of impeachment against Trump over allegations that he pressed Ukraine's president to interfere in the 2020 election by opening two investigations that would benefit Trump politically.

Democrats argued Tuesday that the testimonies of Reeker and Sandy support their claims that Trump surrounded himself with a team of political appointees to carry out their own U.S. policy toward Ukraine, in which the president sought to use nearly $400 million in security aid and the possibility of a White House visit to get Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to open investigations into interference in the 2016 election and the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, one of Trump's top 2020 rivals.

“The testimonies from Ambassador Reeker and Mr. Sandy continue to paint a portrait of hand-picked political appointees corrupting the official levers of U.S. government power, including by withholding taxpayer funded military assistance to Ukraine, to further the President’s own personal political agenda," three Democrat chairs said in a statement Tuesday.

The House chairs -- who include Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Foreign Affairs Chairman Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) and Oversight Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) -- said Sandy implicated the president in withholding aid, pointing to comments acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney made to him.

“Mr. Sandy confirmed that he was told by the office of Mick Mulvaney, the Acting White House Chief of Staff, that the President himself had directed the hold on security assistance to Ukraine. However, he was provided no other reason or justification for the hold when he was directed to implement it," the Democrats said, noting that he "raised concerns" that a delay of aid may violate the law.

The president has denied withholding aid to pressure Ukraine, arguing that he was seeking to root out corruption in Ukraine with his investigation requests.

This whole mess will continue this week. I'm curious to see how everything shakes out with Rudy Giuliani by the end of it all.

Sara wrote:

This whole mess will continue this week. I'm curious to see how everything shakes out with Rudy Giuliani by the end of it all.

NY will give Rudy, 3 years, most likely..
Trump most likely will be reelected ..
the Dem candidates are all junk, but Pete.
trump will be impeached but republicans won't throw him out.
its gonna be loooong year..

Temple wrote:

NY will give Rudy, 3 years, most likely..
Trump most likely will be reelected ..
the Dem candidates are all junk, but Pete.
trump will be impeached but republicans won't throw him out.
its gonna be loooong year..

Rudy is the guy most likely to know what really happened to Jimmy Hoffa. LOL he knows far too much although he probably doesn't know how to use the info wisely. I don't see Trump being re-elected, as of now, but we'll see how things are in a few more months. The Dems have to get their shit together and select a candidate, and the Reps have to have a platform besides the cultish crap of loving Trump because he says so. You're right, no matter what happens, it's gonna be a long year! I think this is gonna be a long week once they get into this round of the hearings.