Trump, his bullshit never stops

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

ah ok, thats what i thought. One thing i can't figure out is why she won't have a House-wide vote to hold the impeachment inquiry. They should easily have the votes, and possibly even a few from republicans. It would just be a formality at this point since its obviously well into the inquiry, but at least it might stop the republican whining for a bit. Although i'm sure they'll find some other reason to whine either way. I don't even think it would make Dems look weak at this point, they could just play it off as, "OK, let's just have the vote for the impeachment inquiry even though we don't have to, just to shut you whiners up and stop interrupting our depositions".

Firstly because they don't legally need to (Because of rules the republicans themselves changed when they had control of the house) but also to not muddy the waters on the issues.

The republicans will move the goal posts regardless, so even if they bother to vote it won't change them actually complying with the investigation. But it will give the republicans an angle to announce the senate is opening an investigation into impeachment and then votes to clear trump, all before the house actually concludes its inquiry. Everything has an angle.

You have to understand the republicans are trying every dirty trick they can to fight this including witness intimidation like today.

Republicans storm impeachment inquiry deposition in House Intel hearing room

Roughly two-dozen House Republicans on Wednesday stormed a closed-door deposition in secure House Intelligence Committee spaces to rail against the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry, a political stunt ratcheting up the GOP complaints about the process that threw the deposition into doubt.

The conservative lawmakers, led by Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, barged into the deposition and demanded they be allowed to see the closed-door proceedings where members of three committees planned to interview Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary Laura Cooper as part of the impeachment probe into President Donald Trump.
The chaotic scene, with Republicans flouting House rules to make a political point, represented a new and more confrontational phase of the Republican attack on House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff and the Democratic impeachment investigation.
The Republicans even walked into the hearing room with their electronics, according to Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia, which is prohibited in the space, known as a SCIF -- a sensitive compartmented information facility -- because it's a secure room used for discussing and handling classified information.

The last bit is particularly important because this is actually a federal crime and national security concern. The entire testimony had to be put on hold and the room emptied so that they can do a security sweep to ensure the safety of the room.

Also republicans are present on all 3 committees. This isn't a democrat only inquiry. The republicans have representation during all of the depositions.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/23/polit...per/index.html

And back up sources because people complained last time about links:
WashingtonPost - NYTimes - TheHill - Politico

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

ah ok, thats what i thought. One thing i can't figure out is why she won't have a House-wide vote to hold the impeachment inquiry. They should easily have the votes, and possibly even a few from republicans. It would just be a formality at this point since its obviously well into the inquiry, but at least it might stop the republican whining for a bit. Although i'm sure they'll find some other reason to whine either way. I don't even think it would make Dems look weak at this point, they could just play it off as, "OK, let's just have the vote for the impeachment inquiry even though we don't have to, just to shut you whiners up and stop interrupting our depositions".

My understanding is if it goes to a vote, it will pass in the house for sure, and at that point the republicans get subpoena power which they will use to play games and cause as much delay as possible. At its current stage, the dems get to do mostly what they want with no real downside.

The republicans do not have facts OR the law on their side, so they are literally resorting to behaving like children - today they barged into a sealed hearing for example. Put the shoe on the other foot and they would have been screaming bloody murder.


Someone on reddit did up a pretty good sourced summary of the recent events:

https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/co..._tied/f4rs26q/

[sabad66]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Firstly because they don't legally need to (Because of rules the republicans themselves changed when they had control of the house) but also to not muddy the waters on the issues.

The republicans will move the goal posts regardless, so even if they bother to vote it won't change them actually complying with the investigation. But it will give the republicans an angle to announce the senate is opening an investigation into impeachment and then votes to clear trump, all before the house actually concludes its inquiry. Everything has an angle.

You have to understand the republicans are trying every dirty trick they can to fight this including witness intimidation like today.



The last bit is particularly important because this is actually a federal crime and national security concern. The entire testimony had to be put on hold and the room emptied so that they can do a security sweep to ensure the safety of the room.

Also republicans are present on all 3 committees. This isn't a democrat only inquiry. The republicans have representation during all of the depositions.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/23/polit...per/index.html

And back up sources because people complained last time about links:
WashingtonPost - NYTimes - TheHill - Politico

Yeah i read about this little stunt already so that's why i was wondering.

I understand they don't legally need to vote to start the INQUIRY (House determines its own rules), but since all previous impeachments did do that first step (Nixon, Clinton, whoever else) i figured it could shut up the whining a bit.

How does formally voting to start the inquiry allow the Senate to start their own inquiry? i thought impeachment was only allowed by the House?

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

My understanding is if it goes to a vote, it will pass in the house for sure, and at that point the republicans get subpoena power which they will use to play games and cause as much delay as possible. At its current stage, the dems get to do mostly what they want with no real downside.

The republicans do not have facts OR the law on their side, so they are literally resorting to behaving like children - today they barged into a sealed hearing for example. Put the shoe on the other foot and they would have been screaming bloody murder.


Someone on reddit did up a pretty good sourced summary of the recent events:

https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/co..._tied/f4rs26q/

So if it becomes a House-wide impeachment inquiry (instead of just the 3 committees), that gives ANYONE in the House subpoena power?

and yes that's a good summary. I ended up reading the full 15 page opening statement document yesterday night figuring it would help me fall asleep but it ended up doing the opposite lol. That deposition on its own is probably the most significant one yet.

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So if it becomes a House-wide impeachment inquiry (instead of just the 3 committees), that gives ANYONE in the House subpoena power?

and yes that's a good summary. I ended up reading the full 15 page opening statement document yesterday night figuring it would help me fall asleep but it ended up doing the opposite lol. That deposition on its own is probably the most significant one yet.

Yeah I heard on a legal podcast this morning that there is apparently a perjury charge already written up for Sondland.

The minority side does not get subpoena power unless an official vote is had:

https://www.latimes.com/politics/sto...-pelosi-doesnt

This is what I was saying a few pages back as the reason why the dems don't (or may not) want this to go further than it has. They already have everything they want for the most part - just look at all the republican tantrums lol. Going further might do more harm than good as they already have the power they need to expose all Trump's illegal shit before 2020.

Just look at the levels the Republicans have stooped to already, and then imagine what they will do with subpoena power.

[sabad66]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yeah I heard on a legal podcast this morning that there is apparently a perjury charge already written up for Sondland.

The minority side does not get subpoena power unless an official vote is had:

https://www.latimes.com/politics/sto...-pelosi-doesnt

This is what I was saying a few pages back as the reason why the dems don't (or may not) want this to go further than it has. They already have everything they want for the most part - just look at all the republican tantrums lol. Going further might do more harm than good as they already have the power they need to expose all Trump's illegal shit before 2020.

Just look at the levels the Republicans have stooped to already, and then imagine what they will do with subpoena power.

ahhh, that's the piece i was missing. Makes total sense now, definitely don't want to give those ass hats subpoena power to stall it and switch directions.

It's not like republicans are in the dark now anyways.. they have almost as many people on each of the 3 committees as the democrats do, just without the Chair.

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

ahhh, that's the piece i was missing. Makes total sense now, definitely don't want to give those ass hats subpoena power to stall it and switch directions.

It's not like republicans are in the dark now anyways.. they have almost as many people on each of the 3 committees as the democrats do, just without the Chair.

Yup, exactly. So where they sit now, the dems have subpoena power and can keep cycling through witnesses, whistle blowers, and whoever ever else they want while the Republicans stand outside their doors (literally) and cry about it.

The white house is surrpsingly quiet. I think they are having a hard time thinking how to spin this.

In other news, Trump lifted the sanctions on the Ukraine after a week haha. And wouldn't you know it, Russia also got what they want. One thing I've noticed is that virtually every action Trump takes either directly or indirectly benefits Russia, Saudi Arabia, ISIS, etc. Everything from Russian owned Aluminium plants in Kentucky to giving the Saudis nuclear technology.

There is also at least one call with Putin and one call with Mohammed Bone Saw on that classified server as well - I hope those eventually get exposed. And that can't be accessed without knowing who accessed it, so it will be difficult for it to "accidentally" get deleted or whatever.

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How does formally voting to start the inquiry allow the Senate to start their own inquiry? i thought impeachment was only allowed by the House?

So the subpeonea angle mentioned above is definitely the bigger factor. But as for what I suggested ... Yes and no. The senate intelligence committee can launch an investigation into whatever it has reasonable grounds to do. In theory if they wanted they could also start investigating trump right now.

But you have to understand what propaganda Fox would start pushing if the democrats to vote on the inquiry.

- House passes vote on impeachment inquiry; Senate intelligence committee announces it is opening investigation into trump's conduct with ukraine (Note worded slightly different to distract from this isn't the same as the actual impeachment trial)
- Senate concludes investigation into trump's conduct and votes to clear him of any wrongdoing
- Trump: WITCHHUNT - probably

Really the Republicans hope/game plan at this point is just to make the general public get bored of this and lose interest. With the Mueller report we heard about it forever and by the time it actually dropped a lot of people had lost interest or already come to their own pre-conceived conclusions.

If they can get ahead of this and start pushing that there already was already an impeachment vote and a investigation then it'll just cause more disinformation.

[Mitsu3000gt]

US Forces found evidence of war crimes in Syria and Trump still lifted the sanctions

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-s...-idUSKBN1X224H

[pheoxs]

So the house will officially vote to 'formalize' the inquiry this week. Likely Thursday.

Would be curious as to why they did this now. Sondland went to testify again today / clarify their testimony. So I wonder if that led to something?

In addition to that Schiff said that the Democrats won't go to court to compel witnesses to testify over the white house's stonewalling.

So something definitely shifted, either way. I believe once they vote on it that means they'll start having public hearings. Maybe this is the shift that they believe they have enough and now they want it all in the public to further push public support for impeachment.

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So the house will officially vote to 'formalize' the inquiry this week. Likely Thursday.

Would be curious as to why they did this now. Sondland went to testify again today / clarify their testimony. So I wonder if that led to something?

In addition to that Schiff said that the Democrats won't go to court to compel witnesses to testify over the white house's stonewalling.

So something definitely shifted, either way. I believe once they vote on it that means they'll start having public hearings. Maybe this is the shift that they believe they have enough and now they want it all in the public to further push public support for impeachment.

Sondland confirmed quid pro quo in his testimony (he said something along the lines of "I'm no lawyer and I don't speak Latin, but...." lol), so now they have multiple people on both "sides" saying Trump blatantly offered a QPQ. Also, the DOJ was just ordered to turn over the underacted Mueller investigation Grand Jury testimony to the House. There's apparently lots of jucy stuff in there, such as Trump blatantly lying about knowing about Wikileaks stuff (directly contradicting his written testimony), etc. I think the dems are getting more confident as the wins keep on coming from the courts - they have both the facts and the law on their side, and have been very careful not to rush anything to be as through as possible.

The republicans have absolutely nothing left, as evidenced by how quiet the White House is, senators trying to pretend to be "neutral", and the childish acts like barging into hearings. They are trying to argue process, but the best part about that is they are arguing against the processes THEY Put in place in the late 90's for Clinton haha (specifically the one that gives the house Subpoena power without having to hold a formal Impeachment vote).

To your last point, the public hearings are a big deal - the sound-bytes plucked from those will be huge in the 2020 campaigns.

Also what's happening is more and more Republican senators are starting to distance themselves from Trump, because if they vote for him to stay in office despite the mountain of irrefutable evidence against him, they might not be able to keep their jobs, which is all they care about at the end of the day. The only way to get senators to do anything outside party lines is to threaten their personal income, and this is getting close.

More dirt on the Ukraine stuff surfaced today as well but I haven't had time to catch up - it's a lot worse than just the origninal QPQ, there was other stuff withheld as well which is even more damning. Summary here: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/c...paign_against/

[SportEL]

Haha. What a joke. No Quid Pro Quo. No high crime or misdemeanorurs. Even Sondland refutes Taylor's testimony that what Taylor said didn't even happen. “did not recall conversations recounted by Taylor in his House deposition.” which also includes Taylor's claim that Morrison told Taylor that Sondland told Morrison that Trump told Sondland there would be no aid without Zelensky announcing a Biden investigation. So Sondland refutes Taylors claim about a conversation about assistance cut-off.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4...stimony-report

All this is is Schifty Schiff's attempt to control the narrative with a selective leak of Taylor's opening statement, but none of the transcript of the Cross-examination in which Taylor's testimony ultimately all fell apart in 2 minutes under questioning and there was no Quid Pro Quo which can't be released due to Schiff's House Rules. So all the Dems have is 3rd or 4th count witness accounts under closed off testimony to the public with selective leaks, and with no evidence to back anything up.

This also all is a sideshow to an actual full transcript of Trump's call with Zalensky in which there was no Quid Pro Quo, and where Zalensky himself said twice that he wasn't pressured.

Meanwhile out of Dems hissyfit of Trump winning the election, the origins of the Russian collusion has now turned into a Criminal probe, the S&P reached a record high today, and the Islamic Jihad leader Baghdadi was killed on the week-end. The Dems have nothing but Impeach Impeach, tax tax, socialism, and open borders.

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Haha. What a joke. No Quid Pro Quo. No high crime or misdemeanorurs. Even Sondland refutes Taylor's testimony that what Taylor said didn't even happen. “did not recall conversations recounted by Taylor in his House deposition.” which also includes Taylor's claim that Morrison told Taylor that Sondland told Morrison that Trump told Sondland there would be no aid without Zelensky announcing a Biden investigation. So Sondland refutes Taylors claim about a conversation about assistance cut-off.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4...stimony-report

All this is is Schifty Schiff's attempt to control the narrative with a selective leak of Taylor's opening statement, but none of the transcript of the Cross-examination in which Taylor's testimony ultimately all fell apart in 2 minutes under questioning and there was no Quid Pro Quo which can't be released due to Schiff's House Rules. So all the Dems have is 3rd or 4th count witness accounts under closed off testimony to the public with selective leaks, and with no evidence to back anything up.

This also all is a sideshow to an actual full transcript of Trump's call with Zalensky in which there was no Quid Pro Quo, and where Zalensky himself said twice that he wasn't pressured.

Meanwhile out of Dems hissyfit of Trump winning the election, the origins of the Russian collusion has now turned into a Criminal probe, the S&P reached a record high today, and the Islamic Jihad leader Baghdadi was killed on the week-end. The Dems have nothing but Impeach Impeach, tax tax, socialism, and open borders.

Keep living in your delusional bubble. Maybe one day you'll stop drunking the trump koolaid

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Keep living in your delusional bubble. Maybe one day you'll stop drunking the trump koolaid

Will never happen. He's too ideologically silo'd to ever A) admit to being wrong, or B) changing his opinion/attitude.

[sabad66]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Haha. What a joke. No Quid Pro Quo. No high crime or misdemeanorurs. Even Sondland refutes Taylor's testimony that what Taylor said didn't even happen. “did not recall conversations recounted by Taylor in his House deposition.” which also includes Taylor's claim that Morrison told Taylor that Sondland told Morrison that Trump told Sondland there would be no aid without Zelensky announcing a Biden investigation. So Sondland refutes Taylors claim about a conversation about assistance cut-off.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4...stimony-report

All this is is Schifty Schiff's attempt to control the narrative with a selective leak of Taylor's opening statement, but none of the transcript of the Cross-examination in which Taylor's testimony ultimately all fell apart in 2 minutes under questioning and there was no Quid Pro Quo which can't be released due to Schiff's House Rules. So all the Dems have is 3rd or 4th count witness accounts under closed off testimony to the public with selective leaks, and with no evidence to back anything up.

This also all is a sideshow to an actual full transcript of Trump's call with Zalensky in which there was no Quid Pro Quo, and where Zalensky himself said twice that he wasn't pressured.

Meanwhile out of Dems hissyfit of Trump winning the election, the origins of the Russian collusion has now turned into a Criminal probe, the S&P reached a record high today, and the Islamic Jihad leader Baghdadi was killed on the week-end. The Dems have nothing but Impeach Impeach, tax tax, socialism, and open borders.

So a guy who donated 500k to Trump’s campaign says “I do not recall the conversations”, and all of a sudden Taylor’s testimony is complete bullshit? Taylor is a career diplomat who was essentially begged by Pompey to join after they fired the last lady (cuz Giuliani told them to). What would be his motivation to lie compared to Sondland? And btw, “do not recall” is way different than “did not happen”. I’m sure Taylor’s notes would corroborate it, but conveniently State confiscated them. I wonder why?

I have to laugh at how republicans are criticizing the behind door process when they are simply following the rules written by republicans themselves. And for good reason too - it’s so that these witnesses can’t match up their stories.

It’s sad really. Trump made it through the whole mueller thing pretty much unscathed... all the guy had to do was just not commit any more high crimes and he would have easily won a second term. People like him can’t help themselves tho, I truly feel like he’s addicted to pushing things as far as possible. This time it’s finally going to bite him in the ass and it’s going to be beautiful to watch

[SportEL]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So a guy who donated 500k to Trump’s campaign says “I do not recall the conversations”, and all of a sudden Taylor’s testimony is complete bullshit? Taylor is a career diplomat who was essentially begged by Pompey to join after they fired the last lady (cuz Giuliani told them to). What would be his motivation to lie compared to Sondland? And btw, “do not recall” is way different than “did not happen”. I’m sure Taylor’s notes would corroborate it, but conveniently State confiscated them. I wonder why?

I have to laugh at how republicans are criticizing the behind door process when they are simply following the rules written by republicans themselves. And for good reason too - it’s so that these witnesses can’t match up their stories.

It’s sad really. Trump made it through the whole mueller thing pretty much unscathed... all the guy had to do was just not commit any more high crimes and he would have easily won a second term. People like him can’t help themselves tho, I truly feel like he’s addicted to pushing things as far as possible. This time it’s finally going to bite him in the ass and it’s going to be beautiful to watch

And what crime to impeach for? What crime? Where is the evidence? There is an actual transcript between Trump and Zalensky with no Quid Pro Quo that people gloss over.

Just like that other partisan witness that heard accounts from other accounts, Schiff will dump Taylor just like that witness because their account was totally different from what was in the call. Furthermore, Taylor has written analysis pieces for Atlantic Council, which is funded by Burisma, the centre of the corruption probe. Also, Taylor has also been now found to have led a delegation in Ukraine for the NDI organization, in which Hunter Biden sat on that council. But 'career dipolomat'. Hahaha. Taylor has a longtime relationship with Burisma and now ties with Hunter Biden -the guy who has no Business to have been on their Board, other than to garner political favor with his Dad having been VP. And who Boasted of having the Ukranian prosecutor fired or else he would not provide the Billion Dollar Loan Guarantees. Actual Quid Pro Quo.

- - - Updated - - -

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Keep living in your delusional bubble. Maybe one day you'll stop drunking the trump koolaid

Perhaps one day, you will rely on facts and evidence versus hearsay and he said she said.

[revelations]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

IMO it's a huge benefit to remove a legit criminal from the most powerful office in the world, and a message to future presidents.

They are all criminals - if the same standards applied to citizens, were applied to politicians. Just ask Hillary.
Had she made it to the office, her trail of destruction would have been hard to ignore.

If hes removed, it will just tell the next person 'dont fuck with the deepstate'.

[sabad66]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And what crime to impeach for? What crime? Where is the evidence? There is an actual transcript between Trump and Zalensky with no Quid Pro Quo that people gloss over.

Just like that other partisan witness that heard accounts from other accounts, Schiff will dump Taylor just like that witness because their account was totally different from what was in the call. Furthermore, Taylor has written analysis pieces for Atlantic Council, which is funded by Burisma, the centre of the corruption probe. Also, Taylor has also been now found to have led a delegation in Ukraine for the NDI organization, in which Hunter Biden sat on that council. But 'career dipolomat'. Hahaha. Taylor has a longtime relationship with Burisma and now ties with Hunter Biden -the guy who has no Business to have been on their Board, other than to garner political favor with his Dad having been VP. And who Boasted of having the Ukranian prosecutor fired or else he would not provide the Billion Dollar Loan Guarantees. Actual Quid Pro Quo.

- - - Updated - - -



Perhaps one day, you will rely on facts and evidence versus hearsay and he said she said.

Why do you continue to reference the “perfect call” as if that is the only piece of evidence that exists? You do realize there were a lot of events outside of that which are probably what the actual impeachment articles will be based on?

Here’s another guy who raised the alarm. This time an army Iraq war veteran who worked on the NSC:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/u...peachment.html

First time someone from the White House will be testifying. Is this guy a partisan hack too? How long until Giuliani gets dumped and becomes the next partisan hack too?

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Why do you continue to reference the “perfect call” as if that is the only piece of evidence that exists? You do realize there were a lot of events outside of that which are probably what the actual impeachment articles will be based on?

Here’s another guy who raised the alarm. This time an army Iraq war veteran who worked on the NSC:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/u...peachment.html

First time someone from the White House will be testifying. Is this guy a partisan hack too? How long until Giuliani gets dumped and becomes the next partisan hack too?

Not to mention the fact that the REAL transcript has never been released. The bullshit 'summary' that the Trump administration released still has him asking for a favour. Plus you have Mulvaney actually say IN PUBLIC that it was in exchange for aid. You have Taylor say it was in exchange for aid, you have Sondland who, according to other articles, backed up Taylor's story.

Schiff said it best, if white house staff had anything good to say Trump would parade them in front of congress. But since they don't they are use every possible angle to try and block people from talking.

Why would you do that for a "Perfect Call"

Again, SportEL, keep drinking your koolaid, more and more testimony is coming out this week.

[Antonito]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not to mention the fact that the REAL transcript has never been released. The bullshit 'summary' that the Trump administration released still has him asking for a favour. Plus you have Mulvaney actually say IN PUBLIC that it was in exchange for aid. You have Taylor say it was in exchange for aid, you have Sondland who, according to other articles, backed up Taylor's story.

Schiff said it best, if white house staff had anything good to say Trump would parade them in front of congress. But since they don't they are use every possible angle to try and block people from talking.

Why would you do that for a "Perfect Call"

Again, SportEL, keep drinking your koolaid, more and more testimony is coming out this week.

Keep in mind that having proof that Trump asked for a quid pro quo would simply make it a bulletproof case that even Republicans could not deny. Trump asking for dirt on his political opponents without using any strong arm tactics is still a compelling case for impeachment for anyone that isn't firmly up Trumps ass. And there is no question that he has done so, he's admitted to it himself, and also done it again on live TV. Then again considering he was withholding aid to Ukraine at the same time, you'd have to be a drooling moron to not be able to connect the dots. Or willfully stupid.

For anyone saying that it isn't a big deal to use his position in government to attempt to dig up dirt on a political opponent, it's why he spent years crying on twitter accusing Obama of wire tapping his campaign, because if that had actually happened it would have been a shit storm similar to what is happening now.

Then again Trump tweeted almost a dozen times saying Obama didn't deserve credit for Bin Ladens death, but Republicans are currently crying about the severe disrespect being shown Trump for his massive accomplishment of doing the exact same thing he said doesn't deserve credit. So consistency isn't a strong suit here

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Haha. What a joke. No Quid Pro Quo. No high crime or misdemeanorurs. Even Sondland refutes Taylor's testimony that what Taylor said didn't even happen. “did not recall conversations recounted by Taylor in his House deposition.” which also includes Taylor's claim that Morrison told Taylor that Sondland told Morrison that Trump told Sondland there would be no aid without Zelensky announcing a Biden investigation. So Sondland refutes Taylors claim about a conversation about assistance cut-off.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4...stimony-report

All this is is Schifty Schiff's attempt to control the narrative with a selective leak of Taylor's opening statement, but none of the transcript of the Cross-examination in which Taylor's testimony ultimately all fell apart in 2 minutes under questioning and there was no Quid Pro Quo which can't be released due to Schiff's House Rules. So all the Dems have is 3rd or 4th count witness accounts under closed off testimony to the public with selective leaks, and with no evidence to back anything up.

This also all is a sideshow to an actual full transcript of Trump's call with Zalensky in which there was no Quid Pro Quo, and where Zalensky himself said twice that he wasn't pressured.

Meanwhile out of Dems hissyfit of Trump winning the election, the origins of the Russian collusion has now turned into a Criminal probe, the S&P reached a record high today, and the Islamic Jihad leader Baghdadi was killed on the week-end. The Dems have nothing but Impeach Impeach, tax tax, socialism, and open borders.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4...mitted-perjury

Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said late Monday that he believes U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland committed perjury in his congressional testimony to investigators in their impeachment inquiry.

“Based on all the testimony so far, I believe that Ambassador Gordon Sondland committed perjury,” Castro tweeted.

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the highest-ranking Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, is expected to tell lawmakers on Tuesday that he twice reported concerns about President Trump's tactics in dealing with Ukraine.

So everyones story looks to match up except Sondland's.