What You Need To Know About Today’s Impeachment Inquiry
From Keith Schipper:
Today, Congressional Democrats continue to pursue their partisan witch hunt against President Trump. But today’s witnesses will only confirm what we already know – there was nothing improper in the July 25th phone call (read the transcript!), President Trump was legitimately concerned with corruption in Ukraine, and there was no ‘quid pro quo’ agreement.Nancy Pelosi, Susie Lee and Steven Horsford’s latest stunt will only backfire when today’s hearing further proves that there was no ‘quid pro quo‘ and that the real investigation should be on the Biden’s shady dealings with Ukraine – not on President Trump.Bottom Line: The Democrats’ baseless impeachment process remains tainted, unfair, and unprecedented. Nothing from the public hearings will change the minds of House Democrats, who have already determined that President Trump is guilty, despite a lack of evidence. But while Democrats continue to waste taxpayer dollars and put important legislative issues on the back-burner, Nevada voters will remember their political exploits in 2020.From RNC Research:
Today’s Witnesses Will Show President Trump Was Concerned With Ukraine’s Widespread Corruption, There Was Nothing Improper In The July Phone Call And That There Was No Quid Pro Quo Arrangement
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT TODAY’S IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY:
On multiple occasions, witnesses in their depositions affirmed that the transcript of President Trump’s July 25th phone call was accurate.
- Tim Morrison, National Security Council Senior Director for European and Russian affairs, called the transcript ” accurate and complete .”
- Jennifer Williams, a State Department employee detailed to the Vice President’s office, testified the transcript was ” substantially accurate. “
- Alexander Vindman, National Security Director for European Affairs, testified the transcript was a ” very accurate ” record of the call.
The witnesses in their depositions affirmed they were unconcerned with the phone call and that it was not illegal.
- Morrison testified that in his view there was ” nothing illegal ,” about the July 25th phone call.
- Williams never raised any concerns about the call during the period between when it was conducted and when it was made public.
The witnesses have affirmed that Ukraine is well known for its corruption and that an investigation of corruption in Burisma would be legitimate.
- Special envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, testified that Ukraine has a ” long history of pervasive corruption ,” and that Burisma was known for years to be a corrupt company and it would be a legitimate thing to investigate.
- Vindman agreed that there were many corrupt companies in Ukraine and that the country has a long history of corruption .
The witnesses have testified already that it was well known that President Trump was concerned with the widespread corruption in Ukraine.
- Morrison testified that the President viewed Ukraine as having ” a significant corruption problem .”
- Volker testified that the President has a very ” deep rooted view ” of corruption in Ukraine.
The witnesses have testified that Ukraine had no knowledge of any hold on aid, disproving Adam Schiff’s claims of a quid pro quo.
- Volker testified in his deposition that the Ukrainian government never raised any concerns or mentions of a quid pro quo deal .
- Williams has testified that she was unaware of any conditionality relating to a hold on foreign assistance.
TODAY’S WITNESSES WILL ILLUMINATE THE WIDESPREAD CORRUPTION IN UKRAINE, INCLUDING WITHIN BURISMA, AND WILL ALSO TESTIFY THAT THERE WAS NO QUID PRO QUO AS CLAIMED BY DEMOCRATS
Today, Officials Jennifer Williams, Alexander Vindman, Kurt Volker And Tim Morrison Will Testify In Front Of The House Intelligence Committee’s Impeachment Inquiry
Today, Officials Jennifer Williams, Alexander Vindman, Kurt Volker And Tim Morrison Will Testify In Front Of The House Intelligence Committee’s Impeachment Inquiry. “Impeachment inquiry hearings next week: Tuesday morning: Jennifer Williams and Alexander Vindman Tuesday afternoon: Kurt Volker and Tim Morrison Wednesday morning: Gordon Sondland Wednesday afternoon: Laura Cooper and David Hale Thursday: Fiona Hill” ( Twitter , 11/12/19)
On Multiple Occasions, The Witnesses In Their Depositions Affirmed That The Transcript Of President Trump’s July 25th Phone Call Was Accurate
Tim Morrison Testified That He Believed The July 25th Transcript Was Accurate And Complete. QUESTION: “The memorandum of conversation that, the MEMCON, you believed it was accurate?” MORRISON: “I believe it was accurate and complete.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/31/19)
Jennifer Williams Testified That The July 25th Phone Call Transcript Was “Substantially Accurate.” QUESTION: “Based on being in the room and taking notes and then reading the transcript, as it accurate and complete?” WILLIAMS: I never saw the transcript until the publicly released version that the White House released in September. So I read that transcript. And at a first reading it looked substantially accurate to me.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/07/19)
Alexander Vindman Testified That The Transcript Was A “Very Accurate” Record Of The Phone Call. QUESTION: “Okay. So, if we’re trying to understand what happened on the call, this certainly is a very accurate record?” VINDMAN: “Correct.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/29/19)
The Witnesses Have Affirmed They Were Unconcerned With The Phone Call And That It Was Not Illegal
Morison Testified That In His View There Was “Nothing Illegal” That Occurred During The Call. QUESTION: “And in your view, there was nothing improper that occurred during the call?” MORRISON: “Correct.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/31/19)
Williams Never Raised Any Concerns About The Call With Anyone During The Period Between When It Was Conducted On 7/25 And When It Was Made Public On 9/25. QUESTION: “So you had no discussions with anybody from 7/25 to 9/25 about what happened on the call?” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/07/19)
The Witnesses Have Affirmed That Ukraine And Burisma Is Well Known For Its Corruption And That An Investigation Would Be Legitimate
Kurt Volker Testified That It Was Very Reasonable For The President To Have A Negative View Of Ukraine Based On Past Corruption And Most People Who Would Know Anything About Ukraine Would Think That. VOLKER: “In response to that, President Trump demonstrated that he had very deeply rooted negative view of Ukraine based no past corruption. And that’s a reasonable position. Most people who would know anything about Ukraine would think that.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/03/19)
Volker: “Ukraine Has A Long History Of Pervasive Corruption Throughout The Economy Throughout The Country.” VOLKER: “I’ll make one general comment. Ukraine has a long history of pervasive corruption throughout the economy throughout the country, and it has been incredible difficult for Ukraine as a country to deal with this, to investigate it, to prosecute it.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/03/19)
Volker Said That Burisma Was Known For Years To Be A Corrupt Company Accused Of Money Laundering. VOLKER: “I think I made earlier, but I want to repeat it again. Burisma is known for years to have been a corrupt company accused of money laundering, et cetera.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/03/19)
Volker Testified That Burisma Hired Hunter Biden In Order To Spruce Up Its Image. VOLKER: “My suspicion is that Burisma, having had a very bad reputation as a company for corruption and money laundering, was looking to spruce up its image by having, you know, prominent-named people on its board.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/03/19)
Volker: “This Was A Company That Had A History Of Improper Things – That’s Legitimate For Them To Investigate.” VOLKER: A No, I didn’t say that. Whether any Ukrainians had done anything improper – and this was a company that had a history of improper things – that’s legitimate for them to investigate.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/03/19)
Vindman Testified That There Are Many Corrupt Companies In Ukraine. ESPAILLAT: “Is that your view as well? Are there many companies in Ukranie that are corrupt?” VINDMAN: “Yes.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/29/19)
Vindman Agreed Ukraine Has A Long History Of Corruption. QUESTION: “Ukraine has, and you know the country well, has a long history of corruption. Is that correct?” VINDMAN: Correct, Congressman.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/29/19)
The Witnesses Will Testify That It Was Well Known The President Was Concerned With Widespread Corruption In Ukraine
Morrison Testified that the President Thought Ukraine Had A Corruption Problem, As Did Many Others Familiar With Ukraine. MORRISON: “I was aware that the President thought Ukraine had a corruption problem, as did many others familiar with Ukraine. I was also aware that the president believed that Europe did not contribute enough assistance to Ukraine.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/31/19)
Morrison Testified That The President Viewed Ukraine As Having A “Significant Corruption Problem.” MORRISON: The President’s general antipathy to foreign aid, as well as his concerns that the Ukrainians are not paying their fair share, as well as his concerns when our aid would be misused, because of the view that Ukraine has a significant corruption problem. ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/31/19)
Volker Testified That It Was Very Reasonable For The President To Have A Negative View Of Ukraine Based On Past Corruption And Most People Who Would Know Anything About Ukraine Would Think That. VOLKER: “In response to that, President Trump demonstrated that he had very deeply rooted negative view of Ukraine based no past corruption. And that’s a reasonable position. Most people who would know anything about Ukraine would think that.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/03/19)
Volker Testified That the President Had A Very Deep-Rooted Negative View Of Corruption In Ukraine. VOLKER: “But the President had a very deep rooted negative view.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/03/19)
The Witnesses Have Already Testified That Ukraine Had No Knowledge Of Any Hold On Aid Disproving Adam Schiff’s claims Of A Quid Pro Quo
The Ukrainian Government Never Raised Any Concerns Or Mentions Of A Quid Pro Quo Deal With Ambassador Volker. QUESTION: “If that were the case from the call, do you feel, because they had some trust in you, that they would have come to you and said, ‘Hey, how do we handle this? Is this what the President of the United States is asking?’ Would they confide — would they ask you that?” VOLKER: “Yes, they would have asked me exactly that, you know: How do we handle this? Page 2 of 5 And, in fact, we had conversations, and some of them are in these text streams here, where they wanted to make a statement to show that they are serious about investigating the past and fighting corruption and turn a new page in Ukraine. And we engaged over what to say, what not to say. QUESTION: “And so they did not ask you that particular question?” VOLKER: “No.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/03/19)
Williams Was Unaware Of Any Conditionality Relating To The Hold On Foreign Assistance. WILLIAMS: “So I was not aware of any conditionality or what the reason for the hold was, and what that might be dependent on. It’s only later on through this process that I understand there were other conversations happening outside of what we could consider to be official diplomatic channels.” ( House Impeachment Inquiry , 10/07/19)