Page 635 - Conclusions News Today

>> bret: they dont have the direct call from president trump that the aide was tied to investigations. but they all come to their own conclusions that they are pretty convinced that it was. >> i think we got a very compelling, a clear picture of the ark of the story. basically, the president of the united states didnt really agree with pretty much everybody else in washington including bipartisan consensus in congress and the overwhelming consensus of the bureaucracy. in resisting that consensus...

Elections. would you agree with that? >> i would agree with that. >> we keep hearing that that whole thing about ukrainians. thats all been debunked and its just the russians and that comes from an ic community that some of the people that have come up with those conclusions are some of the very same people that were going find out if we havent already are deeply involved in this russian collusion hoax. its what he intended to be as a president? would you say thats accurate? >> yes. that was one...

Withholding the aid. >> no. >> of bribery. >> no. >> the ukrainians were not aware of this hold on aid. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> do you accept that in. >> they try to get these fact witnesses to jump to these legal conclusions. the witnesss testimony, the factual testimony, which is all they can do, paints a very serious picture of president trump using taxpayer-funded military assistance to pressure a foreign leader to get help in his reelection. thats soliciting a bribe. theyre ...

Ukrainians were not aware of the hold on aid. is that correct? >> thats correct. >> do you accept that? >> no, of course what theyre doing is try to get these fact witnesses to jump to ultimate legal conclusions. did anybody say im now going to try to bribe you? did anybody say im now going to try to extort you? when the factual testimony -- which is all they can do -- paints a very serious picture of president trump using taxpayer military assistance to pressure a foreign leader to get help in ...

Would you agree with that? >> i agree with that. >> we keep hearing the whole thing about ukrainians, that has all been debunked. it was just the russians. that comes from an ic community that some of the people have come up with those conclusions are some of the very people that we are going to find out, if we havent already, were deeply involved with this whole russian collusion hoax. but i want to say you did a great job. youve added zelenskys intentions. what he intended to be as a president...

Relates to military assistance, you dont have any direct evidence from president trump about that part of it. that is your two plus two part of the equation, right? the presumption? correct? >> correct. >> and you also understand that others disagree. yesterday we heard from mr. morrison, ambassador volker. they testified that they didnt see a quid pro quo. do you understand that? >> i understand thats what they say. >> reasonable people could look at all this and come to different conclusions. ...

Not being a full throated embrace of the ukrainian reform agenda. is that fair? >> yes, congressman. >> with his respect to the concern of something improper, specifically at no point did he come to you and say, i heard something that i thought was improper and was a crime. >> sir, i have no recollection of him doing that. >> no bribe, no extortion, no quid pro quo, all of those things we asked you? >> no, sir, . >> as you were listening, did you hear president trump make a demand of anything th...

Chain of hotels in the pacific northwest. im not a lawyer and i didnt understand contemporaneously that what i was hearing from the president was illegal? >> i think that it has to be plausible, about whether he understands it is illegal. and understanding that its illegal is typically not an element of the defense. today we heard people, congressman radcliffe criticizing some of the witnesses for not characterizing things as bribery or using legal conclusions. thats not a witnesss job. a witnes...

Up this koo-koo for coco puffs idea, that it wasnt russia, it was some other country that did it, it wasry ukraine. and president trump was pushing for that on thees phone with th president of ukraine. and some of the republicans in congress are pushing that theory themselves at these impeachment hearings while the entire u.s. intelligence community said, no, actually, it was russia that did it. the bipartisan senate intelligence committee did it and a dozen russian officers are under indictment...

On the part of it that relates to military assistance, though, you dont have any direct evidence from president trump about that part of it, thats your two plus two part of the equation, right? >> right. >> correct? >> thats correct. >> all right. and you understand also that others disagree. yesterday we heard from mr. morrison, ambassador volker, they testified that they didnt see a quid pro quo, do you understand that. >> i understand that. thats what they said. >> that reasonable people coul...