Page 636 - Conclusions News Today

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

Been in business all my life i run a chain of hotels in the pacific northwest. im not a lawyer and i didnt understand contemporaneously that what i was flaring the president was illegal. >> i think that it has to be plausible, about whether he understands it is illegal. and understands that it is 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. th...

Of investigation, something to back up this cuckoo for cocoa puffs idea that it wasnt russia who interfered in the 2016 election, it was some other country who did it, it was ukraine. and president trump was pushing for that on the phone with the 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 says no, actually it was russia that did it and the bipartisan senate intelligen...

Discussion about not -- there not being a full throated embrace of the ukrainian reform agenda. is that fair? >> yes, congressman. >> okay. but with respect to his concern about 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? >> no, sir. >> all right. and as you were listening, did you hear president trump make a dema...

Investigate joe biden, the president was also trying to get ukraine to provide him some kind of investigation, something to back up this coo coo for cocopuffs idea it wasnt russia who interfered in the 2016 election, it was some other country who did it. it was ukraine. and president trump was pushing for that on the phone with the president of ukraine. and some of the republicans in congress are pushing that theory themselves at the impeachment hearings. while the entire intelligence community ...

Country can be trying to influence our elections, would you agree with that? >> i agree with that. >> and we keep hearing that whole thing about ukrainians, thats all been debunked. it was just the russians. you know 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 were 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. you vette...

Pressure ukraine. again, he was just added as a witness today. the final one of the week. and we have folks going over his testimony behind closed doors, the transcript of which was just released. joining us right now is jeffrey toobin, kirsten powers, david gergen, and former sufrrick san. jeff, the reporting about moving some impeachment witnesses potentially on loan to the white house back to their home departments ahead of schedule, is that okay? i mean obviously the president can have whoev...

Ukraines scandal myths about biden and election interference. i encourage viewers today to read this story and draw your own conclusions about the evidence solomon has gathered. i ask unanimous consent that we put this into the record. >> without objection. >> the concerted campaign by the media to discredit and disown some of their own colleagues is shocking. and we see it again in the sudden denunciations of "new york times" reporter ken vogel as a conspiracy theorist after he covered similar ...

The reporting about moving some impeachment witnesses potentially on loan to the white house back to their home departments ahead of schedule, is that okay? i mean obviously the president can have whoever he wants to have working around him. >> he can. and we can draw our own conclusions about why theyre being moved back. i mean, you know, im reminded of a line from philip roth the smallness of people was simply crushing. the smallness of donald trump to punish these people for answering questio...

If he today says as martha alluded to that he was out of the loop at key moments during everything going on, not talking about a legal argument here, talking about a political argument but can he say that there was no evidence of a quid pro quo if he wasnt in the loop all the time? >> what i would expect is that he will basically say i can only answer to what i saw and heard and he will be on his guard not to draw any ultimate conclusions unless they lay a factual basis for him to have that kind...