MSNBC

MSNBC 2 Dec 2019

How Did Trump Get To The Brink Of Impeachment? The Ukraine Bribery Plot Explained

Description:

As House Democrats ramp up impeachment probe, and gather evidence and testimony from key witnesses, MSNBC's Chief Legal Correspondent breaks down the full timeline of the Ukraine bribery plot. In this special report, Ari details the key dates from Congress approving the military aid, to the phone call with the Ukrainian president, to the filing of the whistleblower complaint and where the probe is headed next. Aired on 12/02/19.


A Hong Kong police chief has said pro-democracy protesters are pushing the city to "the brink of a total breakdown". The last two days have been among the most violent since the demonstrations began five months ago. The main flashpoint has become the university district, where there have been clashes between demonstrators and police.
In 1987, the U.S. and Russia signed a nuclear-arms treaty banning land-based missiles capable of flying 300 to 3,400 miles. WSJ's Shelby Holliday explains why the landmark agreement is now on the brink of collapse. Photo Illustration: Laura Kammermann
Statement by Mr. Geir Pedersen Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria, on the situation in Syria.

UN Special Envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen told the Security Council that the situation in Idlib must be stabilized and if that is achieved, "we must then avoid the risk of a no-war-no-peace scenario."

Addressing the Council via teleconference from Geneva today (27 Jun), Pedersen said civilians in and around Idlib continue to be killed and hundreds of thousands have been displaced due to the indiscriminate use of force by the warring parties. He said the terrorist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) must cease its attacks, but reminded that, even while fighting terrorism, there must be full compliance with international law. He said strikes against civilians and civilian infrastructure - including deconflicted health facilities and humanitarian workers - are absolutely unacceptable.

The Special Envoy said the current escalation and unrest also sends the wrong signal to Syrian refugees and reinforces their doubts over security conditions, conscription, and livelihoods in Syria. He warned from a "no-war-no-peace" scenario with frontlines and frozen but there is periodic unrest, five international armies in perpetual risk of confrontation, and still no political solution.

The Special Envoy added that both Turkey and Russia have reassured him that they remain committed to the September 2018 memorandum of understanding, but he added that we need to see this implemented on the ground.

Pedersen provided details of recent dialogue between the two parties and other officials, saying that he looked forward to consultations in Damascus in the near future. He expressed his belief that the path to concluding the constitutional committee's composition now may be open.

SOUNDBITE (English) Geir O. Pedersen, Special Envoy for Syria, United Nations:
"The constitutional committee can be a door-opener. But it will not alone solve the conflict or the challenges facing Syria. This can only unfold if we begin to see real trust and confidence developing, via tangible and reciprocal steps, including on the ground."

Pedersen told the Council that now was the time "for the Idlib situation to be stabilized and a nationwide ceasefire pursued. It is in fact past time to launch a constitutional committee. It is also time to try to develop a climate of confidence-building measures. And we clearly need a renewed international support format."

Syria's Idlib ‘on the brink' of a nightmare, humanitarian chiefs warn, launching global solidarity campaign (27 June 2019) #TheWorldIsWatching
Trump jokes to Putin: 'Don't meddle in the election, please.'

… show captions ↓
WHETHER AND HOW TO IMPEACH THE SITTING PRESIDENT THAT CAN LEAD
SITTING PRESIDENT THAT CAN LEAD TO A FORMAL VOTE ON ARTICLES OF
TO A FORMAL VOTE ON ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT.
IMPEACHMENT. TONIGHT I ASK YOU HOW DID WE GET
TONIGHT I ASK YOU HOW DID WE GET HERE TO THE BRINK OF
HERE TO THE BRINK OF IMPEACHMENT?
IMPEACHMENT? THE SCANDAL HAS BEEN IN THE
THE SCANDAL HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR MONTH.
WORKS FOR MONTH. IT EXPLODED.
IT EXPLODED. WE CAN SEE BY TWO CRITICAL
WE CAN SEE BY TWO CRITICAL EVENTS THAT HAPPENED ON THE SAME
EVENTS THAT HAPPENED ON THE SAME DAY.
DAY. ON SEPTEMBER 9th, DEMOCRATS
ON SEPTEMBER 9th, DEMOCRATS ANNOUNCED THEY WOULD GO FORWARD
ANNOUNCED THEY WOULD GO FORWARD TO INVESTIGATE GIULIANI’S
TO INVESTIGATE GIULIANI’S SUSPICIOUS DEALINGS WITH
SUSPICIOUS DEALINGS WITH UKRAINE.
UKRAINE. A TOP INTELLIGENCE OFFICIAL TOLD
A TOP INTELLIGENCE OFFICIAL TOLD SCHIFF A WHISTLEBLOWER FILED
SCHIFF A WHISTLEBLOWER FILED THIS MYSTERIOUS COMPLAINT.
THIS MYSTERIOUS COMPLAINT. THEY WOULD NOT REVEAL WHAT IT
THEY WOULD NOT REVEAL WHAT IT WAS ABOUT AND IT WAS NOT AT THAT
WAS ABOUT AND IT WAS NOT AT THAT TIME CHAIRED WITH CONGRESS.
TIME CHAIRED WITH CONGRESS. >> THE DIRECTOR HAS SAID
>> THE DIRECTOR HAS SAID ESSENTIALLY THAT HE IS ANSWERING
ESSENTIALLY THAT HE IS ANSWERING TO A HIGHER AUTHORITY AND
TO A HIGHER AUTHORITY AND REFUSING TO TURN OVER THE
REFUSING TO TURN OVER THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT.
WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT. >> HE OR SHE HAS EVIDENCE OF
>> HE OR SHE HAS EVIDENCE OF SERIOUS MISCONDUCT.
SERIOUS MISCONDUCT. >> I THINK IT IS FAIR TO
>> I THINK IT IS FAIR TO INVOLVES THIS INVOLVES EITHER
INVOLVES THIS INVOLVES EITHER THE PRESIDENT OR PEOPLE AROUND
THE PRESIDENT OR PEOPLE AROUND HIM OR BOTH.
HIM OR BOTH. >> SO WATCH THIS SPACE, AS THEY
>> SO WATCH THIS SPACE, AS THEY SAY.
SAY. >> AMERICANS HAVE BEEN WATCHING
>> AMERICANS HAVE BEEN WATCHING EVER SINCE.
EVER SINCE. AND THE REPORTING HAS BEEN
AND THE REPORTING HAS BEEN FILLING IN THE BLANKS FAST.
FILLING IN THE BLANKS FAST. SOON THERE WERE THESE CLUES THAT
SOON THERE WERE THESE CLUES THAT THE COMPLAINT INVOLVED TRUMP’S
THE COMPLAINT INVOLVED TRUMP’S QUOTE COMMUNICATIONS WITH A
QUOTE COMMUNICATIONS WITH A FOREIGN LEADER.
FOREIGN LEADER. OKAY.
OKAY. THAT WAS INTERESTING.
THAT WAS INTERESTING. THE VERY NEXT DAY THAT FOREIGN
THE VERY NEXT DAY THAT FOREIGN COUNTRY WAS NAMED.
COUNTRY WAS NAMED. UKRAINE AND THEN THE ALLEGED
UKRAINE AND THEN THE ALLEGED TRUMP PROMISE.
TRUMP PROMISE. NOW, CONSIDERING WHAT WE HAVE
NOW, CONSIDERING WHAT WE HAVE COME TO KNOW, IT IS PRETTY
COME TO KNOW, IT IS PRETTY INTERESTING THAT IT WAS RIGHT IN
INTERESTING THAT IT WAS RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT WHIRLWIND
THE MIDDLE OF THAT WHIRLWIND THAT I’M GIVING YOU A COUPLE
THAT I’M GIVING YOU A COUPLE HIGHLIGHTS ON THAT JOHN BOLTON
HIGHLIGHTS ON THAT JOHN BOLTON SUDDENLY RESIGNED AND MANY OF
SUDDENLY RESIGNED AND MANY OF THE TYPICAL EXPLANATIONS WERE
THE TYPICAL EXPLANATIONS WERE OFFERED ALONG TO DISAGREEMENTS
OFFERED ALONG TO DISAGREEMENTS BETWEEN HIM AND TRUMP.
BETWEEN HIM AND TRUMP. FINE.
FINE. POLICY DISAGREEMENTS WITH COMMON
POLICY DISAGREEMENTS WITH COMMON REALLY.
REALLY. THEY’RE FINE TO HAVE AS A REASON
THEY’RE FINE TO HAVE AS A REASON TO BELIEVE.
TO BELIEVE. BUT NOW WE KNOW BOLTON AND
BUT NOW WE KNOW BOLTON AND OTHERS HAVE TESTIFIED THAT HE
OTHERS HAVE TESTIFIED THAT HE DIDN’T JUST OBJECT ON POLICY BUT
DIDN’T JUST OBJECT ON POLICY BUT ON ALLEGED CRIME.
ON ALLEGED CRIME. OBJECTING IN REAL-TIME TO HIS
OBJECTING IN REAL-TIME TO HIS NOW FAMOUS PHRASE, QUOTE, DRUG
NOW FAMOUS PHRASE, QUOTE, DRUG DEAL, THAT SONDLAND AND MULVANEY
DEAL, THAT SONDLAND AND MULVANEY WERE COOKING UP.
WERE COOKING UP. HE RELEASED THE MILITARY AID AND
HE RELEASED THE MILITARY AID AND COULD HAVED UP SOMETHING THAT
COULD HAVED UP SOMETHING THAT VERY FEW PRECEDENTS RELEASE,
VERY FEW PRECEDENTS RELEASE, WHICH IS THE PRIVATE READ-OUT OF
WHICH IS THE PRIVATE READ-OUT OF THAT INCRIMINATING CALL WITH THE
THAT INCRIMINATING CALL WITH THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE.
PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE. ALL OF IT LEADING LESS THAN A
ALL OF IT LEADING LESS THAN A MONTH AFTER THE REPORTS WE JUST
MONTH AFTER THE REPORTS WE JUST SHOWED YOU SPEAKER PELOSI
SHOWED YOU SPEAKER PELOSI ANNOUNCING AN OFFICIAL PROBE.
ANNOUNCING AN OFFICIAL PROBE. >> I’M ANNOUNCING THE HOUSE OF
>> I’M ANNOUNCING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES MOVING FORWARD
REPRESENTATIVES MOVING FORWARD WITH AN OFFICIAL IMPEACHMENT
WITH AN OFFICIAL IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY.
INQUIRY. THE PRESIDENT MUST BE HELD
THE PRESIDENT MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
ACCOUNTABLE. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.
NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW. >> A HISTORIC DAY IN WASHINGTON.
>> A HISTORIC DAY IN WASHINGTON. >> THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED
>> THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED WITHOUT OBJECTION.
WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE
THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE LAID UPON THE TABLE.
LAID UPON THE TABLE. THAT IS WHAT POWER SOUNDS LIKE,
THAT IS WHAT POWER SOUNDS LIKE, THE SPEAKER ACTS.
THE SPEAKER ACTS. THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.
THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED. AND THEN, BOY, DO THE WHEELS
AND THEN, BOY, DO THE WHEELS START TURNING FAST.
START TURNING FAST. SUBPOENAS, DEPOSITIONS, PUBLIC
SUBPOENAS, DEPOSITIONS, PUBLIC HEARINGS.
HEARINGS. AND THEN BECAUSE OF THOSE RULES,
AND THEN BECAUSE OF THOSE RULES, BECAUSE OF HOW THAT POWER WAS
BECAUSE OF HOW THAT POWER WAS DEPLOYED, THE BOMBSHELL
DEPLOYED, THE BOMBSHELL TESTIMONY.
TESTIMONY. >> I WAS CONCERNED BY THE
>> I WAS CONCERNED BY THE COLUMN.
COLUMN. WHAT I HEARD WAS INAPPROPRIATE.
WHAT I HEARD WAS INAPPROPRIATE. MR. GIULIANI SIDE CHANNELS, QUID
MR. GIULIANI SIDE CHANNELS, QUID PRO QUOS, CORRUPTION.
PRO QUOS, CORRUPTION. >> EFFORTS TO GIN UP
>> EFFORTS TO GIN UP MOTIVATIONS.
MOTIVATIONS. >> DID YOU FEEL THREATENED?
>> DID YOU FEEL THREATENED? >> I DID.
>> I DID. >> WAS THERE A QUID PRO QUO?
>> WAS THERE A QUID PRO QUO? THE ANSWER IS QUESTION.
THE ANSWER IS QUESTION. WE FOLLOWED THE PRESIDENT’S
WE FOLLOWED THE PRESIDENT’S ORDERS.
ORDERS. >> I’M JOINED BY THE MAYOR OF
>> I’M JOINED BY THE MAYOR OF NEW YORK CITY AND A FORMER CIVIL
NEW YORK CITY AND A FORMER CIVIL PROSECUTOR.
PROSECUTOR. U.S. ATTORNEY JOYCE VANCE.
U.S. ATTORNEY JOYCE VANCE. GOOD EVENING TO BOTH OF YOU.
GOOD EVENING TO BOTH OF YOU. JOYCE, TAKING THE WIDER VIEW
JOYCE, TAKING THE WIDER VIEW THAT WE GET TO DO SOMETIMES,
THAT WE GET TO DO SOMETIMES, WHAT STRIKES YOU AS AN
WHAT STRIKES YOU AS AN INVESTIGATOR AT JUST HOW QUICK
INVESTIGATOR AT JUST HOW QUICK ALL OF THAT HAPPENED AND WHAT IT
ALL OF THAT HAPPENED AND WHAT IT SETS UP AS THE JUDICIARY
SETS UP AS THE JUDICIARY PREPARES FOR THESE FUTURE
PREPARES FOR THESE FUTURE HEARINGS?
HEARINGS? >> I THINK THAT THE SPEED WITH
>> I THINK THAT THE SPEED WITH WHICH THIS UNFOLDED IS ONE OF
WHICH THIS UNFOLDED IS ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING FEATURES OF
THE MOST INTERESTING FEATURES OF THIS ENTIRE PROCESS IN FRONT OF
THIS ENTIRE PROCESS IN FRONT OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE.
THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE. YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY THE
YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY THE PRESIDENT IS QUICK TO COME UP
PRESIDENT IS QUICK TO COME UP WITH AACY THEORY OR
WITH AACY THEORY OR A REASON HE SHOULD BE HELD
A REASON HE SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
ACCOUNTABLE. BUT HERE THE PACE OF TESTIMONY
BUT HERE THE PACE OF TESTIMONY WAS SO QUICK, THE DROP OF NEWS
WAS SO QUICK, THE DROP OF NEWS EVERY DAY OF EXPANDING DETAIL
EVERY DAY OF EXPANDING DETAIL WAS SO FAST THAT THE PRESIDENT
WAS SO FAST THAT THE PRESIDENT LITERALLY COULDN’T KEEP UP.
LITERALLY COULDN’T KEEP UP. AND I THINK THAT THAT’S ONE OF
AND I THINK THAT THAT’S ONE OF THE SMART PARTS OF THE PROCESS
THE SMART PARTS OF THE PROCESS IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE
IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, IS THAT
INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, IS THAT SPEED OF PROCESS.
SPEED OF PROCESS. >> YEAH.
>> YEAH. YOU MENTIONED HE COULDN’T KEEP
YOU MENTIONED HE COULDN’T KEEP UP.
UP. A LOT OF US IN NEWS ROOMS AND
A LOT OF US IN NEWS ROOMS AND THOSE OF YOU WHO REPORT WITH US
THOSE OF YOU WHO REPORT WITH US WERE JUST AMAZED, MIA, WHEN THE
WERE JUST AMAZED, MIA, WHEN THE PRESIDENT WAS LITERALLY AT THE
PRESIDENT WAS LITERALLY AT THE UN.
UN. SO WE KNOW FROM WHAT HE WAS
SO WE KNOW FROM WHAT HE WAS DOING THAT DAY HE WAS TOO BUSY
DOING THAT DAY HE WAS TOO BUSY TO CONFER, THINK THROUGH OR HEAR
TO CONFER, THINK THROUGH OR HEAR ALL THE JUDGMENTS ABOUT WHETHER
ALL THE JUDGMENTS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO RELEASE THE CALL
OR NOT TO RELEASE THE CALL TRANSCRIPT AND HE JUST DECIDED
TRANSCRIPT AND HE JUST DECIDED TO RELEASE THE WHISTLEBLOWER
TO RELEASE THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT WAS REQUIRED TO
COMPLAINT WAS REQUIRED TO RELEASE TO CONGRESS, BUT THE
RELEASE TO CONGRESS, BUT THE CALL WASN’T.
CALL WASN’T. I WONDER HOW FATEFUL THAT LOOKS
I WONDER HOW FATEFUL THAT LOOKS IN SETTING UP THE CONDITIONS FOR
IN SETTING UP THE CONDITIONS FOR WHAT I’M ABOUT TO SHOW YOU,
WHAT I’M ABOUT TO SHOW YOU, WHICH WAS THE BOMBSHELLS FROM
WHICH WAS THE BOMBSHELLS FROM GORDON SONDLAND IN THE FACT
GORDON SONDLAND IN THE FACT FINDING PART OF THIS PROBE.
FINDING PART OF THIS PROBE. TAKE A LOOK.
TAKE A LOOK. >> WAS THERE A QUID PRO QUO?
>> WAS THERE A QUID PRO QUO? THE ANSWER IS YES.
THE ANSWER IS YES. I FOLLOWED THE DIRECTIONS OF THE
I FOLLOWED THE DIRECTIONS OF THE PRESIDENT.
PRESIDENT. WE DID NOT WANT TO WORK WITH MR.
WE DID NOT WANT TO WORK WITH MR. GIULIANI.
GIULIANI. SIMPLY PUT, WE WERE PLAYING THE
SIMPLY PUT, WE WERE PLAYING THE HAND WE WERE DEALT.
HAND WE WERE DEALT. MR. GIULIANI’S REQUESTS FOR A
MR. GIULIANI’S REQUESTS FOR A QUID PRO QUO FOR ARRANGING A
QUID PRO QUO FOR ARRANGING A WHITE HOUSE VISIT FOR PRESIDENT
WHITE HOUSE VISIT FOR PRESIDENT ZELENSKY.
ZELENSKY. HE HAD TO ANNOUNCE THE
HE HAD TO ANNOUNCE THE INVESTIGATIONS.
INVESTIGATIONS. HE DIDN’T ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO
HE DIDN’T ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO THEM, AS I UNDERSTOOD IT.
THEM, AS I UNDERSTOOD IT. EVERYONE WAS IN THE LOOP.
EVERYONE WAS IN THE LOOP. IT WAS NO SECRET.
IT WAS NO SECRET. >> MIA, WOULD WE HAVE LEARNED
>> MIA, WOULD WE HAVE LEARNED ALL THIS AND WOULD WE BE ON THE
ALL THIS AND WOULD WE BE ON THE PRECIPICE OF IMPEACHMENT
PRECIPICE OF IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS FOR DRAFTING THE
HEARINGS FOR DRAFTING THE ARTICLES IF THOSE FATEFUL THINGS
ARTICLES IF THOSE FATEFUL THINGS HADN’T HAPPENED?
HADN’T HAPPENED? >> YEAH.
>> YEAH. I THINK YOU’RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT,
I THINK YOU’RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, ARI, AS IS JOYCE.
ARI, AS IS JOYCE. THE SPEED OF THIS IN PART IS
THE SPEED OF THIS IN PART IS THANKS TO THAT WHISTLEBLOWER
THANKS TO THAT WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT WHICH HAS PROVED SO
COMPLAINT WHICH HAS PROVED SO ACCURATE.
ACCURATE. EVERY WITNESS WHO HAS COME
EVERY WITNESS WHO HAS COME FORWARD IN THE HOUSE HAS REALLY
FORWARD IN THE HOUSE HAS REALLY SAID EXACTLY WHAT THE
SAID EXACTLY WHAT THE WHISTLEBLOWER SAID WAS REPORTED
WHISTLEBLOWER SAID WAS REPORTED TO THE WHISTLEBLOWER AND THE
TO THE WHISTLEBLOWER AND THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT ITSELF
WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT ITSELF WAS SO DETAILED THAT IT IN AND
WAS SO DETAILED THAT IT IN AND OF ITSELF WOULD HAVE RESULTED
OF ITSELF WOULD HAVE RESULTED WITH WHERE WE ARE NOW.
WITH WHERE WE ARE NOW. BUT THAT CALL SUMMARY BEING
BUT THAT CALL SUMMARY BEING RELEASED ON THE HEELS OF THE
RELEASED ON THE HEELS OF THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT JUST
WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT JUST REINFORCED EVERYTHING THAT THE
REINFORCED EVERYTHING THAT THE WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT WAS
WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINT WAS ALLEGE
ALLEGE ALLEGING.
ALLEGING. IT WAS A REAL DOUBLE WHAMMY THAT
IT WAS A REAL DOUBLE WHAMMY THAT GOES TO WHAT JOYCE WAS SAYING
GOES TO WHAT JOYCE WAS SAYING ABOUT THE SPEED OF THIS PROCESS.
ABOUT THE SPEED OF THIS PROCESS. IT REALLY PUT IT ON STEROIDS.
IT REALLY PUT IT ON STEROIDS. >> IF IT’S BEEN A STEROIDS
>> IF IT’S BEEN A STEROIDS PROCESS OF FACT FINDING, THAT IS
PROCESS OF FACT FINDING, THAT IS WHAT SPEAKER PELOSI HAS
WHAT SPEAKER PELOSI HAS EMPOWERED ADAM SHAF TO DO.
EMPOWERED ADAM SHAF TO DO. WE DON’T KNOW WHAT HISTORY WILL
WE DON’T KNOW WHAT HISTORY WILL ULTIMATELY JUDGE AS THESE
ULTIMATELY JUDGE AS THESE DIFFERENT PHASES.
DIFFERENT PHASES. BUT FOR DEMOCRATS AT LEAST, THEY
BUT FOR DEMOCRATS AT LEAST, THEY HAVE SEEN A SHIFT PHASE AND THEY
HAVE SEEN A SHIFT PHASE AND THEY ARE ABOUT TO ENTER THE NADLER
ARE ABOUT TO ENTER THE NADLER PHASE.
PHASE. TAKE A LOOK.
TAKE A LOOK. >> THERE IS MORE WORK TO BE
>> THERE IS MORE WORK TO BE DONE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE
DONE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE HAVE ALREADY ACCUMULATED QUITE
HAVE ALREADY ACCUMULATED QUITE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE.
OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE. THERE WAS NO PLAUSIBLE
THERE WAS NO PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION BUT ONE, AND THAT
EXPLANATION BUT ONE, AND THAT WAS THE PRESIDENT WANTED THIS
WAS THE PRESIDENT WANTED THIS LEVERAGE TO GET UKRAINE TO DO
LEVERAGE TO GET UKRAINE TO DO HIS POLITICAL DIRTY WORK.
HIS POLITICAL DIRTY WORK. >> THAT’S HOW HE SUMMARIZES ALL
>> THAT’S HOW HE SUMMARIZES ALL THE WORK HE’S DONE.
THE WORK HE’S DONE. HERE WAS FOR A COMPARISON,
HERE WAS FOR A COMPARISON, JOYCE, CHAIRMAN NADLER OF THE
JOYCE, CHAIRMAN NADLER OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE JUST DAYS
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE JUST DAYS BEFORE UKRAINE TOOK FLIGHT.
BEFORE UKRAINE TOOK FLIGHT. HAVE A LISTEN.
HAVE A LISTEN. >> THE INVESTIGATION ALSO
>> THE INVESTIGATION ALSO EXTENDS BEYOND THE FOUR CORNERS
EXTENDS BEYOND THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE MUELLER REPORT.
OF THE MUELLER REPORT. WE ARE LOOKING AT CORRUPTION AND
WE ARE LOOKING AT CORRUPTION AND ABUSE OF POWER MORE BROADLY, SO
ABUSE OF POWER MORE BROADLY, SO WE WILL INQUIRE ABOUT OTHER
WE WILL INQUIRE ABOUT OTHER SUBJECTS AS WELL.
SUBJECTS AS WELL. WE INTEND TO SECURE
WE INTEND TO SECURE ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ANY
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ANY WRONGDOING BECAUSE NO ONE IS
WRONGDOING BECAUSE NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW, NOT EVEN THE
ABOVE THE LAW, NOT EVEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. >> WHAT DO YOU EXPECT, JOYCE, IN
>> WHAT DO YOU EXPECT, JOYCE, IN THIS NADLER PHASE.
THIS NADLER PHASE. >> SO IT’S REALLY INCREDIBLE TO
>> SO IT’S REALLY INCREDIBLE TO THINK ABOUT THE GAP OF JUST A
THINK ABOUT THE GAP OF JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS BETWEEN THAT
COUPLE OF MONTHS BETWEEN THAT ORIGINAL NADLER STATEMENT AND
ORIGINAL NADLER STATEMENT AND WHAT WE HEARD FROM CHAIRMAN
WHAT WE HEARD FROM CHAIRMAN STIFF
STIFF SCHIFF.
SCHIFF. AND SCHIFF CUES ON THAT THE
AND SCHIFF CUES ON THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS ESSENTIALLY HAD NO
PRESIDENT HAS ESSENTIALLY HAD NO SUBSTANTIVE ANSWER TO THIS
SUBSTANTIVE ANSWER TO THIS NARRATIVE OF WRONGDOING BY THE
NARRATIVE OF WRONGDOING BY THE PRESIDENT AND THOSE CLOSE TO HIM
PRESIDENT AND THOSE CLOSE TO HIM AND ALSO SCHIFF WAS ABLE TO LAY
AND ALSO SCHIFF WAS ABLE TO LAY IT AT THE PRESIDENT’S DOORSTEP.
IT AT THE PRESIDENT’S DOORSTEP. SO THAT’S THE LEGAL PART OF THIS
SO THAT’S THE LEGAL PART OF THIS PROCESS.
PROCESS. NOW WE KNOW THAT CHAIRMAN NADLER
NOW WE KNOW THAT CHAIRMAN NADLER AND THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WILL
AND THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WILL OPEN WITH AT LEAST ONE DAY OF
OPEN WITH AT LEAST ONE DAY OF HEARINGS DESIGNED TO LAY OUT THE
HEARINGS DESIGNED TO LAY OUT THE LEGAL PONTIFFS.
LEGAL PONTIFFS. WHAT IS AN ABUSE OF TRUST THAT
WHAT IS AN ABUSE OF TRUST THAT WARRANTS IMPEACHMENT OF A
WARRANTS IMPEACHMENT OF A PRESIDENT?
PRESIDENT? I EXPECT THAT THEY WILL DIP BACK
I EXPECT THAT THEY WILL DIP BACK TO THE WISDOM OF THE FOUNDING
TO THE WISDOM OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS, GIVE THE COUNTRY AN
FATHERS, GIVE THE COUNTRY AN OVERLAW OF THE LAW SO THAT WE
OVERLAW OF THE LAW SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE LEGAL
CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE LEGAL ANALYSIS LOOKS LIKE THAT WE
ANALYSIS LOOKS LIKE THAT WE BRING AND THAT WE FOLD THOSE
BRING AND THAT WE FOLD THOSE FACTS INTO.
FACTS INTO. >> MIA?
>> MIA? >> I AGREE.
>> I AGREE. AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS
AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT’S GOING TO BE SO IMPORTANT
THAT’S GOING TO BE SO IMPORTANT WITH THIS ONE DAY THAT WE KNOW
WITH THIS ONE DAY THAT WE KNOW SO FAR, WE NEVER KNOW WHAT ELSE
SO FAR, WE NEVER KNOW WHAT ELSE IS GOING TO POP AND WHETHER MORE
IS GOING TO POP AND WHETHER MORE DAYS GET ADDED BETWEEN NOW AND
DAYS GET ADDED BETWEEN NOW AND THE FOURTH.
THE FOURTH. BUT ONE THING THAT IS GOING TO
BUT ONE THING THAT IS GOING TO BE SO IMPORTANT FOR THE
BE SO IMPORTANT FOR THE DEMOCRATS TO DO IS TO DECIDE HOW
DEMOCRATS TO DO IS TO DECIDE HOW TAILERED IS THIS STORY, HOW MANY
TAILERED IS THIS STORY, HOW MANY COUNTS ARE THERE?
COUNTS ARE THERE? RIGHT NOW WE’RE SEEING A REAM OF
RIGHT NOW WE’RE SEEING A REAM OF POTENTIAL COUNTS FROM BRIBERY TO
POTENTIAL COUNTS FROM BRIBERY TO EXTORTION, OBSTRUCTION AND ALL
EXTORTION, OBSTRUCTION AND ALL THE VARIOUS ABUSES OF POWER THAT
THE VARIOUS ABUSES OF POWER THAT CAN BE ADDED TO THIS.
CAN BE ADDED TO THIS. AND I THINK THE DISCUSSION THEY
AND I THINK THE DISCUSSION THEY ARE HAVING, I IMAGINE, IS HOW
ARE HAVING, I IMAGINE, IS HOW MUCH OF THIS IS A STORY THAT THE
MUCH OF THIS IS A STORY THAT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC CAN ABSORB WHEN
AMERICAN PUBLIC CAN ABSORB WHEN THERE IS A TRIAL IN THE SENATE
THERE IS A TRIAL IN THE SENATE BECAUSE IT’S AS MUCH OF A STORY
BECAUSE IT’S AS MUCH OF A STORY FOR THE PUBLIC AS IT IS FOR THE
FOR THE PUBLIC AS IT IS FOR THE POLITICIANS.
POLITICIANS. >> AND, JOYCE, BOTH AS A FEATHER
>> AND, JOYCE, BOTH AS A FEATHER IN YOUR CAP BUT ALSO AS FULL
IN YOUR CAP BUT ALSO AS FULL DISCLOSURE, WE REMIND VIEWERS
DISCLOSURE, WE REMIND VIEWERS YOU TESTIFIED IN THOSE NADLER
YOU TESTIFIED IN THOSE NADLER HEARINGS WE DISCUSSED BEFORE.
HEARINGS WE DISCUSSED BEFORE. ARE THERE DIFFERENCES GIVEN THE
ARE THERE DIFFERENCES GIVEN THE TEMPERATURE?
TEMPERATURE? >> SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN BART AND I
>> SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN BART AND I TESTIFIED THIS SUMMER ABOUT THE
TESTIFIED THIS SUMMER ABOUT THE MUELLER REPORT, CONGRESS WAS
MUELLER REPORT, CONGRESS WAS STILL USING THIS PROCESS OF
STILL USING THIS PROCESS OF BOUNCING BACK AND FORTH FIVE
BOUNCING BACK AND FORTH FIVE MINUTES ASIDE BETWEEN THE
MINUTES ASIDE BETWEEN THE REPUBLICANS AND THE DEMOCRATS.
REPUBLICANS AND THE DEMOCRATS. WHAT WE LEARNED DURING THE
WHAT WE LEARNED DURING THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE HEARINGS
INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE HEARINGS WAS HOW EFFECTIVE THE USE OF
WAS HOW EFFECTIVE THE USE OF STAFF ATTORNEYS IS IN TELLING A
STAFF ATTORNEYS IS IN TELLING A COHESIVE NARRATIVE.
COHESIVE NARRATIVE. THESE HEARINGS ARE AT LEAST THE
THESE HEARINGS ARE AT LEAST THE FIRST DAY THAT MIA AND I HAVE
FIRST DAY THAT MIA AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT IS MORE THE
TALKED ABOUT THAT IS MORE THE LAW.
LAW. ONE WOULD HOPE THEY USE THAT
ONE WOULD HOPE THEY USE THAT PROCESS AGAIN SO THAT THE
PROCESS AGAIN SO THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL UNDERSTAND
AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL UNDERSTAND THE LAW.
THE LAW. I WOULD ENCOURAGE THEM TO USE
I WOULD ENCOURAGE THEM TO USE THAT APPROACH.
THAT APPROACH. >> VERY INTERESTING.

Share Video:

Embed Video: