Intel Member: There’s ‘Parade Of Patriots’ Testifying To Impeachment Inquiry | The Last Word | MSNBC


TELL US HOW HE BALANCED PARTISAN PRESSURE AGAINST HIS SWORN DUTY PRESSURE AGAINST HIS SWORN DUTY AS A JUROR IN A PRESIDENTIAL AS A JUROR IN A PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT TRIAL. IMPEACHMENT TRIAL. WE BEGIN TONIGHT WITH THE WE BEGIN TONIGHT WITH THE INCREASING PACE OF WITNESSES INCREASING PACE OF WITNESSES TESTIFYING TO THE IMPEACHMENT TESTIFYING TO THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AS MORE WITNESSES GET INQUIRY AS MORE WITNESSES GET ADDED TO THE DEPOSITION SCHEDULE ADDED TO THE DEPOSITION SCHEDULE EVERY DAY. EVERY DAY. JOHN BOLTON WILL NOT TESTIFY JOHN BOLTON WILL NOT TESTIFY VOLUNTARILY. VOLUNTARILY. THAT’S WHAT HIS LAWYER SAID THAT’S WHAT HIS LAWYER SAID TODAY IN RESPONSE TO A LETTER TODAY IN RESPONSE TO A LETTER FROM THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT FROM THE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEES INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEES REQUESTING JOHN BOLTON’S REQUESTING JOHN BOLTON’S VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE OF THE VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE OF THE DEPOSITION NEXT THURSDAY, DEPOSITION NEXT THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 7th, AT 9:30 A.M. NOVEMBER 7th, AT 9:30 A.M. JOHN BOLTON’S LAWYER, CHARLES JOHN BOLTON’S LAWYER, CHARLES COOPER, TOLD NBC NEWS, QUOTE, COOPER, TOLD NBC NEWS, QUOTE, BOLTON IS NOT WILLING TO APPEAR BOLTON IS NOT WILLING TO APPEAR VOLUNTARILY. VOLUNTARILY. AND THEN THE LAWYER ADDED, I AND THEN THE LAWYER ADDED, I STAND READY AT ALL TIMES TO STAND READY AT ALL TIMES TO ACCEPT SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA ON ACCEPT SERVICE OF A SUBPOENA ON HIS BEHALF. HIS BEHALF. BUT THAT SAME ATTORNEY, CHARLES BUT THAT SAME ATTORNEY, CHARLES COOPER, REPRESENTS CHARLES COOPER, REPRESENTS CHARLES CUPPERMAN WHO WAS SUBPOENAED BY CUPPERMAN WHO WAS SUBPOENAED BY THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, AND THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, AND THAT LAWYER THEN BROUGHT AN THAT LAWYER THEN BROUGHT AN UNPRECEDENTED LAWSUIT TO ASK A UNPRECEDENTED LAWSUIT TO ASK A COURT TO CLARIFY WHETHER HIS COURT TO CLARIFY WHETHER HIS CLIENT SHOULD OBEY A LAWFUL CLIENT SHOULD OBEY A LAWFUL SUBPOENA OR OBEY THE PRESIDENT’S SUBPOENA OR OBEY THE PRESIDENT’S DEMAND NOT TO TESTIFY EVEN DEMAND NOT TO TESTIFY EVEN THOUGH HIS CLIENT NO LONGER THOUGH HIS CLIENT NO LONGER WORKS IN GOVERNMENT. WORKS IN GOVERNMENT. DONALD TRUMP’S NO LONGER HIS DONALD TRUMP’S NO LONGER HIS BOSS. BOSS. HE IS A PRIVATE CITIZEN JUST HE IS A PRIVATE CITIZEN JUST LIKE JOHN BOLTON. LIKE JOHN BOLTON. AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAS NO LEGAL AUTHORITY TO STATES HAS NO LEGAL AUTHORITY TO ISSUE AN ORDER TO A PRIVATE ISSUE AN ORDER TO A PRIVATE CITIZEN. CITIZEN. BUT ALL PRIVATE CITIZENS ARE BUT ALL PRIVATE CITIZENS ARE SUBJECT SUBPOENA. SUBJECT SUBPOENA. AND SO THE LAWSUIT THAT JOHN AND SO THE LAWSUIT THAT JOHN BOLTON’S LAWYER HAS ALREADY BOLTON’S LAWYER HAS ALREADY BROUGHT ON BEHALF OF ONE OF HIS BROUGHT ON BEHALF OF ONE OF HIS CLIENTS TO AVOID TESTIFYING TO CLIENTS TO AVOID TESTIFYING TO THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IS THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IS ANOTHER UNPRECEDENTED, FRIVOLOUS ANOTHER UNPRECEDENTED, FRIVOLOUS LEGAL MANEUVER THROWN IN THE LEGAL MANEUVER THROWN IN THE PATH OF THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. PATH OF THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. THE FIRST HEARING ON THAT THE FIRST HEARING ON THAT LAWSUIT IS TOMORROW. LAWSUIT IS TOMORROW. ATTORNEY CHARLES COOPER’S ATTORNEY CHARLES COOPER’S CLIENTS ARE EVENTUALLY GOING TO CLIENTS ARE EVENTUALLY GOING TO BE ORDERED BY JUDGES TO TESTIFY BE ORDERED BY JUDGES TO TESTIFY TO THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. TO THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. AND SO JOHN BOLTON IS EVENTUALLY AND SO JOHN BOLTON IS EVENTUALLY GOING TO HAVE TO TELL HIS STORY GOING TO HAVE TO TELL HIS STORY UNDER OATH IN PUBLIC AFTER FIRST UNDER OATH IN PUBLIC AFTER FIRST POSSIBLY SUBMITTING TO A CLOSED POSSIBLY SUBMITTING TO A CLOSED DOOR DEPOSITION. DOOR DEPOSITION. AND THE BIG REASON JOHN BOLTON AND THE BIG REASON JOHN BOLTON HAS FOR NOT WANTING TO DO THAT, HAS FOR NOT WANTING TO DO THAT, THE BIG DISCONTENT JOHN BOLTON THE BIG DISCONTENT JOHN BOLTON HAS ABOUT TESTIFYING PUBLICLY IS HAS ABOUT TESTIFYING PUBLICLY IS THE FINANCIAL INCENTIVE HE HAS THE FINANCIAL INCENTIVE HE HAS TO SAY ALL OF HIS MOST COLORFUL TO SAY ALL OF HIS MOST COLORFUL AND CONDEMNING STORIES ABOUT AND CONDEMNING STORIES ABOUT DONALD TRUMP FOR HIS BOOK, HIS DONALD TRUMP FOR HIS BOOK, HIS BIG BOOK WHICH HE IS REPORTEDLY BIG BOOK WHICH HE IS REPORTEDLY ALREADY WORKING ON. ALREADY WORKING ON. AND THE VALUE OF THAT BOOK AND THE VALUE OF THAT BOOK INCREASES AS LONG AS JOHN BOLTON INCREASES AS LONG AS JOHN BOLTON CAN HOLD ONTO HIS TRUMP SECRETS, CAN HOLD ONTO HIS TRUMP SECRETS, WHICH ALSO MEANS THAT THE VALUE WHICH ALSO MEANS THAT THE VALUE OF THAT BOOK DECLINES IF JOHN OF THAT BOOK DECLINES IF JOHN BOLTON IS FORCED TO REVEAL SOME BOLTON IS FORCED TO REVEAL SOME OF THOSE SECRETS PUBLICLY IN OF THOSE SECRETS PUBLICLY IN TESTIMONY TO THE IMPEACHMENT TESTIMONY TO THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY AND LONG BEFORE HE CAN INQUIRY AND LONG BEFORE HE CAN PUBLISH HIS BOOK. PUBLISH HIS BOOK. SO IT SEEMS UNLIKELY THAT JOHN SO IT SEEMS UNLIKELY THAT JOHN BOLTON WILL SHOW UP FOR HIS BOLTON WILL SHOW UP FOR HIS DEPOSITION NEXT THURSDAY. DEPOSITION NEXT THURSDAY. EVEN IF HE’S HIT WITH A SUBPOENA EVEN IF HE’S HIT WITH A SUBPOENA IN THE MEANTIME. IN THE MEANTIME. IN ADDITION TO REQUESTING IN ADDITION TO REQUESTING TESTIMONY FROM JOHN BOLTON THE TESTIMONY FROM JOHN BOLTON THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY HAS SENT IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY HAS SENT REQUESTS FOR TESTIMONY TO REQUESTS FOR TESTIMONY TO JOHN IZENBERG, THE TOP LAWYER JOHN IZENBERG, THE TOP LAWYER FOR THE NATIONAL SECURITY FOR THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSEL AND MICHAEL ELLIS, COUNSEL AND MICHAEL ELLIS, ASKING THEM FOR APPEAR FOR ASKING THEM FOR APPEAR FOR DEPOSITIONS MONDAY. DEPOSITIONS MONDAY. FIONA HILL, PRESIDENT TRUMP’S FIONA HILL, PRESIDENT TRUMP’S FORMER TOP RUSSIA AIDE ON THE FORMER TOP RUSSIA AIDE ON THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL TESTIFIED EARLIER THIS MONT SHE TESTIFIED EARLIER THIS MONT SHE MET WITH IZENBERG TWICE AT JOHN MET WITH IZENBERG TWICE AT JOHN BOLTON’S URGING AFTER SHE WAS BOLTON’S URGING AFTER SHE WAS WORRIED ABOUT RUDY GIULIANI’S WORRIED ABOUT RUDY GIULIANI’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE INVOLVEMENT IN THE TRUMP-UKRAINE. TRUMP-UKRAINE. CALLING HIM A HAND GRENADE WHO’S CALLING HIM A HAND GRENADE WHO’S GOING TO BLOW EVERYBODY UP, GOING TO BLOW EVERYBODY UP, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT RUDY WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT RUDY GIULIANI APPARENTLY HAS DONE. GIULIANI APPARENTLY HAS DONE. LIEUTENANT COLONEL ALEXANDER LIEUTENANT COLONEL ALEXANDER VINDMAN TOLD THE IMPEACHMENT VINDMAN TOLD THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY YESTERDAY THAT HE TWICE INQUIRY YESTERDAY THAT HE TWICE REPORTED HIS CONCERNS ABOUT REPORTED HIS CONCERNS ABOUT PRESIDENT TRUMP’S DEALINGS WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP’S DEALINGS WITH UKRAINE INCLUDING THE UKRAINE INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT’S JULY 25th PHONE CALL PRESIDENT’S JULY 25th PHONE CALL WITH THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE. WITH THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE. TWO CURRENT STATE DEPARTMENT TWO CURRENT STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS, CHRISTOPHER ANDERSON, OFFICIALS, CHRISTOPHER ANDERSON, AND CATHERINE CROFT, TESTIFIED AND CATHERINE CROFT, TESTIFIED IN UNDER OATH DEPOSITIONS TO THE IN UNDER OATH DEPOSITIONS TO THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY TODAY. IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY TODAY. CHRISTOPHER ANDERSON SERVED AS CHRISTOPHER ANDERSON SERVED AS THE UKRAINE EXPERT ADVISING THE UKRAINE EXPERT ADVISING FORMER SPECIAL ENVOY TO UKRAINE FORMER SPECIAL ENVOY TO UKRAINE KIRK VOLKER. KIRK VOLKER. CHRISTOPHER ANDERSON WAS CHRISTOPHER ANDERSON WAS FOLLOWED IN THAT JOB BY FOLLOWED IN THAT JOB BY CATHERINE CROFT. CATHERINE CROFT. MR. ANDERSON TOLD HOUSE MR. ANDERSON TOLD HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATORS THAT IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATORS THAT RUDY GIULIANI PREVENTED THE RUDY GIULIANI PREVENTED THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FROM TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FROM STRENGTHSING COOPERATION WITH STRENGTHSING COOPERATION WITH UKRAINE. UKRAINE. CHRISTOPHER ANDERSON DESCRIBED A CHRISTOPHER ANDERSON DESCRIBED A MEETING HE HAD WITH JOHN BOLTON MEETING HE HAD WITH JOHN BOLTON ON THE TOPIC OF HAVING SENIOR ON THE TOPIC OF HAVING SENIOR WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS ENGAGE WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS ENGAGE MORE WITH UKRAINE. MORE WITH UKRAINE. JOHN BOLTON IDENTIFIED AN JOHN BOLTON IDENTIFIED AN OBSTACLE TO BETTER ENGAGEMENT OBSTACLE TO BETTER ENGAGEMENT WITH UKRAINE. WITH UKRAINE. HE CAUTIONED THAT MR. GIULIANI HE CAUTIONED THAT MR. GIULIANI WAS A KEY VOICE WITH THE WAS A KEY VOICE WITH THE PRESIDENT ON UKRAINE WHICH COULD PRESIDENT ON UKRAINE WHICH COULD BE AN OBSTACLE TO INCREASED BE AN OBSTACLE TO INCREASED WHITE HOUSE ENGAGEMENT. WHITE HOUSE ENGAGEMENT. ACCORDING TO ATHREN CROFT’S ACCORDING TO ATHREN CROFT’S OPENING STATEMENT SHE FIRST OPENING STATEMENT SHE FIRST LEARNED OF THE TRUMP WHITE LEARNED OF THE TRUMP WHITE HOUSE’S PLAN TO HOLD UP HOUSE’S PLAN TO HOLD UP UKRAINIAN — MILITARY ASSISTANCE UKRAINIAN — MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO UKRAINE DURING A JULY 18th TO UKRAINE DURING A JULY 18th OFFICE OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT OFFICE OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT MEETING AND SHE LISTENED IN BY MEETING AND SHE LISTENED IN BY VIDEOCONFERENCE. VIDEOCONFERENCE. TOLD THE GROUP THAT WHITE HOUSE TOLD THE GROUP THAT WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF MICK MULVANEY HAD CHIEF OF STAFF MICK MULVANEY HAD PLACED WHAT SHE CALLED AN PLACED WHAT SHE CALLED AN INFORMAL HOLD ON THE AID TO INFORMAL HOLD ON THE AID TO UKRAINE. UKRAINE. CATHERINE CROFT TESTIFIED THAT CATHERINE CROFT TESTIFIED THAT THE REASON GIVEN THEN FOR THE THE REASON GIVEN THEN FOR THE HOLD ON UKRAINE, THE HOLD ON HOLD ON UKRAINE, THE HOLD ON UKRAINE AIDE WAS THAT THE ORDER UKRAINE AIDE WAS THAT THE ORDER CAME AT THE DIRECTION OF THE CAME AT THE DIRECTION OF THE PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. CATHERINE CROFT TESTIFIED UNDER CATHERINE CROFT TESTIFIED UNDER SUBPOENA TODAY ACCORDING TO AN SUBPOENA TODAY ACCORDING TO AN OFFICIAL WORKING ON THE OFFICIAL WORKING ON THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IN LIGHT OF IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IN LIGHT OF AN ATTEMPT BY THE WHITE HOUSE AN ATTEMPT BY THE WHITE HOUSE AND STATE DEPARTMENT TO DIRECT AND STATE DEPARTMENT TO DIRECT CATHERINE CROFT NOT TO APPEAR CATHERINE CROFT NOT TO APPEAR FOR HER SCHEDULED DEPOSITION. FOR HER SCHEDULED DEPOSITION. NBC NEWS HAS LEARNED MORE ABOUT NBC NEWS HAS LEARNED MORE ABOUT LIEUTENANT COLONEL VINDMAN’S LIEUTENANT COLONEL VINDMAN’S DEPOSITION YESTERDAY. DEPOSITION YESTERDAY. NBC NEWS IS REPORTING COLONEL NBC NEWS IS REPORTING COLONEL VINDMAN TOLD HOUSE IMPEACHMENT VINDMAN TOLD HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATORS ON TUESDAY AS WELL INVESTIGATORS ON TUESDAY AS WELL AS THE DELIVERY OF NEARLY $400 AS THE DELIVERY OF NEARLY $400 MILLION ON SECURITY AND MILITARY MILLION ON SECURITY AND MILITARY AID WAS CONTINGENT ON UKRAINIAN AID WAS CONTINGENT ON UKRAINIAN OFFICIALS CARRYING OUT OFFICIALS CARRYING OUT INVESTIGATIONS IN BURISMA, THE INVESTIGATIONS IN BURISMA, THE BIDENS, THE 2016 ELECTION AND BIDENS, THE 2016 ELECTION AND CROWD STRIKE NBC NEWS HAS CROWD STRIKE NBC NEWS HAS LEARNED. LEARNED. COLONEL VINDMAN SAID IN HIS COLONEL VINDMAN SAID IN HIS OPENING STATEMENT I DID NOT OPENING STATEMENT I DID NOT THINK IT WAS PROPER TO DEMAND A THINK IT WAS PROPER TO DEMAND A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATE A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATE A U.S. CITIZEN, AND I WAS WORRIED U.S. CITIZEN, AND I WAS WORRIED ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT SUPPORT FOR U.S. GOVERNMENT SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE. UKRAINE. ACCORDING TO NBC NEWS TWO ACCORDING TO NBC NEWS TWO SOURCES FAMILIAR WITH THE SOURCES FAMILIAR WITH THE TESTIMONY SAY THAT COLONEL TESTIMONY SAY THAT COLONEL VINDMAN LATER WENT FURTHER THAN VINDMAN LATER WENT FURTHER THAN HIS OPENING STATEMENT BY DRAWING HIS OPENING STATEMENT BY DRAWING A DIRECT LINE BETWEEN THE A DIRECT LINE BETWEEN THE DELIVERABLES FOR UKRAINE AND THE DELIVERABLES FOR UKRAINE AND THE MULTIPLE INVESTIGATIONS. MULTIPLE INVESTIGATIONS. LEADING OFF OUR DISCUSSION LEADING OFF OUR DISCUSSION TONIGHT ARE DEMOCRATIC TONIGHT ARE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN RAJAH, HE ATTENDED CONGRESSMAN RAJAH, HE ATTENDED THEDES OF BOTH CHRISTOPHER THEDES OF BOTH CHRISTOPHER ANDERSON AND CATHERINE CROFT ANDERSON AND CATHERINE CROFT TODAY. TODAY. ALSO JOINING US JILL WINE-BANKS, ALSO JOINING US JILL WINE-BANKS, AND EVELYN FARKAS, A DEPUTY AND EVELYN FARKAS, A DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AND IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AND A FORMER STAFF MEMBER ON THE A FORMER STAFF MEMBER ON THE HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE. HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE. SHE SERVED ON THE STAFF OF THE SHE SERVED ON THE STAFF OF THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE FOR SEVEN YEARS. FOR SEVEN YEARS. SHE KNOWS CATHERINE CROFT WHO SHE KNOWS CATHERINE CROFT WHO TESTIFIED TODAY, AND SHE’S AN TESTIFIED TODAY, AND SHE’S AN MSNBC NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST. MSNBC NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST. CONGRESSMAN, FIRST OF ALL, CONGRESSMAN, FIRST OF ALL, TODAY’S DEPOSITIONS DID THEY TODAY’S DEPOSITIONS DID THEY DEEPEN YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF DEEPEN YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING WITHIN WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION ON UKRAINE THE ADMINISTRATION ON UKRAINE AND IN WHAT WAYS DID THEY DO AND IN WHAT WAYS DID THEY DO THAT? THAT?>>THANKS FOR HAVING ME ON,>>THANKS FOR HAVING ME ON, LAWRENCE. LAWRENCE. I THINK IT’S FAIR TO SAY THAT I THINK IT’S FAIR TO SAY THAT THEY FLESHED OUT FURTHER KIND OF THEY FLESHED OUT FURTHER KIND OF THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE WHISTLE-BLOWER’S ALLEGATIONS AND WHISTLE-BLOWER’S ALLEGATIONS AND THE SCHEME TO BASICALLY PRESSURE THE SCHEME TO BASICALLY PRESSURE THE UKRAINIANS TO INITIATE BOGUS THE UKRAINIANS TO INITIATE BOGUS INVESTIGATIONS OF THE INVESTIGATIONS OF THE PRESIDENT’S DOMESTIC RIVALS IN PRESIDENT’S DOMESTIC RIVALS IN RETURN FOR AID AND POTENTIALLY A RETURN FOR AID AND POTENTIALLY A WHITE HOUSE MEETING AS WELL. WHITE HOUSE MEETING AS WELL. AND SO I CAN’T COMMENT ON THE AND SO I CAN’T COMMENT ON THE SPECIFICS OF THE TESTIMONY, BUT SPECIFICS OF THE TESTIMONY, BUT THESE INDIVIDUALS, YOU KNOW, THESE INDIVIDUALS, YOU KNOW, MADE STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE STATEMENTS THAT WERE COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH OTHERS NARRATIVES AND THEIR OTHERS NARRATIVES AND THEIR TESTIMONY AS WELL. TESTIMONY AS WELL.>>AND SO — WHAT CAN YOU TELL>>AND SO — WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT TIM MORRISON AND THE US ABOUT TIM MORRISON AND THE REPORT TONIGHT HE HAS RESIGNED. REPORT TONIGHT HE HAS RESIGNED. HE’S SCHEDULED TO TESTIFY HE’S SCHEDULED TO TESTIFY TOMORROW. TOMORROW.>>WELL, I THINK THAT’S — I>>WELL, I THINK THAT’S — I THINK MORE OF A REASON THAT I THINK MORE OF A REASON THAT I HOPE HE WILL SHOW UP TOMORROW HOPE HE WILL SHOW UP TOMORROW BECAUSE HE WILL NO LONGER BE BECAUSE HE WILL NO LONGER BE WITHIN THE PRESIDENT’S EMPLOY. WITHIN THE PRESIDENT’S EMPLOY. AND HE’LL BE IN SOME — YOU AND HE’LL BE IN SOME — YOU COULD SAY HE’S A PRIVATE CITIZEN COULD SAY HE’S A PRIVATE CITIZEN AT THAT POINT. AT THAT POINT. AND, YOU KNOW, WHO KNOWS? AND, YOU KNOW, WHO KNOWS? MAYBE HE’LL EVEN HAVE SOME MAYBE HE’LL EVEN HAVE SOME DOCUMENTS WITH HIM. DOCUMENTS WITH HIM. I’M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT. I’M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT. BUT THE POINT IS THAT I THINK BUT THE POINT IS THAT I THINK THAT CUTTING TIES WITH THE THAT CUTTING TIES WITH THE ADMINISTRATION MAKES IT LESS ADMINISTRATION MAKES IT LESS LIKELY THAT THE PRESIDENT COULD LIKELY THAT THE PRESIDENT COULD COMPEL HIM NOT TO SHOW OR NOT TO COMPEL HIM NOT TO SHOW OR NOT TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OF HIS OWN. PRODUCE DOCUMENTS OF HIS OWN.>>AND CONGRESSMAN, THE — THERE>>AND CONGRESSMAN, THE — THERE SEEMS TO BE A MORE RAPID PACE SEEMS TO BE A MORE RAPID PACE NOW FOR SCHEDULING THESE THINGS. NOW FOR SCHEDULING THESE THINGS. WE WATCHED THE HOUSE OF WE WATCHED THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, FOR EXAMPLE, IN REPRESENTATIVES, FOR EXAMPLE, IN EFFECT NEGOTIATE TO SCHEDULE EFFECT NEGOTIATE TO SCHEDULE ROBERT MUELLER’S TESTIMONY FOR ROBERT MUELLER’S TESTIMONY FOR MONTHS. MONTHS. THE NEGOTIATION TOOK MONTHS. THE NEGOTIATION TOOK MONTHS. IT WAS THEN SCHEDULED FOR MORE IT WAS THEN SCHEDULED FOR MORE THAN A MONTH IN ADVANCE OF WHEN THAN A MONTH IN ADVANCE OF WHEN IT WAS ANNOUNCED. IT WAS ANNOUNCED. WE’RE NOW LEARNING TODAY THAT WE’RE NOW LEARNING TODAY THAT JOHN BOLTON’S TOLD WE WANT YOU JOHN BOLTON’S TOLD WE WANT YOU TO COME IN SEVEN DAYS FROM NOW. TO COME IN SEVEN DAYS FROM NOW. IT SEEMS LIKE THIS PACE IS IT SEEMS LIKE THIS PACE IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN’T SEEN SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN’T SEEN BEFORE. BEFORE.>>NO, WE HAVEN’T, AND IT’S A>>NO, WE HAVEN’T, AND IT’S A PARADE OF CAREER PUBLIC CIVIL PARADE OF CAREER PUBLIC CIVIL SERVANTS. SERVANTS. I CALL THEM A PARADE OF I CALL THEM A PARADE OF PATRIOTS, QUITE FRANKLY. PATRIOTS, QUITE FRANKLY. PEOPLE WHO ARE PUTTING THEIR PEOPLE WHO ARE PUTTING THEIR NECKS ON THE LINE, THEY HIRE NECKS ON THE LINE, THEY HIRE THEIR OWN ATTORNEYS SO THEY’RE THEIR OWN ATTORNEYS SO THEY’RE COMING IN AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE. COMING IN AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE. THEY’RE BASICALLY COMING FORWARD THEY’RE BASICALLY COMING FORWARD OUT OF CONVICTION TO TELL THE OUT OF CONVICTION TO TELL THE TRUTH. TRUTH. AND TO TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT AND TO TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT MISCONDUCT THAT THEY WITNESSED. MISCONDUCT THAT THEY WITNESSED. THEY ARE INCREDIBLY COMMENDABLE THEY ARE INCREDIBLY COMMENDABLE AND JUST YESTERDAY YOU TALKED AND JUST YESTERDAY YOU TALKED ABOUT COLONEL VINDMAN. ABOUT COLONEL VINDMAN. THERE’S A GENTLEMAN WHO IS THERE’S A GENTLEMAN WHO IS CURRENTLY IN THE NATIONAL CURRENTLY IN THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSEL, CURRENTLY IN SECURITY COUNSEL, CURRENTLY IN THE WHITE HOUSE, AND HE CAME THE WHITE HOUSE, AND HE CAME FORWARD TODAY OR YESTERDAY TO FORWARD TODAY OR YESTERDAY TO TESTIFY. TESTIFY. AGAIN, A VERY COMPELLING WITNESS AGAIN, A VERY COMPELLING WITNESS JUST LIKE FOR INSTANCE MR. JUST LIKE FOR INSTANCE MR. TAYLOR, AMBASSADOR TAYLOR FROM TAYLOR, AMBASSADOR TAYLOR FROM LAST WEEK. LAST WEEK.>>AND JILL WINE-BANKS I WANT TO>>AND JILL WINE-BANKS I WANT TO BRING YOU IN ON THIS LEGAL BRING YOU IN ON THIS LEGAL QUESTION. QUESTION. THE MOST ABSURD THING I’VE SEEN THE MOST ABSURD THING I’VE SEEN DEVELOP IS JOHN BOLTON’S LAWYER DEVELOP IS JOHN BOLTON’S LAWYER ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER CLIENT ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER CLIENT ASKING THE COURT TO CLARIFY WHAT ASKING THE COURT TO CLARIFY WHAT SHOULD WE DO HERE? SHOULD WE DO HERE? WE HAVE A SUBPOENA FROM CONGRESS WE HAVE A SUBPOENA FROM CONGRESS AND YET THE PRESIDENT IS TELLING AND YET THE PRESIDENT IS TELLING MY CLIENT NOT TO TESTIFY. MY CLIENT NOT TO TESTIFY. THE CLIENT IS A PRIVATE CITIZEN. THE CLIENT IS A PRIVATE CITIZEN. I CAN’T THINK OF A MORE I CAN’T THINK OF A MORE RIDICULOUS THING TO BRING TO A RIDICULOUS THING TO BRING TO A JUDGE. JUDGE. AND NOTHING LIKE THAT EVER AND NOTHING LIKE THAT EVER HAPPENED IN THE WATERGATE. HAPPENED IN THE WATERGATE. THERE WASN’T ANYBODY WHO WENT TO THERE WASN’T ANYBODY WHO WENT TO A JUDGE AND SAID DO I OBEY A A JUDGE AND SAID DO I OBEY A CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA, I’M A CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA, I’M A PRIVATE CITIZEN, OR DO I LIST PRIVATE CITIZEN, OR DO I LIST TOON THE PRESIDENT ABOUT WHAT TO TOON THE PRESIDENT ABOUT WHAT TO DO ON THIS? DO ON THIS?>>NO, IT NEVER HAPPENED IN>>NO, IT NEVER HAPPENED IN WATERGATE AND IT SHOULDN’T BE WATERGATE AND IT SHOULDN’T BE HAPPENING NOW BECAUSE THE ANSWER HAPPENING NOW BECAUSE THE ANSWER IS OBVIOUS. IS OBVIOUS. THAT A SUBPOENA TRUMPS — NO PUN THAT A SUBPOENA TRUMPS — NO PUN INTENDED — TRUMPS ANYTHING INTENDED — TRUMPS ANYTHING ELSE. ELSE. THEY HAVE A LEGITIMATE RIGHT, THEY HAVE A LEGITIMATE RIGHT, AND OF COURSE THE COURT OPINIONS AND OF COURSE THE COURT OPINIONS NOW HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR THAT NOW HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR THAT THE CONGRESS IS CONDUCTING A THE CONGRESS IS CONDUCTING A LEGITIMATE LAWFUL MANDATED LEGITIMATE LAWFUL MANDATED INQUIRY. INQUIRY. AND EVEN THE VOTE WHICH WILL NOW AND EVEN THE VOTE WHICH WILL NOW HAPPEN AND I’M SURE WILL PASS, HAPPEN AND I’M SURE WILL PASS, BUT EVEN WITHOUT THAT IT WAS BUT EVEN WITHOUT THAT IT WAS TOTALLY LEGITIMATE, AND THEY TOTALLY LEGITIMATE, AND THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO USE THE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO USE THE SUBPOENA POWER AND PEOPLE COME SUBPOENA POWER AND PEOPLE COME IN AND TESTIFY, AND THEY’RE IN IN AND TESTIFY, AND THEY’RE IN CONTEMPT IF THEY DON’T FOLLOW CONTEMPT IF THEY DON’T FOLLOW THE SUBPOENA. THE SUBPOENA. SO IT’S VERY HARD TO GET A COURT SO IT’S VERY HARD TO GET A COURT TO ISSUE WHAT’S CALLED A TO ISSUE WHAT’S CALLED A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT BECAUSE DECLARATORY JUDGMENT BECAUSE THERE’S NOT REALLY AN ISSUE. THERE’S NOT REALLY AN ISSUE. THERE’S NO REAL FIGHT GOING ON. THERE’S NO REAL FIGHT GOING ON. AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO OPPOSING SIDES TO GET THE COURTS OPPOSING SIDES TO GET THE COURTS TO RULE. TO RULE. BUT I THINK THEY DID A GOOD JOB BUT I THINK THEY DID A GOOD JOB OF PHRASING IT, AND MAYBE THE OF PHRASING IT, AND MAYBE THE COURT WILL SAY THIS IS COURT WILL SAY THIS IS RIDICULOUS, YOU HAVE TO OF RIDICULOUS, YOU HAVE TO OF COURSE ABIDE BY A SUBPOENA. COURSE ABIDE BY A SUBPOENA. AND I THINK THEY WILL. AND I THINK THEY WILL.>>EVELYN, YOU KNOW SOME OF>>EVELYN, YOU KNOW SOME OF THESE WITNESSES. THESE WITNESSES. WHAT IS YOUR SENSE OF HOW THIS WHAT IS YOUR SENSE OF HOW THIS EVIDENCE IS DEVELOPING NOW? EVIDENCE IS DEVELOPING NOW?>>I THINK IT’S REALLY>>I THINK IT’S REALLY INTERESTING, LAWRENCE, BECAUSE INTERESTING, LAWRENCE, BECAUSE OF COURSE THERE’S BEEN AN OF COURSE THERE’S BEEN AN ACCELERATION OF WITNESSES. ACCELERATION OF WITNESSES. WE CAN’T EVEN KEEP THEIR NAMES WE CAN’T EVEN KEEP THEIR NAMES STRAIGHT. STRAIGHT. I MEAN I CAN BECAUSE I KNOW ALL I MEAN I CAN BECAUSE I KNOW ALL OF THEM, BUT THE POINT IS THESE OF THEM, BUT THE POINT IS THESE ARE ALL HARDWORKING ARE ALL HARDWORKING PROFESSIONALS. PROFESSIONALS. CATHERINE CROFT WHO CAME FORWARD CATHERINE CROFT WHO CAME FORWARD TODAY AND TESTIFIED, SHE KNOWS TODAY AND TESTIFIED, SHE KNOWS UKRAINE INSIDE OUT. UKRAINE INSIDE OUT.>>LET’S PAUSE OVER THIS.>>LET’S PAUSE OVER THIS. SHE’S A CURRENT FEDERAL SHE’S A CURRENT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE. SHE’S IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT, SHE’S IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT, SHE’S ON THE PAYROLL, AND SHE SHE’S ON THE PAYROLL, AND SHE GOT HER SUBPOENA. GOT HER SUBPOENA. SHE WENT. SHE WENT. THERE WAS NO CONFUSION ABOUT THERE WAS NO CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT TO DO. WHAT TO DO. SHE DOESN’T CARE WHAT POMPEO SHE DOESN’T CARE WHAT POMPEO SAYS OR WHAT TRUMP SAYS. SAYS OR WHAT TRUMP SAYS.>>BUT PART OF IT IS I THINK>>BUT PART OF IT IS I THINK BECAUSE SHE’S A CIVIL SERVANT BECAUSE SHE’S A CIVIL SERVANT SHE HAS A SENSE OF DUTY. SHE HAS A SENSE OF DUTY. REALLY AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH REALLY AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH REMEMBER SHE WAS THE FIRST ONE REMEMBER SHE WAS THE FIRST ONE TO GO. TO GO. SHE WAS THE SENIOR ONE. SHE WAS THE SENIOR ONE. WHAT I’D HEARD FROM INSIDE THE WHAT I’D HEARD FROM INSIDE THE DEPARTMENT WAS THAT SHE WANTED DEPARTMENT WAS THAT SHE WANTED TO STAY IN THE GOVERNMENT SO TO STAY IN THE GOVERNMENT SO THAT SHE COULD DO THAT, SO SHE THAT SHE COULD DO THAT, SO SHE COULD LOOK OUT FOR OTHER PEOPLE. COULD LOOK OUT FOR OTHER PEOPLE. I DON’T KNOW, I HAVEN’T I DON’T KNOW, I HAVEN’T CORROBORATED IT WITH LOTS OF CORROBORATED IT WITH LOTS OF PEOPLE. PEOPLE. BUT MY SENSE WAS FROM PEOPLE BUT MY SENSE WAS FROM PEOPLE I’VE TALKED TO — I’VE TALKED TO –>>SHE UNDERSTANDS THE GUMP AS A>>SHE UNDERSTANDS THE GUMP AS A MODEL WHAT TO DO IN TESTIFYING MODEL WHAT TO DO IN TESTIFYING EVEN WHEN YOU’RE WORKING IN THE EVEN WHEN YOU’RE WORKING IN THE GOVERNMENT. GOVERNMENT.>>SHE’S SENIOR, SHE HAS HER>>SHE’S SENIOR, SHE HAS HER PENSION. PENSION. SHE CAN AFFORD LET’S SAY SHE CAN AFFORD LET’S SAY FINANCIALLY AND OTHERWISE TO PUT FINANCIALLY AND OTHERWISE TO PUT HER LEG OUT THERE A LITTLE BIT, HER LEG OUT THERE A LITTLE BIT, AND THAT’S ACTUALLY THEN — THAT AND THAT’S ACTUALLY THEN — THAT EMBOLDENED A LOT OF OTHERS. EMBOLDENED A LOT OF OTHERS. BILL TAYLOR IN THE SITUATION SHE BILL TAYLOR IN THE SITUATION SHE IS, MORE SENIOR, CAN AFFORD TO IS, MORE SENIOR, CAN AFFORD TO TAKE THE RISK. TAKE THE RISK. CATHERINE CROFT HAS A GREAT CATHERINE CROFT HAS A GREAT CAREER AHEAD OF HER. CAREER AHEAD OF HER. I WANT TO PAUSE ON TIM MORRISON I WANT TO PAUSE ON TIM MORRISON BECAUSE I WORKED WITH HIM AND WE BECAUSE I WORKED WITH HIM AND WE TALKED ABOUT HIM ACTUALLY YOU TALKED ABOUT HIM ACTUALLY YOU AND I. AND I. YOU ASKED ME WHETHER HE WOULD YOU ASKED ME WHETHER HE WOULD TESTIFY. TESTIFY. HE WORKED FOR A LONG TIME IN HE WORKED FOR A LONG TIME IN CONGRESS. CONGRESS. HE WORKED FOR MATT THORNBERRY HE WORKED FOR MATT THORNBERRY WHO’S RETIRING. WHO’S RETIRING. I SUSPECT HE LEFT — HE WAS A I SUSPECT HE LEFT — HE WAS A POLITICAL APPOINTEE. POLITICAL APPOINTEE. I THINK HE LEFT THE WHITE HOUSE I THINK HE LEFT THE WHITE HOUSE SO HE COULD SPEAK MORE FRANKLY, SO HE COULD SPEAK MORE FRANKLY, SO HE COULD TESTIFY. SO HE COULD TESTIFY. THAT’S MY BET. THAT’S MY BET. POLICY-WISE, A LOT OF DEMOCRATS POLICY-WISE, A LOT OF DEMOCRATS WANT TO SAY NEGATIVE THINGS WANT TO SAY NEGATIVE THINGS BECAUSE THEY DON’T LIKE THE BECAUSE THEY DON’T LIKE THE POLICIES HE WORKED HARD TO POLICIES HE WORKED HARD TO ADVOCATE, BUT AS A COLLEAGUE I ADVOCATE, BUT AS A COLLEAGUE I WORKED HARD WITH HIM, AND MY WORKED HARD WITH HIM, AND MY SENSE IS HE UNDERSTANDS HIS SENSE IS HE UNDERSTANDS HIS CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATIONS. CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATIONS.>>JILL, WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THE>>JILL, WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THE PACE THAT CONGRESSMAN TELLS US PACE THAT CONGRESSMAN TELLS US HAS PICKED UP? HAS PICKED UP?>>I THINK IT’S A NATURAL>>I THINK IT’S A NATURAL REACTION TO THE FACT THE REACTION TO THE FACT THE EVIDENCE IS MOUNTING SO FAST AND EVIDENCE IS MOUNTING SO FAST AND IT’S LIKE PIECES OF JIGSAW IT’S LIKE PIECES OF JIGSAW COMING TOGETHER AND FITTING WELL COMING TOGETHER AND FITTING WELL NOW. NOW. THE EVIDENCE IS SO STRONG IT’S THE EVIDENCE IS SO STRONG IT’S IMPOSSIBLE FOR REPUBLICANS TO IMPOSSIBLE FOR REPUBLICANS TO DEFEND ON THE FACTS. DEFEND ON THE FACTS. THE LAW IS AGAINST THEM SO YOU THE LAW IS AGAINST THEM SO YOU KNOW YOU ALWAYS SAY IF THE LAW KNOW YOU ALWAYS SAY IF THE LAW IS AGAINST YOU, ARGUE THE FACTS. IS AGAINST YOU, ARGUE THE FACTS. IF THE FACTS ARE AGAINST YOU, IF THE FACTS ARE AGAINST YOU, POUND THE TABLE. POUND THE TABLE. THERE’S NOTHING LEFT FOR THEM TO THERE’S NOTHING LEFT FOR THEM TO DO BUT TO DO THAT BECAUSE THE DO BUT TO DO THAT BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE AND THE LAW ARE SO EVIDENCE AND THE LAW ARE SO STRONG, AND EVERYONE OF THE STRONG, AND EVERYONE OF THE PEOPLE YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR PEOPLE YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR OPENING, FIT TOGETHER AND MAKE A OPENING, FIT TOGETHER AND MAKE A UNBELIEVABLY STRONG CASE. UNBELIEVABLY STRONG CASE. YOU CAN’T JUST TAKE THE PHONE YOU CAN’T JUST TAKE THE PHONE CALL OUT OF CONTEXT. CALL OUT OF CONTEXT. YES, THE PHONE CALL ON THE FACE YES, THE PHONE CALL ON THE FACE OF IT IS REALLY DAMNING TO THE OF IT IS REALLY DAMNING TO THE PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. HE SAID I NEED A FAVOR, THOUGH. HE SAID I NEED A FAVOR, THOUGH. THERE’S NO QUESTION THAT HE WAS THERE’S NO QUESTION THAT HE WAS ASKING FOR SOMETHING OF VALUE, ASKING FOR SOMETHING OF VALUE, WHICH IS AN ACT VIOLATION, WHICH IS AN ACT VIOLATION, SOLICITING A BRIBE, IT ENDANGERS SOLICITING A BRIBE, IT ENDANGERS OUR SECURITY, ENDANGERS OUR SECURITY, ENDANGERS UKRAINE’S SECURITY. UKRAINE’S SECURITY. IT HELPS ONLY ONE PERSON AND IT HELPS ONLY ONE PERSON AND THAT’S PUTIN AND RUSSIA. THAT’S PUTIN AND RUSSIA. IT ALL GOES BACK TO RUSSIA. IT ALL GOES BACK TO RUSSIA. SO IT’S REALLY GETTING TO BE SO IT’S REALLY GETTING TO BE STRONG BUT YOU NEED IT IN STRONG BUT YOU NEED IT IN CONTEXT WHERE YOU SAY FOR MONTHS CONTEXT WHERE YOU SAY FOR MONTHS BEFORE THAT RUDY GIULIANI WAS BEFORE THAT RUDY GIULIANI WAS REALLY TRYING TO GET THEM TO REALLY TRYING TO GET THEM TO MAKE UP AN INVESTIGATION, MAKE MAKE UP AN INVESTIGATION, MAKE UP EVIDENCE THAT DOESN’T EXIST. UP EVIDENCE THAT DOESN’T EXIST.>>CONGRESSMAN, WE GOT REPORTS>>CONGRESSMAN, WE GOT REPORTS YESTERDAY INDICATING REPUBLICANS YESTERDAY INDICATING REPUBLICANS WERE TRYING TO GET THE NAME OF WERE TRYING TO GET THE NAME OF THE WHISTLE-BLOWER OUT OF THE THE WHISTLE-BLOWER OUT OF THE COLONEL YESTERDAY IN HIS COLONEL YESTERDAY IN HIS TESTIMONY EVEN THOUGH HE TESTIMONY EVEN THOUGH HE TESTIFIED IN HIS OPENING TESTIFIED IN HIS OPENING STATEMENT HE DOESN’T KNOW WHO STATEMENT HE DOESN’T KNOW WHO THE WHISTLE-BLOWER IS. THE WHISTLE-BLOWER IS. WHAT WERE THEIR TACTICS TODAY? WHAT WERE THEIR TACTICS TODAY? WAS IT ANYTHING SIMILAR TO THAT? WAS IT ANYTHING SIMILAR TO THAT? WAS IT OBSTRUCTIONIST OR WERE WAS IT OBSTRUCTIONIST OR WERE THEY SPECTATORS TODAY? THEY SPECTATORS TODAY?>>I FELT THEY WERE A LITTLE>>I FELT THEY WERE A LITTLE MORE SUBDUED, QUITE FRANKLY. MORE SUBDUED, QUITE FRANKLY. I THINK AT THIS POINT IT’S BEEN I THINK AT THIS POINT IT’S BEEN MADE CLEAR BY CHAIRMAN SCHIFF MADE CLEAR BY CHAIRMAN SCHIFF AND ALSO THE COUNSEL FOR THE AND ALSO THE COUNSEL FOR THE WITNESSES THAT THEY’RE NOT GOING WITNESSES THAT THEY’RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW FOR ANYBODY TO GET THEM TO ALLOW FOR ANYBODY TO GET THEM TO INTENTIONALLY OR INVD TO INTENTIONALLY OR INVD INADVERTENTLY RELEASE THE NAMES INADVERTENTLY RELEASE THE NAMES OF PEOPLE THAT COULD BE OF PEOPLE THAT COULD BE WHISTLE-BLOWERS. WHISTLE-BLOWERS. AS YOU KNOW WHISTLE BLOWERS ARE AS YOU KNOW WHISTLE BLOWERS ARE PROTECTED UNDER STATUTE PROTECTED UNDER STATUTE REGULATIONS FROM BEING EXPOSED. REGULATIONS FROM BEING EXPOSED. AND WE ALSO KNOW THAT PRESIDENT AND WE ALSO KNOW THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP AND HIS ALLIES IN CONGRESS TRUMP AND HIS ALLIES IN CONGRESS WANT TO EXPOSE THIS WANT TO EXPOSE THIS WHISTLE-BLOWER SO THAT THEY CAN WHISTLE-BLOWER SO THAT THEY CAN THEN RETALIATE AGAINST HIM OR THEN RETALIATE AGAINST HIM OR HER. HER. IF THAT IS DONE NOT ONLY WILL IT IF THAT IS DONE NOT ONLY WILL IT HARM THE WHISTLE-BLOWER IN HARM THE WHISTLE-BLOWER IN QUESTION, BUT IT WILL CREATE A QUESTION, BUT IT WILL CREATE A TREMENDOUS CHILLING EFFECT FOR TREMENDOUS CHILLING EFFECT FOR ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO COME ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO COME FORWARD WITH EVIDENCE OF FORWARD WITH EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING WHO MIGHT BE IN THE WRONGDOING WHO MIGHT BE IN THE RANK AND FILE OF OUR GOVERNMENT. RANK AND FILE OF OUR GOVERNMENT. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DEVISED THE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DEVISED THE WHISTLE-BLOWER SYSTEM FOR ONE WHISTLE-BLOWER SYSTEM FOR ONE REASON ALONE, AND THAT IS THEY REASON ALONE, AND THAT IS THEY WANT THE RANK AND FILE PEOPLE TO WANT THE RANK AND FILE PEOPLE TO COME FORWARD SO THEY CAN GET COME FORWARD SO THEY CAN GET GOOD GOVERNMENT. GOOD GOVERNMENT. AND THE REASON WHY THE TRUMP AND THE REASON WHY THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WANTS TO CREATE ADMINISTRATION WANTS TO CREATE THIS CHILLING EFFECT IS THIS CHILLING EFFECT IS PRECISELY TO GET PEOPLE TO AVOID PRECISELY TO GET PEOPLE TO AVOID DOING THAT. DOING THAT. AND WE CAN’T ALLOW THAT TO AND WE CAN’T ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN, SO WE’RE NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, SO WE’RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO BURN THIS ALLOW PEOPLE TO BURN THIS WHISTLE-BLOWER. WHISTLE-BLOWER.>>CONGRESSMAN, QUICKLY BEFORE>>CONGRESSMAN, QUICKLY BEFORE WE GO TO THE BREAK, I’VE HAD TWO WE GO TO THE BREAK, I’VE HAD TWO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEES IN MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEES IN DEPOSITIONS WHO HAVE SAID ON DEPOSITIONS WHO HAVE SAID ON THIS PROGRAM THEY BELIEVE GORDON THIS PROGRAM THEY BELIEVE GORDON SONDLAND IS COMING VERY CLOSE TO SONDLAND IS COMING VERY CLOSE TO RISKING PERJURY CHARGES BASED ON RISKING PERJURY CHARGES BASED ON WHAT THEY’VE SEEN IN THE DIRECT WHAT THEY’VE SEEN IN THE DIRECT CONTRADICTIONS OF HIS TESTIMONY CONTRADICTIONS OF HIS TESTIMONY UNDER OATH BY OTHER WITNESSES. UNDER OATH BY OTHER WITNESSES. DO YOU SHARE THAT SENSE THAT DO YOU SHARE THAT SENSE THAT GORDON SONDLAND COULD BE IN GORDON SONDLAND COULD BE IN LEGAL JEOPARDY? LEGAL JEOPARDY?>>I WOULDN’T SAY IT THAT WAY.>>I WOULDN’T SAY IT THAT WAY. WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT AT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT AT LEAST MY IMPRESSION OF HIS LEAST MY IMPRESSION OF HIS TESTIMONY WAS THAT HE WASN’T TESTIMONY WAS THAT HE WASN’T ABLE TO RECALL A WHOLE HECK OF A ABLE TO RECALL A WHOLE HECK OF A LOT WITH REGARD TO A LOT OF HIS LOT WITH REGARD TO A LOT OF HIS ENCOUNTERS AND CONVERSATIONS. ENCOUNTERS AND CONVERSATIONS. AND SO THAT KIND OF LACK OF AND SO THAT KIND OF LACK OF MEMORY, SELECTIVE AMNESIA AND MEMORY, SELECTIVE AMNESIA AND PERHAPS EVASIVENESS ARE ISSUES. PERHAPS EVASIVENESS ARE ISSUES. BUT THAT BEING SAID, THERE ARE A BUT THAT BEING SAID, THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER DATA POINTS NOW LOT OF OTHER DATA POINTS NOW THAT WE HAVE WITH REGARD TO THAT WE HAVE WITH REGARD TO CONVERSATIONS, MEETINGS AND SO CONVERSATIONS, MEETINGS AND SO FORTH THAT HELP TO FILL IN THE

100 thoughts on “Intel Member: There’s ‘Parade Of Patriots’ Testifying To Impeachment Inquiry | The Last Word | MSNBC

  1. Witnesses are coming forward, evidence is piling up and yet on fox news "Hannity: GOP must find out if whistleblower is a deep state operative".
    Pathetic…

  2. How broke is Bolton? I'm thinking he'd rather go down in history as a pivotal force in getting Trump impeached than gain $$ in an already saturated book market. Unless he needs the money.

  3. When all the trumpites are sentenced and have been locked up, will the proceeds from any books written by them be seized as proceeds of a criminal enterprise?

  4. Trump is a criminal defending his criminal behaviour by defaming every decent American, and every decent human value….. … and certain republicans defend this disgusting human being.

    Bone spurs Trump is not a Republican … Make the world a better place .. impeach him.

  5. Soo, if I understand correctly, Bolton who projects to be more patriotic then anyone else basically is putting MONEY before NATION.
    Quite revealing I would say

  6. Nice thing is trump ain't in charge of me..I would quit n testify too.. n I would do it voluntarily..its called character..trump n goona dont have it

  7. Released today, the whistleblower worked for Bjdden and Brennan ,also with the liar Adam Schiff! Staff! Schiff colluded with the whistleblower and lied to congress, a illegal act and punishable by up to a year in prison!

  8. Aren't Trump and his enablers breaking witness intimidation laws? Why does Congress make laws it will never enforce?

  9. If Giuliani butt dialled about needing cash is he broke? Trump is so cheap he won't even pay for his lawyer. STOOPID 😳

  10. All the W.H(Traitor mc Grab'em)is gonna do is say Rudy was Woking Rogue,because what i told him to do is chck for Corruption,so any thing else he did on his Own,and you know Rudy only worked on little things,we really didn't talk that Much.

  11. I think its a good thing to get s definite court ruling as to whether a lawfully issued subpoena takes precedence over the president's instruction. We can put the question to rest once and for all. I do not see how any court of law could side with the president in this straight forward legal question.

  12. I'm going to remind the Republicans and the Trump supporters that work for Donald. After Nixon resign there was over 40 people indicted
    and or went to jail. I hope those people are prepared for that, because Donald Trump ain't going to come to your rescue. Donald Trump only cares about Donald Trump.

  13. I would love to see the full, un-redacted version of the Ukraine call that Trump insists clears him of any wrongdoing. If it were (not holding my breath) released, it would prove every single witness as a liar. Thereby clearing Trump in a heartbeat… Yes?

  14. Don't forget, the tRUMP to Ukraine Quid Pro Quo phone call is hidden on a double super secret State Department computer server which could only be accessed by a senior State Department official. Like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo maybe? Hiding evidence of bribery, a High Crime in the Constitution, is considered Obstruction of Justice. Attorney General Bill Barr was in on the call also, so he knew of tRUMP's bribe and failed to report the crime.

  15. What the H is wrong with Bolton?? I would think he would be RUNNING in to testify against his abuser Trump. A book? I'm not sure that's the reason.

  16. The patriots are coming out to defend their constitution. This should have been the first course of action taken by the spineless self serving elected republicans.
    Shame on you gaetz,jordan,mconnell ,graham et al. Shame on you.

  17. I heard Trumpian used like Orwellian on another post; let's make Trumpian formally a new word.
    "Trumpian" is an adjective describing a rude hyper-partisan president. A president who's also identified as vacuous, of dissolute character, corruptible and corrupting, incapable of veracity or accountability, and who disregards charter and law in a free and democratic society.

  18. I think you missed the point about Bolton's lawyer's request for clarification regarding the subpoena. He wants to be subpoenaed to free Bolton to testify. He also wants the courts to make a ruling on just how far the administration can influence people's testimony when they are subpoenaed. In effect, he is saying he wants the various camps to commit to a real position but he is otherwise fully prepared to testify.

  19. Is the president a dictator? Is the question that all that worked for him ask now?! Is this normal or is the US of A become a dictatorship? Is there still a rule of law in the US of A?!

  20. The lawyer is trying to make a name for himself by doing stupid stuff. And the judge ruled that this was a totally legal process last Friday. And oh he’s representing Bolton. Yeah he’s not gonna try that with Bolton too since he was asked to testify voluntarily today. And yup he turned that down on Bolton’s behalf and said we are waiting for a subpoena. John doesn’t want to talk cause he’s writing a book. Surprise, surprise. These two men he represents are NOT PATRIOTS.

  21. Bolton understands he will have to testify eventually. His civic duty outweighs his desire for a book deal, whether he likes it or not. It also makes him look better in the eyes of the republican party if he responds to a subpoena as opposed to appearing voluntarily.

  22. Lawrence really has this right. It’s all about the book.

    But I’m sure Bolton has more than enough stories about crazy Trump to fill five books and the Ukraine situation is only one of them.

    Anyway. Subpoena him.

  23. Good hackers of the world, if you're listening, we need for you to delete trumpf's twitter account. I'm sure you will be mightily rewarded.

  24. WOW!!! One single corrupt nefarious power abusing illegal phone conversation, has had more impact than a two year multi ten million dollar Mueller investigation.

    To be completely forthcoming, the Mueller Report didn't detonate because the AG personally defused it. But within those 400 pages, Donald J Trump was just as corrupt.
    That's who his is, it's who he's always been. He's the pretentious braggadocios John Gotti in the White House.

    And remember, Gotti had lots of fans, who wanted him to get off.

  25. 🧐 – Jill Wine-Banks, Evelyn Farkas, Lawrence O’Donnell sir, 👍.

    My opinion;
    If John Bolton, is actually worried about the sales of his book, when it’s finished and published;
    He need not worry, if he tells the truth, to Impeachment Committee.

    So on that note;
    He should testify to the Impeachment Committee / Congress, without any hesitation.

    Stating the truth of the matter verbally, regarding the 45th President, will only help increase the status of his legacy, in a positive way.
    I, for one, would still purchase a hardcover of his book, knowing that;
    What he’s stated verbally and truthfully / factual, to the Impeachment Committee, is on paper, that I would, now own.

    Last but not least:
    Rep. Raja Krisnamoorthi, keep up the great work, you and all your fellow colleagues, are doing. 👍

  26. Is there some way we citizens could help these patriots with their attorney fees?
    I believe this will show these patriots our support for their patriotism!

  27. When you drag trump out, can you do it in "Hannibal Lecter style"?
    – appropriate for the season, appropriate for the crimes.

  28. Many of these witnesses gave up their careers to testify unencumbered.
    That's the mark of true American patriots!

  29. Note to John Bolton: Skip out on the deposition and you can make bigger bucks than your toilet paperback book and star in your own movie, "The Ball-less Wonder Boy."

  30. Congress has the power to hold those that defy a subpoena with imposing fines of up to $25,000 per day and incarceration until they comply. What's all this court decision bs. Charge them with contempt and enforce these options and we'll see more people comply. That's $750.000 per month in exchange or three hots and a cot.

  31. DjT, if you did "nothing wrong" then respond to the multiple House requests for documents and witnesses including the missing 20 minutes of your 30 minute phone conversation with the Ukraine President.

    DjT, your public confessions concerning that conversation, and those of Mulvaney and Giuliani, clearly establish your guilt and that you are unfit for the office of the President of the United States and must be impeached, convicted and removed from office.

  32. Wouldn't it be some cosmic justice — and outrageously hilarious —- that Rudy ended up going to prison, from prosecution by the officer he once lead? (Remember, Rudy, Mike Flynn, Michael Cohen et al… they all lead chants of "Lock her up!" during Trump's campaign. And, like Newt, who pretended to be outraged by Bill Clinton's affair but who was having an affair of his own, while being Speaker of the House… I think Rudy and Flynn KNEW as they're loudly chanting with mindless drones in the audiences about locking Hillary up… that they WERE really committing frauds and crimes against the US, working as double agents, for Trump as well as Turkey and Ukraine and Russia…

  33. This is the time that our country needs us to defend it from a group of traitors who want to undermine our democracy and values as citizens make worthless our constitution and laws that govern us and give value to our country in the world speak up if you know something if you love our country and you know you put in your life on a risk and we must defend it with our lives if necessary

  34. It turns out Trump doesn't spend all his time playing golf: he also meddles with foreign policy for his own profit.

  35. Who needs more books about the criminality of the moron?The country had ENOUGHT of his Daily BS! Narcissist self adoration, BE very happy to never ever heard from this imbecile for the rest of the millennium 😅😁😅

  36. All the Republican rats are jumping ship! Don't you wish you could go in court and NOT tell the truth! And not be punished by the law, like these Trumpsters? The White man wrote the constitution and has broken every law in the WH and always worry about people of color breaking the law. Trump is out in 2020 let see if the 40% can save this lying President!!

  37. It seems more and more like a real civil war between the cult leader & a chief in crimes, Trumpuppets AND the National protectors of America. On one side, protectors are seriously trying to base the impeachment investigation on the legal ground, on the other hand, only desperate cult-loyalists with any weapon of the counter-claims are trying to find even a small, stupid, nonsense, excuse or reason to destroy the Congress procedure. Quite contrary color. One is tainted in red-bloody and orange. The other is moving steadily with cool and clear color.

  38. A lot of these R defenses should be sanctioned by the courts under rule 11 as frivolous defenses wasting the court's time

  39. Whatever name they use, quid pro quo or another, if one uses something of value with an intent to extort from the other party, it is a crime under the bribery law. Whether the victim side got damaged or harmed does not matter. Whether the victim received that something of value or not is not a necessary condition. Only "intent" is the necessary element.

  40. Contempt of Congress is defined in statute, 2 U.S.C.A. § 192, enacted in 1938, which states that ANY PERSON who is summoned before Congress who "willfully makes default, or who, having appeared, refuses to answer ANY question pertinent to the question under inquiry" SHALL BE GUILTY of a misdemeanor and subject to a maximum $1,000 fine and 12 month imprisonment.

  41. Giuliani should of been disbarred long time ago, all the people he put in prison, are waiting for him!!!
    Trump and his lawyers can share a cell together.

  42. Trump violates his oath of office daily by calling constitution phoney and attacking it ."I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

  43. Isnt violating your oath of office a high crime?isn't violating the emoluments act a high crime or misdemeanor?isnt tax fraud a high crime or misdemeanor?isnt violating campaign finance laws a high crime or misdemeanor?isnt obstruction of justice a high crime or misdemeanor?isnt colludibg with a foreign government a high crime or misdemeanor?

  44. The history books, college lectures and documentaries will not be kind to this president and his administration.  Too many scandals, dramas and lies in this administration and yet the GOP still defends Trump.   Our Government will bear the “Stains of Shame” of Trump for decades.  This is not about being a Democratic or Republican.  We need a president with honor and integrity.

  45. Trump is the new jesus for conservative Christians since they've abandoned all teachings of jesus and the bible and adopted all of trumps treating him like a god and above God.

  46. The 10 commandments trump has broken ..“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods.”“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.”“Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”“Thou shalt not steal.”

    “Thou shalt not commit adultery.”“I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have any strange gods before Me.” 6 out of 10 not bad but lying is a major sin and hes done that well over 15,000 times since being president.

  47. The deficit from this year is being used against our country… This foreign placed president is a real piece of puke and will try to destroy our country for his own gain before he will ever do anything positive for it… But he goes to bat for Russia, Turkey and Saudi Arabia on everything… The INF treaty or begging to let them back in the g7 alone was ridiculous… Seems as if this would be stopped quickly… Wonder if it's a bipartisan split to entertain themselves while being paid to steal our money while eating popcorn and watching us?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *