Ditto - you Dems are pathetic whining cry babies and sore LOSERS - lot of polls are now showing that the American public is sick of your *******.
Trump lost moving on with new year go Biden
- Thread starter Allforthewifey
- Start date
Ditto - you Dems are pathetic whining cry babies and sore LOSERS - lot of polls are now showing that the American public is sick of your *******.
People really don’t like Donald Trump. | The New Republic
newrepublic.com
people-really-dont-like-donald-trump
People really don’t like Donald Trump. For Trump, that means that 70 percent of the country has an unfavorable opinion of him—the highest mark since he began running for president a year ago. Only 29 percent of Americans have favorable opinions of him; meanwhile, 89 percent of Hispanics and 94 percent of blacks dislike Trump.
Americans love the economy — but most still don't like Trump
https://www.cnbc.com/.../americans-love-the-economy--but-most-still-dont-like-trump.html
Jan 11, 2018 · A Quinnipiac poll says 66 percent of American voters view the economy as "excellent" or "good." But only 36 percent say they approve of President Trump's performance. A larger percentage of …
People really don’t like Donald Trump.
A Washington Post-ABC News poll has Trump and Hillary Clinton both hitting their lowest favorability point in the 2016 contest. For Trump, that means that 70 percent of the country has an unfavorable opinion of him—the highest mark since he began running for president a year ago. Only 29 percent...
newrepublic.com
People really don’t like Donald Trump. For Trump, that means that 70 percent of the country has an unfavorable opinion of him—the highest mark since he began running for president a year ago. Only 29 percent of Americans have favorable opinions of him; meanwhile, 89 percent of Hispanics and 94 percent of blacks dislike Trump.
Americans love the economy — but most still don't like Trump
https://www.cnbc.com/.../americans-love-the-economy--but-most-still-dont-like-trump.html
Jan 11, 2018 · A Quinnipiac poll says 66 percent of American voters view the economy as "excellent" or "good." But only 36 percent say they approve of President Trump's performance. A larger percentage of …
O contraire - from what I’ve seen most Independents have had it with your whining bitch party.
again ...that must be more of the Cult news......if you are so right how is it trump hangs around 30% approval...…...you do know some math right........30%.....that means that 70% doesn't like him
Americans really hate Trump - The Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/10/14/americans-really-hate-trump
Oct 14, 2016 · It’s the opposite for Trump, as 63 percent think he lacks the temperament and 56 percent say he isn’t qualified. For 49 percent, he is “not at all” qualified.
Donald Trump Approval Rating: Lowest in History After 1 ...
https://time.com/5103776/donald-trump-approval-rating-graph
Jan 17, 2018 · Based on historical trends and contemporary patterns, we previously calculated that Trump’s lowest possible approval rating is 22%. Design by …
Trump has the lowest approval rating in US history at 20 ...
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20190811193140AAbGNKb
Aug 11, 2019 · Trump has the lowest approval rating in US history at 20 percent. How on Earth is it possible for him to win in 2020?
Last edited:
Have you ever even rode a horse? You can't ride a dead horse. Didn't I say he has turned the economy around, strengthened our military, Is responsible for More Jobs for minorities, the list goes on.
This impeachment hearing is simply the democrats attempt to redirect the meaning of Trumps intent concerning his asking a favor of the new Ukrainian President to investigate the Biden's for their connection in the Burisma corruption, thus how deep was the United States involved though the Obama administration. What did Burisma get for their bribe money? They were buying a path to Obama for some sort of influence that needs to be investigated. President Trump could very well have been seeking out truth on Joe Biden's part of this corruption as he is running as a candidate in the 2020 election. BUT after being falsely investigated for over 3 years by the Democrats and the media, trying to connect Trump to Russian election influence in 2016, the important issue is the corruption between the Ukraine and and the Obama, Biden administration not Joe Biden's run of his own in 2020. Trump did not need dirt on Biden to beat him despite what the media keeps driving down our throats.
you made this same statement yesterday and 2 of us answered it.....talk about riding a dead horse...no matter how much you kick it....still dead.....kind of like your train of thought when you have been repeatedly shown to be WRONG!
Are Trump Supporters Really As Stupid As We Think ...
https://democracyguardian.com/are-trump-supporters...
May 04, 2017 · There has been a long standing belief that those that support Trump are the percentage of the country that is ignorant, naïve of politics, gullible and flat out stupid. This opinion was not developed by sheer chance, but has been based on both the behavior and the comments made by his supporters.
Dems THINK they’re so damned smart - think they can talk down to anyone that doesn’t agree with them - look at Hillary’s basket of deplorables. HEY Dems guess who’s in the Whitehouse - taint ole Hill-a-beans - now ya gonna say RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA WAH WAH WAH - truth is ya just whining bitches and sore LOSERS !!!!!
WRONG...….I don't think that at all....it's just that you guys make so many stupid comments that can be easily fact checked that's all......I do think you guys have a problem with using your "noggins"....you spout all that stuff the right likes to put out.....without at least checking it for yourself....and here I was trying to be nice with an answer and the second part of your statement is pure *******
now back to the asshole comments you finished on......yes again Russia put him them...even noted yesterday that P.utin is keeping a close eye on the hearings.....as for the whinning bitches...that would be you guys...….
music to my ears when you guys cry about being picked on
FORMER REPUBLICAN SENATOR GEORGE VOINOVICH ADMITS …
republican-senator-george-voinovich-admits-that-in-2008...
FORMER REPUBLICAN SENATOR GEORGE VOINOVICH ADMITS THAT IN 2008 REPUBLICANS WERE ORDERED TO BLOCK EVERYTHING PRES. OBAMA WANTED EVEN IF IT WOULD HELP THE COUNTRY: "If Obama wanted it, we Republicans had to be against it." Occupy Demmocrats from Facebook tagged as Obama Meme
Discover ideas about Republican Senators - Pinterest
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/20266267053055236
Former Republican Senator George Voinovich admits that in 2008, Republicans were ORDERED to block EVERYTHING President Obama wanted, even if it would help the country: "If Obama wanted it, we, Republicans, had to be against it."
did george voinovich say he had orders to block Obama ...
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20150706205344AAua6k6
Jul 06, 2015 · Answers. It reveals some of my reporting on the Republican plot to obstruct President Obama before he even took office, including secret meetings led by House GOP whip Eric Cantor (in December 2008) and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (in early January 2009) in which they laid out their daring (though cynical and political)...
looking more and more like trump going DOWN.....republicans do not have a defense now
Mmmmm would seem Trump completely wrong on Biden.....and the Ukraine election interference...and the corruption
happy days are here again......hope the site will still work with all those tears the trump cult giving right now
Mmmmm would seem Trump completely wrong on Biden.....and the Ukraine election interference...and the corruption
happy days are here again......hope the site will still work with all those tears the trump cult giving right now
Last edited:
Dems are dreaming - all you guys come off as fulla shite as Schiffty - tellin ya - you’re just pissing people off now - more every day - getting nothing done except this total horseshite impeachment crap - gonna bite ya in the arse hard come Election Day :}
Cultmeister Sub - ya take your Dem talking points so to heart
They blow right past me like a Dem fulla shite fart
All Dems can do is go with identity politics and label opposing people with a name
Goes without saying you guys are just sooooooooooooooooooo f’n lame :}
They blow right past me like a Dem fulla shite fart
All Dems can do is go with identity politics and label opposing people with a name
Goes without saying you guys are just sooooooooooooooooooo f’n lame :}
Fiona Hill Testifies ‘Fictions’ on Ukraine Pushed by Trump Help Russia
WASHINGTON — The White House’s former top Europe and Russia expert sharply denounced what she called a “fictional narrative” embraced by President Trump and his Republican allies that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 elections, testifying that the claim at the center of the impeachment inquiry was a fabrication by Moscow that had harmed the United States.
Testifying on the final day of the week’s public impeachment hearings, the expert, Fiona Hill, tied Mr. Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine to a dangerous effort by Russia to sow political divisions in the United States and undercut American diplomacy. Her testimony before the House Intelligence Committee was an implicit rebuke to the president, suggesting that when he pressed Ukraine to investigate the theory that Kyiv rather than Moscow undertook a concerted campaign to meddle in the 2016 campaign, he was playing into Russia’s hands for his own political gain.
Dr. Hill’s account of how Mr. Trump’s team carried out what she called a “domestic political errand” that diverged from his own administration’s foreign policy amounted to sharp — albeit indirect — criticism of the president she served, and it brought home the grave national security consequences of the effort.
“These fictions are harmful even if they are deployed for purely domestic political purposes,” said Dr. Hill, the British-born ******* of a coal miner who became a United States citizen and co-wrote a lengthy book analyzing the psyche of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
The Russians, she said, “deploy millions of dollars to weaponize our own political opposition research and false narratives. When we are consumed by partisan rancor, we cannot combat these external forces as they seek to divide us against each another, degrade our institutions, and destroy the faith of the American people in our democracy.”
Both Dr. Hill and David Holmes, a top aide in the United States Embassy in Kyiv, testified in detail about what they understood to be a concerted campaign by the president and his allies, led by Rudolph W. Giuliani, his personal lawyer, to condition a White House meeting for Ukraine’s president on his announcement of investigations that Mr. Trump wanted into the 2016 election claim and of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
“Investigations for a meeting,” is how Dr. Hill described her understanding of the deal laid out by the president’s inner circle, including Mr. Giuliani, Gordon D. Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union, and Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff.
Under questioning from the top Republican counsel on the House Intelligence Committee, Dr. Hill said she confronted Mr. Sondland in July about his failure to coordinate with other members of the administration on his actions regarding Ukraine. She understood only later that Mr. Sondland was part of a group of officials — along with Mr. Mulvaney and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo — who were “being involved in a domestic political errand, and we were being involved in national security, foreign policy — and those two things had just diverged.”
Dr. Hill said she had told Mr. Sondland at the time that, “this is all going to blow up.”
Mr. Holmes said it was his “clear understanding” by the end of August that Mr. Trump had frozen $391 million in vital security aid to pressure Ukraine to commit to announcing an investigation into Mr. Biden and his family.
Their testimony came as Democrats sought to pull back the focus of the impeachment proceedings at the end of two weeks of detail-heavy hearings focused on White House meetings, suspended security assistance for Ukraine, diplomatic exchanges and plenty of obscure Ukrainian names. But they also notched additional new information that could help bolster their case.
Republicans, knowing that Dr. Hill’s criticism was coming, used their opening remarks to try to blunt the attacks. Representative Devin Nunes of California, the panel’s top Republican, said that his party did not doubt Russia’s actions in 2016, but were open to a broader focus that Democrats were not.
“Needless to say, it’s entirely possible for two separate nations to engage in election meddling at the same time, and Republicans believe we should take meddling seriously by all foreign countries,” Mr. Nunes said.
In 2017, American intelligence officials released a report concluding that Mr. Putin ordered a state-sponsored campaign to try to influence the 2016 presidential election. No evidence has emerged that there was a similar effort by Ukraine.
Mr. Trump, who has responded to the proceedings in real time, took shots at Mr. Holmes Thursday morning, and his allies went after Dr. Hill as well. As Mr. Holmes testified, Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter that there was no way he could have heard what he claimed to have picked up the cellphone conversation between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sondland
Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest *******, wrote on Twitter that Dr. Hill only had an “OPINION” to offer, not firsthand knowledge. Republicans have dismissed multiple witnesses as unelected bureaucrats merely second-guessing the president’s policy positions.
Mr. Holmes said his assessment came after he drafted and sent a cable to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on behalf of William B. Taylor Jr., the top American diplomat in Ukraine, attempting to explain the importance of the security assistance to Ukraine.
WASHINGTON — The White House’s former top Europe and Russia expert sharply denounced what she called a “fictional narrative” embraced by President Trump and his Republican allies that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 elections, testifying that the claim at the center of the impeachment inquiry was a fabrication by Moscow that had harmed the United States.
Testifying on the final day of the week’s public impeachment hearings, the expert, Fiona Hill, tied Mr. Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine to a dangerous effort by Russia to sow political divisions in the United States and undercut American diplomacy. Her testimony before the House Intelligence Committee was an implicit rebuke to the president, suggesting that when he pressed Ukraine to investigate the theory that Kyiv rather than Moscow undertook a concerted campaign to meddle in the 2016 campaign, he was playing into Russia’s hands for his own political gain.
Dr. Hill’s account of how Mr. Trump’s team carried out what she called a “domestic political errand” that diverged from his own administration’s foreign policy amounted to sharp — albeit indirect — criticism of the president she served, and it brought home the grave national security consequences of the effort.
“These fictions are harmful even if they are deployed for purely domestic political purposes,” said Dr. Hill, the British-born ******* of a coal miner who became a United States citizen and co-wrote a lengthy book analyzing the psyche of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
The Russians, she said, “deploy millions of dollars to weaponize our own political opposition research and false narratives. When we are consumed by partisan rancor, we cannot combat these external forces as they seek to divide us against each another, degrade our institutions, and destroy the faith of the American people in our democracy.”
Both Dr. Hill and David Holmes, a top aide in the United States Embassy in Kyiv, testified in detail about what they understood to be a concerted campaign by the president and his allies, led by Rudolph W. Giuliani, his personal lawyer, to condition a White House meeting for Ukraine’s president on his announcement of investigations that Mr. Trump wanted into the 2016 election claim and of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
“Investigations for a meeting,” is how Dr. Hill described her understanding of the deal laid out by the president’s inner circle, including Mr. Giuliani, Gordon D. Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union, and Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff.
Under questioning from the top Republican counsel on the House Intelligence Committee, Dr. Hill said she confronted Mr. Sondland in July about his failure to coordinate with other members of the administration on his actions regarding Ukraine. She understood only later that Mr. Sondland was part of a group of officials — along with Mr. Mulvaney and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo — who were “being involved in a domestic political errand, and we were being involved in national security, foreign policy — and those two things had just diverged.”
Dr. Hill said she had told Mr. Sondland at the time that, “this is all going to blow up.”
Mr. Holmes said it was his “clear understanding” by the end of August that Mr. Trump had frozen $391 million in vital security aid to pressure Ukraine to commit to announcing an investigation into Mr. Biden and his family.
Their testimony came as Democrats sought to pull back the focus of the impeachment proceedings at the end of two weeks of detail-heavy hearings focused on White House meetings, suspended security assistance for Ukraine, diplomatic exchanges and plenty of obscure Ukrainian names. But they also notched additional new information that could help bolster their case.
Republicans, knowing that Dr. Hill’s criticism was coming, used their opening remarks to try to blunt the attacks. Representative Devin Nunes of California, the panel’s top Republican, said that his party did not doubt Russia’s actions in 2016, but were open to a broader focus that Democrats were not.
“Needless to say, it’s entirely possible for two separate nations to engage in election meddling at the same time, and Republicans believe we should take meddling seriously by all foreign countries,” Mr. Nunes said.
In 2017, American intelligence officials released a report concluding that Mr. Putin ordered a state-sponsored campaign to try to influence the 2016 presidential election. No evidence has emerged that there was a similar effort by Ukraine.
Mr. Trump, who has responded to the proceedings in real time, took shots at Mr. Holmes Thursday morning, and his allies went after Dr. Hill as well. As Mr. Holmes testified, Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter that there was no way he could have heard what he claimed to have picked up the cellphone conversation between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sondland
Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest *******, wrote on Twitter that Dr. Hill only had an “OPINION” to offer, not firsthand knowledge. Republicans have dismissed multiple witnesses as unelected bureaucrats merely second-guessing the president’s policy positions.
Mr. Holmes said his assessment came after he drafted and sent a cable to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on behalf of William B. Taylor Jr., the top American diplomat in Ukraine, attempting to explain the importance of the security assistance to Ukraine.
MSN
www.msn.com
Trump appears to launch another real-time attack on an impeachment witness
President Donald Trump on Thursday appeared to level another real-time attack against a witness in the House impeachment inquiry, questioning the testimony of a State Department official who claimed to have overheard an incriminating phone call that involved the president.
“I have been watching people making phone calls my entire life. My hearing is, and has been, great,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “Never have I been watching a person making a call, which was not on speakerphone, and been able to hear or understand a conversation. I’ve even tried, but to no avail. Try it live!”
The president’s post came mere minutes before David Holmes, the political counselor at the U.S. embassy in Kyiv, delivered his opening statement before a public hearing of the House Intelligence Committee.
Holmes previously told lawmakers in a closed-door deposition last week that he and two other State Department staffers joined Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, for a July 26 lunch in the Ukrainian capital.
During that meal on a restaurant's outdoor terrace — at which Sondland selected a bottle of wine and the four “discussed topics such as marketing strategies for his hotel business” — Holmes testified that Sondland placed a call on his mobile phone to Trump.
President Donald Trump on Thursday appeared to level another real-time attack against a witness in the House impeachment inquiry, questioning the testimony of a State Department official who claimed to have overheard an incriminating phone call that involved the president.
“I have been watching people making phone calls my entire life. My hearing is, and has been, great,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “Never have I been watching a person making a call, which was not on speakerphone, and been able to hear or understand a conversation. I’ve even tried, but to no avail. Try it live!”
The president’s post came mere minutes before David Holmes, the political counselor at the U.S. embassy in Kyiv, delivered his opening statement before a public hearing of the House Intelligence Committee.
Holmes previously told lawmakers in a closed-door deposition last week that he and two other State Department staffers joined Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, for a July 26 lunch in the Ukrainian capital.
During that meal on a restaurant's outdoor terrace — at which Sondland selected a bottle of wine and the four “discussed topics such as marketing strategies for his hotel business” — Holmes testified that Sondland placed a call on his mobile phone to Trump.
MSN
www.msn.com
right now Trump is a shoe in for impeachment
BUT if Bolton or Mulvaney were to come forward and speak up...…...could be worse for Atilla the Nun
BUT if Bolton or Mulvaney were to come forward and speak up...…...could be worse for Atilla the Nun
Impeachment hearing takeaways: A ‘domestic political errand’
WASHINGTON (AP) — The final testimony of an extraordinary week of impeachment hearings came from a former White House national security adviser who wrote the book on Vladimir Putin — literally — and a political counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine who overheard a pivotal conversation between President Donald Trump and EU ambassador Gordon Sondland.
The British-born Hill is a Russia expert who’s written extensively on the Kremlin, and she made that clear from the outset when she scolded Republicans lawmakers for propagating what she said was a “fictional narrative” — that somehow Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Those discredited theories have been advanced by Trump himself, who in a July 25 phone call at the center of the impeachment inquiry asked Ukraine’s leader to investigate the possibility.
Hill said the unwillingness by some to accept Russia’s role has profound consequences at a time when Russia’s security services have “geared up to repeat their interference in the 2020 election.” Putin, she said, deploys millions of dollars to “weaponize our own political opposition research and false narratives.”
“When we are consumed by partisan rancor, we cannot combat these external forces as they seek to divide us against each another, degrade our institutions, and destroy the faith of the American people in our democracy,” Hill said.
At another point, she implored impeachment investigators — and the country at large — to stop advancing fictions that she said distract from the attention needed to fight Russian interference.
“In the course of this investigation, I would ask that you please not promote politically driven falsehoods that so clearly advance Russian interests,” Hill said.
THE BIG STUFF’
The July 26 lunch on an outdoor terrace in a Kyiv restaurant started out social enough. There was a bottle of wine and affable chatter about marketing strategies for Sondland’s hotel business.
Then, according to David Holmes, a counselor at the U.S. embassy in Kyiv, Sondland said he was going to call Trump to give him an update. The conversation Holmes overheard was loud — and memorable.
At one point, Holmes said, he heard Sondland tell Trump that Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy “loves your ass.”
“I then heard President Trump ask, ‘So, he’s gonna do the investigation?’ Ambassador Sondland replied that ‘he’s gonna do it.’” He said Sondland told Trump that Zelenskiy will do “anything you ask him to.”
When the call ended, Holmes said he asked Sondland if it was true that Trump did not “give a s--t about Ukraine.” Sondland said that it was indeed the case.
I noted that there was ‘big stuff’ going on in Ukraine, like a war with Russia, and Ambassador Sondland replied that he meant ‘big stuff’ that benefits the president, like the ‘Biden investigation’ that Mr. Giuliani was pushing.” That was a reference to Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, who had been pushing for Ukraine investigations.
The account of the conversation largely lined up with Sondland’s own version, though Sondland testified Wednesday that he doesn’t remember discussing Biden with Trump.
DOMESTIC POLITICAL ERRAND’
Hill’s testimony also vividly outlined the diverging objectives of Trump’s official staff and a parallel effort led by Giuliani.
She described her alarm with the work of Sondland, who was central in trying to get Ukraine to announce political investigations the president wanted. Sondland acknowledged his role in those efforts Wednesday, laying out the contours of a quid pro quo with Ukraine and said “everyone was in the loop.”
But Hill insisted that she was never on the same page with Sondland
“He was being involved in a domestic political errand. And we were being involved in national security policy,” she said.
She said in retrospect, she thinks she may have been a bit rude to Sondland because she can see now that Sondland was trying to carry out something that the president had instructed him to do.
IMMIGRANT STORIES
Hill, a British-born immigrant, said Trump allies who have suggested her NSC colleague Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman has dual loyalty were being “deeply unfair.”
Vindman was 3 years old in 1979 when his family fled the Soviet-controlled Ukraine for the U.S. Earlier in his Army career, Vindman served as an infantry officer and did tours in South Korea, Germany and Iraq. In October 2004, he was wounded by a roadside bomb and awarded the Purple Heart.
But Vindman, an NSC Ukraine specialist, has faced questions from Trump allies about whether his loyalties may be divided, because of his origins. He has steadfastly maintained his loyalty is to the United States.
“This is a country of immigrants,” Hill reminded lawmakers. “This is what, for me, really does make America great. I’m sure that every single person here — some people perhaps came reluctantly — and some came by choice as I did. For me, this is the essence of Americans and why I wanted to be here and why I wanted to stay here.”
THE MISSING WITNESS
His name was mentioned dozens of times on Thursday alone, but former national security adviser John Bolton was nowhere to be seen in the committee room. In fact, media reports indicated he was in New York.
Bolton hasn’t been subpoenaed by to appear, and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff has so far suggested he won’t be, even though his testimony could be of high interest to impeachment investigators.
Schiff has indicated he doesn’t want a prolonged court battle over Bolton’s testimony, and Democrats have said they already have a mountain of evidence in their impeachment probe. it’s not clear he’ll be.
Still, Hill described colorful language from Bolton — she quoted him as saying that didn’t want to be part of “whatever ******* deal” Sondland and White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney were “cooking up” and describing Giuliani as a “hand grenade that was going to blow everyone up.” She described seeing him “stiffen” and abruptly end a White House meeting last July when Sondland brought up the topic of investigations.
Holmes also described an August visit to Ukraine by Bolton in which he told an adviser to the president that military aid for Ukraine would not be lifted before an upcoming meeting in Warsaw and would turn on whether Zelenskiy was able to “favorably impress President Trump.”
TRUMP ON THE DEFENSIVE
Even before Hill’s testimony began Trump excoriated Democrats leading the impeachment inquiry.
In a series of tweets, Trump urged House Republican allies to “Keep fighting tough,” and told them they are “dealing with human scum who have taken Due Process and all of the Republican Party’s rights away from us during the most unfair hearings in American History.”
Still, Trump insisted, that “we are winning big” and warned that “they will soon be on our turf” — presumably a reference to the inquiry moving to the Senate, which Republicans control.
Trump has repeatedly proclaimed his innocence and accused Democrats and the media of pursuing a “witch hunt” to damage him heading into 2020.
He claimed he and Republicans had “had a GREAT day” of testimony Wednesday, even though Sondland, his ambassador to the European Union, bolstered Democrats’ impeachment narrative as he repeatedly talked of a “quid pro quo” involving Ukraine. Yet Trump complained that, when he “got home to the White House & checked out the news coverage on much of television, you would have no idea they were reporting on the same event.”
FAKE & CORRUPT NEWS!” he tweeted.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The final testimony of an extraordinary week of impeachment hearings came from a former White House national security adviser who wrote the book on Vladimir Putin — literally — and a political counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine who overheard a pivotal conversation between President Donald Trump and EU ambassador Gordon Sondland.
The British-born Hill is a Russia expert who’s written extensively on the Kremlin, and she made that clear from the outset when she scolded Republicans lawmakers for propagating what she said was a “fictional narrative” — that somehow Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Those discredited theories have been advanced by Trump himself, who in a July 25 phone call at the center of the impeachment inquiry asked Ukraine’s leader to investigate the possibility.
Hill said the unwillingness by some to accept Russia’s role has profound consequences at a time when Russia’s security services have “geared up to repeat their interference in the 2020 election.” Putin, she said, deploys millions of dollars to “weaponize our own political opposition research and false narratives.”
“When we are consumed by partisan rancor, we cannot combat these external forces as they seek to divide us against each another, degrade our institutions, and destroy the faith of the American people in our democracy,” Hill said.
At another point, she implored impeachment investigators — and the country at large — to stop advancing fictions that she said distract from the attention needed to fight Russian interference.
“In the course of this investigation, I would ask that you please not promote politically driven falsehoods that so clearly advance Russian interests,” Hill said.
THE BIG STUFF’
The July 26 lunch on an outdoor terrace in a Kyiv restaurant started out social enough. There was a bottle of wine and affable chatter about marketing strategies for Sondland’s hotel business.
Then, according to David Holmes, a counselor at the U.S. embassy in Kyiv, Sondland said he was going to call Trump to give him an update. The conversation Holmes overheard was loud — and memorable.
At one point, Holmes said, he heard Sondland tell Trump that Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy “loves your ass.”
“I then heard President Trump ask, ‘So, he’s gonna do the investigation?’ Ambassador Sondland replied that ‘he’s gonna do it.’” He said Sondland told Trump that Zelenskiy will do “anything you ask him to.”
When the call ended, Holmes said he asked Sondland if it was true that Trump did not “give a s--t about Ukraine.” Sondland said that it was indeed the case.
I noted that there was ‘big stuff’ going on in Ukraine, like a war with Russia, and Ambassador Sondland replied that he meant ‘big stuff’ that benefits the president, like the ‘Biden investigation’ that Mr. Giuliani was pushing.” That was a reference to Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, who had been pushing for Ukraine investigations.
The account of the conversation largely lined up with Sondland’s own version, though Sondland testified Wednesday that he doesn’t remember discussing Biden with Trump.
DOMESTIC POLITICAL ERRAND’
Hill’s testimony also vividly outlined the diverging objectives of Trump’s official staff and a parallel effort led by Giuliani.
She described her alarm with the work of Sondland, who was central in trying to get Ukraine to announce political investigations the president wanted. Sondland acknowledged his role in those efforts Wednesday, laying out the contours of a quid pro quo with Ukraine and said “everyone was in the loop.”
But Hill insisted that she was never on the same page with Sondland
“He was being involved in a domestic political errand. And we were being involved in national security policy,” she said.
She said in retrospect, she thinks she may have been a bit rude to Sondland because she can see now that Sondland was trying to carry out something that the president had instructed him to do.
IMMIGRANT STORIES
Hill, a British-born immigrant, said Trump allies who have suggested her NSC colleague Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman has dual loyalty were being “deeply unfair.”
Vindman was 3 years old in 1979 when his family fled the Soviet-controlled Ukraine for the U.S. Earlier in his Army career, Vindman served as an infantry officer and did tours in South Korea, Germany and Iraq. In October 2004, he was wounded by a roadside bomb and awarded the Purple Heart.
But Vindman, an NSC Ukraine specialist, has faced questions from Trump allies about whether his loyalties may be divided, because of his origins. He has steadfastly maintained his loyalty is to the United States.
“This is a country of immigrants,” Hill reminded lawmakers. “This is what, for me, really does make America great. I’m sure that every single person here — some people perhaps came reluctantly — and some came by choice as I did. For me, this is the essence of Americans and why I wanted to be here and why I wanted to stay here.”
THE MISSING WITNESS
His name was mentioned dozens of times on Thursday alone, but former national security adviser John Bolton was nowhere to be seen in the committee room. In fact, media reports indicated he was in New York.
Bolton hasn’t been subpoenaed by to appear, and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff has so far suggested he won’t be, even though his testimony could be of high interest to impeachment investigators.
Schiff has indicated he doesn’t want a prolonged court battle over Bolton’s testimony, and Democrats have said they already have a mountain of evidence in their impeachment probe. it’s not clear he’ll be.
Still, Hill described colorful language from Bolton — she quoted him as saying that didn’t want to be part of “whatever ******* deal” Sondland and White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney were “cooking up” and describing Giuliani as a “hand grenade that was going to blow everyone up.” She described seeing him “stiffen” and abruptly end a White House meeting last July when Sondland brought up the topic of investigations.
Holmes also described an August visit to Ukraine by Bolton in which he told an adviser to the president that military aid for Ukraine would not be lifted before an upcoming meeting in Warsaw and would turn on whether Zelenskiy was able to “favorably impress President Trump.”
TRUMP ON THE DEFENSIVE
Even before Hill’s testimony began Trump excoriated Democrats leading the impeachment inquiry.
In a series of tweets, Trump urged House Republican allies to “Keep fighting tough,” and told them they are “dealing with human scum who have taken Due Process and all of the Republican Party’s rights away from us during the most unfair hearings in American History.”
Still, Trump insisted, that “we are winning big” and warned that “they will soon be on our turf” — presumably a reference to the inquiry moving to the Senate, which Republicans control.
Trump has repeatedly proclaimed his innocence and accused Democrats and the media of pursuing a “witch hunt” to damage him heading into 2020.
He claimed he and Republicans had “had a GREAT day” of testimony Wednesday, even though Sondland, his ambassador to the European Union, bolstered Democrats’ impeachment narrative as he repeatedly talked of a “quid pro quo” involving Ukraine. Yet Trump complained that, when he “got home to the White House & checked out the news coverage on much of television, you would have no idea they were reporting on the same event.”
FAKE & CORRUPT NEWS!” he tweeted.
Trump 2020
and everything you just said is a bunch of bullshit because he is not responsible for anything you named, but hey dont let facts get in the way of your reality who needs them right, they are just facts. But hey i am a "black" man, i am use to seeing white men taking credit for things the black man has done.
you mean to tell me that the commie cult is still supporting P.utins puppet after all you heard this week.....even the republicans are mum right now trying to come up with another ploy since their last one just got shot to *******.....even mentioned that with the right supporting trump they are just emboldening P.utin
You Dems are dupes to P utin’s plan - did ya not hear Fiona Hill’s testimony that the Russians just wanted to play one party against the other - just what you doofii bought into. Ole Vladimir must be laughing himself silly. Fiona Hill is considered an expert on the Russians.
