For those not already tuned in

←

CSPAN link to peach mint live

Is live on other channels as well.

[Pop] it out and listen in

>>7910184

>1.Destroying the Mueller report

Muh $0.02 is that hyperbole should not be here

Perhaps…

1. Sekulow compares cost, subpoenas, witness testimony and time to investigate to the House Impeachment Inquiry

>>7910184

>Destroying the Mueller report

Ugh I effed up in …

>>7910236 , I left out "Mueller report" should be…

1. Sekulow compares cost, subpoenas, witness testimony and time to investigate the Mueller report to the House Impeachment Inquiry

Apologies

Patrick Philbin is now presenting to Senate about compulsory process

1. Subpoenas - Legal basis was given by POTUS counsel for refusal to honor subpoenas b/c House did not vote

2. No negotiation - October 8th letter from POTUS counsel to pelosi

3. Executive Privilege was never asserted because House did not vote to authorize peach mint

4. Office of legal counsel had other issues with House trying to compel members of the executive: House was asking executive branch members to testify without counsel, House was also seeking to compel members of the executive to testify who the House has no authority to compel. Executive privilege was never asserted and it wasn't the only legal issue DOJ discussed.

5. House MUST vote to authorize committees in peach mint process, that didn't happen

>>7910450

>2. No negotiation - October 8th letter from POTUS counsel to pelosi

Sorry… should be

1. House managers claim POTUS would not negotiate - Oct 8 POTUS counsel sent letter to Pelosi stating a willingness to engage

>>7910450 , >>7910478

Patrick Philbin is now presenting to Senate about compulsory process

1. Subpoenas - Legal basis was given by POTUS counsel for refusal to honor subpoenas b/c House did not vote

2. No negotiation - October 8th letter from POTUS counsel to pelosi

3. Executive Privilege was never asserted because House did not vote to authorize peach mint

4. Office of legal counsel had other issues with House trying to compel members of the executive: House was asking executive branch members to testify without counsel, House was also seeking to compel members of the executive to testify who the House has no authority to compel. Executive privilege was never asserted and it wasn't the only legal issue DOJ discussed.

5. House MUST vote to authorize committees in peach mint process, that didn't happen

Continuation of summary

1. House Manager Nadler claims that POTUS would not participate in House impeachment process - not true. POTUS's team was engaging back and forth multiple times

2. Judiciary process happened in secret where House members could screen testimony, then House would conduct public hearings where only certain information would be presented

3. Outcome was determined, no plans to hear from fact witnesses, POTUS did not want to participate in that process… that is not due process, there was no DUE process

4. Fastest impeachment process in history, for 71 of 78 days POTUS could not present his case or introduce evidence, no ability for cross examination which is a key in due process

5. Dems had a timetable to meet by Christmas

Pivot to whistleblower

1. ICIG thought the whistle blower had political bias, don't know what bias that was though

2. ICIG is still classified as secret - one would think that before going forward with impeachment that (you) would want to find out more

3. Connection between whistleblower and working with Biden on Ukraine? Why isn't the House concerned about this? Aren't the origins of impeachment

4. We should hear from the whistleblower (Schiff testimony) but then Schiff changed his mind. What changed?

5. Schiff making public statements that were not true, Schiff's staff DID talk with the whistleblower which is why Schiff wanted to shut down any inquiry into the whistleblower

6. Schiff's conflict of interest as chairman of the committee with whistle blower is why Schiff shut down any inquiry

7. Video "moar than circumstantial evidence" of Schiff in March of 2017 of muh Russia collusion but Mueller report says "no cullusion"…. Schiff cannot be trusted, making incorrect inferences in muh Russia. Assessments of evidence Schiff has introduced in the past with Mueller is relevant to muh Ukrainian investigation

Hand off to Cipollone

Final update to muh notes… any mistakes are mine and feedback is appreciated.

Patrick Philbin is now presenting to Senate about compulsory process

1. Subpoenas - Legal basis was given by POTUS counsel for refusal to honor subpoenas b/c House did not vote

2. No negotiation - October 8th letter from POTUS counsel to Pelosi states a willingness to engage, contrary to House manager's claims

3. Executive Privilege was never asserted because House did not vote to authorize peach mint

4. Office of legal counsel had other issues with House trying to compel members of the executive: House was asking executive branch members to testify without counsel, House was also seeking to compel members of the executive to testify who the House has no authority to compel. Executive privilege was never asserted and it wasn't the only legal issue DOJ discussed.

5. House MUST vote to authorize committees in peach mint process, that didn't happen

Continuation of summary

1. House Manager Nadler claims that POTUS would not participate in House impeachment process - not true. POTUS's team was engaging back and forth multiple times

2. Judiciary process happened in secret where House members could screen testimony, then House would conduct public hearings where only certain information would be presented

3. Outcome was determined, no plans to hear from fact witnesses, POTUS did not want to participate in that process… that is not due process, there was no DUE process

4. Fastest impeachment process in history, for 71 of 78 days POTUS could not present his case or introduce evidence, no ability for cross examination which is a key in due process

5. Dems had a timetable to meet by Christmas

Pivot to whistleblower

1. ICIG thought the whistle blower had political bias, don't know what bias that was though

2. ICIG is still classified as secret - one would think that before going forward with impeachment that (you) would want to find out more

3. Connection between whistleblower and working with Biden on Ukraine? Why isn't the House concerned about this? Aren't the origins of impeachment

4. We should hear from the whistleblower (Schiff testimony) but then Schiff changed his mind. What changed?

5. Schiff making public statements that were not true, Schiff's staff DID talk with the whistleblower which is why Schiff wanted to shut down any inquiry into the whistleblower

6. Schiff's conflict of interest as chairman of the committee with whistle blower is why Schiff shut down any inquiry

7. Video "moar than circumstantial evidence" of Schiff in March of 2017 of muh Russia collusion but Mueller report says "no cullusion"…. Schiff cannot be trusted, making incorrect inferences in muh Russia. Assessments of evidence Schiff has introduced in the past with Mueller is relevant to muh Ukrainian investigation

Hand off to Cipollone - closing statements (nothing much new here, just a wrap up)

1. House managers claim POTUS staff will not present facts, all we have done are present facts

2. This is undoing the 2016 election and interfering with 2020's election

3. We look forward to continuing to present our case on Monday

Total time ~ 2hours … see last bread (all PB) for Anon's summary of previous opening statements by POTUS counsel. These were notabled in bread #10122

>>7909807 , >>7909826 , >>7909861 , >>7910027