Q & A Peach Mint Highlights: Wed Jan 29 2020: page 6
PAGE 6
EVENING SESSION
Q: Sen from AZ to POTUS team: Do the articles of impeachment accuse the President of bribery or extortion?
A: No. You can't introduce it at this point, either. In a regular trial, it would be an instant mistrial. 4:33 PST
Q: Sen from Udall NM to POTUS team: Should Ivanka & Jared Kushner's foreign interests also be subjected to same scrutiny as Hunter Biden's?
A: Demings: Irrelavant what children do. We're here coz POTUS tried to shake down a foreign gov't.
Q: Sen from ID to POTUS team: Do evidence show Burisma/Biden investigation would help stop corruption?
A: Philbin: Yes. HB appted w/no experience. Appt raised red flags at the time [cites examples–Wapo etc]. Reminder of VP Biden's ultimatum.
Q: Sen from Illinois to House mgrs: same q as above
A: Garcia: POTUS only looked into corruption after VP Biden announced his run for office of POTUS.
Q: Sen from SC to POTUS team: What agy has debunked Burisma/Biden corruption?
A: Herschmann: NONE. There is no evidence of that, no testimony. House mgrs just say "it was debunked."
Q: Sen from OR to POTUS team: Plz clarify your answer on Bolton manuscript
A: Philbin: NSC conducted book review not us.
Q: Sen from AK to : there has been conflicting testimony about how long the trial would take w/witnesses?
A: Sekulow: a long time. Months. They put this forward in an aggressive and fast paced way–and now want witnesses.
Q: Sen from NJ to House mgrs: POTUS gave $ to Ukraine previously (2017-2018), why concerned about corruption in 2019?
A: Crow: He wasn't–it was just political.
Q: Sen from WI to POTUS team: Why shouldn't the Senate take the speedy route, just like the House?
A: Sekulow: That's the issue. His Q: new norm for impeachment? Very dangerous precedent. "We have enough evidence to prove our case–but not really."
Q: Sen from Schumer to House mgrs: same q
A: Schiff: It's the POTUS team that will make the trial endless, not us. "I trust the man behind me" (Roberts). 5:10 PST
Q: Sen from LA to both parties: Nadler said previously that there should never be a partisan impeachment. Does this impeachment typify that?
A: Philbin: YES. That is clearly what it is turning into. Every President will be impeached.
A: Jeffries: Evidence is overwhelming that President abused his power…….
Q: Sen from VT to House mgrs: POTUS' lawyers say, no quid pro quo; but given all his lies, why should we believe POTUS?
A: Schiff: [Says POTUS tries to shake down Z even when others were listening bc he believes he's above the law]. False denial. [Calls POTUS "the accused."]
Q: Sen from CO to POTUS team: Isn't the assertion of executive privilege an indicator of guilt? What protects Exec Privilege in the future?
A: Philbin: Not evidence of guilt. Also, exec privilege doesn't disappear just bc there's an assertion of wrongdoing. Dems' theory is dangerous to separation of powers.
Q: Sen from MA to House mgrs: If Z gave bribery $ to POTUS, that would be impeachable; why not the reverse?
A: Nadler: claims it's been shown.
A: Philbin. Bribery or extortion is not at issue here. Impermissable, prosecutorial misconduct.
Q:' Sen from KS to POTUS team: Can Chief Justice be subject to judicial review?
A: Philbin: subpoenas would have to be issued, then Senate would have to decide how to handle. Then when resolved, admissability of particular evidence would be next. Votes would be needed. Chief Justice would not determine. Chief Justice could make initial rulings but that's not enough.