re-post from LB

Q & A Peach Mint Highlights: Wed Jan 29 2020: page 6

PAGE 6

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.

>>7960987

Q & A Peach Mint Highlights: Wed Jan 29 2020: page 7

PAGE 7

Peach Mint Highlights: Wed Jan 29 2020

>>7957050 page 1, >>7957159 page 2, >>7958547 page 3, >>7958548 page 4, >>7958872 page 5, >>7960269 page 6

Q: Sen from MN to House mgrs: If POTUS' actions were perfect, why won't he allow people to testify?

A: Schiff: Bc he doesn't want you to hear what they have to say. Also disputes what Philbin just said in previous.

Q: Sen from NE to POTUS team: What are the limiting principles of impeachment?

A: Cippolone: Golden role of impeachment - should NOT be partisan, it's the overturning of an election. Also shouldn't happen near an election. If process is unprecented, that should be a consideration–along with violation of historical precedents that allow POTUS rights like ability to call witnesses, etc. ["Have we got a deal for you!"]

Q:' Sen from IL to House mgrs: If POTUS invoked exec privilege, wouldn't he be forced to identify sensitive material that he seeks to protect?

A: Nadler: exec privilege is very limited; he's has instead claimed absolute immunity. Facts: he tried to extort a foreign gov't. "Those are the facts." What Hunter Biden did is irrelevant. Things like this are a diversion. "The president is a danger to the US, he's tried to rig our elections." 5:50 PST

Q: Sen from UT to POTUS team: On what date did POTUS submit a hold on security assistance to Uk and did he explain his reason at that time?

A: Philbin: No evidence of a specific date. Testimony that OMB individuals were aware by July 3. From start of June, he'd expression concern about burden sharing. [timeline layed out.] 5:57 PST

Q: Sen from NV to House mgrs: Describe due process during House proceedings. Was POTUS unfairly excluded?

A: Demings: POTUS is not the victim here. Victim is the American people. POTUS was invited to attend and participate in all of the hearings. Could have had Cippolone, Sekulow or any other rep participate–attend the hearings–and cross-examined witnesses, raised objections, and present evidence. Could have requested to have POTUS' own witnesses called. But POTUS refused and tried to obstruct.

Q:' Sen from AK to House mgrs: After Cippolone said subpoenas were not authorized in early Oct, why didn't House address the deficiencies or reissue the subpoenas when they would have been valid?

A: These arguments are a red herring. House gets to decide how to structure its impeachment process, its rules. House is entitled to get info from Executive for that proceeding. There is no req't for the full House to take a vote to authorize an impeachment inquiry. 6:06 PST

Q: Sen from OH to POTUS team: Addresses an earlier Q - WH counsel refused to answer a direct q saying he could only cite to the record but later read articles from outside the House record. So again: did POTUS ever mention the Bidens in connection to Ukraine before VP Biden announced his campaign in April 2019? What did he say, to whom and when?

A: Philbin: did not evade the question. House mgrs had said they would object if we would introduce anything outside or record and/or public domain. Q was answered to the best of his ability. But wants to counter the claim made by Garcia above that there is no req't for a full House vote to authorize an impeachment inquiry. This is a fundamental rule of the House for any kind of inquiry, power flows from the House to its cmte's.

Q: Sen from MI to both parties: Did VP Biden ever ask Hunter to step down from Burisma? [longer]

A: Philbin: We're not aware of this. We're aware that concerns were raised. No ethics opinion was issued. Biden said he never discussed his son's business dealings overseas.

A: Demings: Shokin was widely considered to be corrupt. Yovanovich WAS anti-corruption. Cites Ukraine's anti-corruption bureau. 6:17 PST

Q:' Sen King to House mgrs: Doesn't POTUS' mention of Giuliani establish the real purpose of the call?

A: Nadler: Rudy was the gatekeeper in POTUS' pressure campaign. [cites supposed examples of meddling/pressuring]. Rudy focused specifically on two individuals. He represents the interests of the POTUS.

Q: Sen from FL to POTUS team: How would American people view a partisan impeachment?

A: Dershowitz: The criteria set out - THERE IS NO LAW (Maxine Waters). This is lawless. Intent vs motive. 3 levels of motives: pure, corrupt, mixed. Good for me, good for the country.

>>7961052

tx, baker fren

doc bak again, yes?

Will take a break and see if i can finish this thing up later, damn Senate is going too late! I'm fried.

Won't plan on dough pickup at 2. Ghost when you need to, will pick up later if it works out.

>>7961259

good

have a good run

i'll see ya when i see ya

o7