reposting bc it's hot right now, moar eyes on
Q & A Peach Mint Highlights: Thurs Jan 30 2020: page 1
PAGE 1
Q: Sen from WA to POTUS team House mgrs: House didn't reissue subpoenas; why is that ok? 10:08 PST
A: Lofgren: These were validly-issused subpoenas. [!] House cmte's are allowed to issue subpoenas. [She is arguing against the idea that a full vote is first necessary–also, that there was some kind of authorization from the beginning.] Thus, the obstruction charge is valid.
Q: Sen from KY to both parties: ["The presiding officer declines to read the Q as submitted"]
[WOW. Wonder what that Q was???]
Q: Sen from WI to House mgrs: Re date the hold on assistance was issued, what witness could answer this?
A: Crow: think there is info in a Bolton and Blair email. Shows a slide called "Ukraine Knew about the Hold." at 1:18 EST. [makes lots of claims made about who might have known, watch this clip to see what they were.]
Q: Sen from PA to POTUS team: How much weight should Senate give to impeachment of POTUS, in that it is happening in an election year?
A: Sekulow: This is really taking the vote away from the American people.
Q: Sen Tester to POTUS team House mgrs: Any limit to the quid pro quo as long as POTUS believes is in the national interest?
A: Schiff: No. "What we have seen in the last two days is a descent into Constitutional madness." [He implies the quid pro quo would necessarily be "corrupt."] "that is the normalization of lawlessness."
Q: Sen from ND to POTUS team: Is the first innocent defendant NOT to waive his rights?
A: Philbin: House mgrs say that POTUS asserting his rights is "not the way innocent people act." This is fundamentally antithetical to all the principles of the American system.
Q: Sen from AL to House mgrs: Which provisions in House rules justifies the issuance of subpoenas issed by cmte's prior to Res. 660? Also plz list subpoenas issued afterwards?
A: [Quickly reads list of 6 subpoenas. Rule 10 allows it, he says. Then goes off on a long irrelevant hypothetical and other irrelevancies.]
Q: Sen from TX to both parties: VP Biden said he didn't know anything about son's dealings with Burisma but that was contradicted by Hunter. Why the conflict in story? Did House either one that question?
A: Bondi: summarizes HB's involvement. Everyone knows head of B is corrupt. But Joe Biden never asked his son to leave the board. [lots of detail].
A: Demmings: [ducks the q; but says we have no evidence that either Biden has anything to tell us about POTUS shaking down Ukraine. But who does know? Bolton (etc)
Q: Sen from NV to House mgrs: If POTUS was personally profiting from his actions, what precedent does that set? 10:50 PST
A: Crow: Will call into q our broader alliances. Shows clips of POTUS calling for looking at the Bidens. Call Bolton to testify.
Q: Sen from OH to POTUS team: House mgrs often cite Turley; but didn't Turley oppose impeachment (etc)?
A: Philbin: Yes, Turley was very critical of both articles, neither of which has ever been used alone wo/violations of law.
Q: Sen from OH to House mgrs: Re offers of help from foreign actors being acceptable; what message does that send?
A: Jeffries: sends a terrible message. [he was "shocked"]. More of the same…..illegal to receive "anything of value…"
Q: Sen from MO to POTUS team: Courts have held that it's ok for a fed public officer to "condition" his official acts on the acts of another public officer?
A: Philbin: there is no application in this case, bc there's no evidence of quid pro quo.
Q: Sen from OR to House mgrs: Any evidence that Barr, Mulvaney or Pompeo with in the loop re obstruction of Congress?
A: Sondland said "everyone" was in the loop. Cites others & slows slide she thinks shows they were all in on the "scheme." 11:14 PST
Q: Sen from SD to POTUS team: Should we take into acct the partisan nature of House proceedings?
A: Cipollone: Absolutely. Horrible consequences that would tear apart the country for generations.
Q: Sen from ? (sounds like "Orian") to both parties: Who's paid for Rudy's legal fees and other expenses?
A: Schiff: I don't know, but "it raises profound q's." Implies that Rudy is saying America is now "open for business."
A: Sekulow: I'll tell you who's opening for business–Biden's son. [says focus on Rudy is misplaced]. Also read ltr showing that "foreign investigations" are done all the time.
Q: Sen from OK to POTUS team: 2020 pattern of funds allocation to Uk was the same as in previous years (done in Sept). Why ok previously and not this year?
A: Philbin. No damage. [Explains how effects of "pause" were in no way untoward.]