As with everying in the Trump era, much depends on how one reads a statement. Here is the critical portion of what Mick Mulvaney said today about the hold on aid to Ukraine. The highlighted part is the soundbite we're hearing frequently on cable TV.
Seems impossible to believe Dems would draw up articles of impeachment, hold House vote without having released all transcripts in time for public to digest them. Also, would be evidence in Senate trial. http://ow.ly/vp1E30pJAROhttp://ow.ly/vp1E30pJARO …
Schiff pressed Volker to say Ukraine felt pressured by Trump withholding aid. But Volker kept saying that was wrong. The Ukrainians didn't know aid was withheld, and things seemed to be going their way. Schiff would not accept that view. http://ow.ly/txUq50wNJIV
Much comment on this article. Legal analogies--grand jury, cross examination--are useless. House can do what it wants. Point is, Volker testimony seems to show Dems dead set on proving a story and resistant to evidence that doesn't support the story. http://ow.ly/tw2850wNxlO
In secret testimony, Adam Schiff wanted envoy Kurt Volker to say Ukraine felt pressured by Trump. But Volker did not think that was the case. So Schiff pressed and pressed. 'You're making this much more complicated than it has to be.' http://ow.ly/fPRK50wNfvU
Worries on Dem debate stage: It 'would be a disaster, if the American people believe that all we were doing is taking on Trump and we're forgetting that 87 million Americans are uninsured or underinsured.' http://ow.ly/bZfQ50wMBPd
As Dems in Washington race toward impeachment, the party's presidential candidates still seem concerned that moderate Americans will see Dems as so determined to pursue Trump they ignore pressing national issues. http://ow.ly/VKBa50wMyrg