pbs--2020-01-24--In the biggest fight of his life, Trump basks in support at March for Life

The impeachment trial has consumed Washington this week as senators weigh the fate of Donald Trump ’ s presidency .
But for a brief moment Friday , just a stone ’ s throw from the Capitol , President Trump found a friendly venue where he could address supporters on a crucial issue that drives conservative voters to the polls .
Trump rallied a crowd of anti-abortion advocates in a speech at the March for Life rally on the National Mall , becoming the first president to speak at the event .
“ Together we must protect , cherish and defend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ human life , ” Trump said .
“ When we see the image of a baby in the womb , we glimpse the majesty of God ’ s creation.
” He added , “ When we hold a newborn in our arms , we know the endless love that each child brings to a family.
” Noticeably absent from Trump ’ s speech ?
A lengthy mention of the ongoing impeachment trial , taking place in the Senate chamber on the opposite end of the National Mall .
The president alluded to it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are coming after me because I am fighting for you and we are fighting for those who have no voice , ” he said .
It was a remarkable juxtaposition : House Democrats arguing for the Trump ’ s removal from office at the same time that a defiant president gave a speech largely ignoring the biggest fight of his political life .
The moment was not lost on the many Trump supporters who attended the march .
If anything , Trump ’ s appearance energized those who claimed the president has done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a partisan Democratic attack .
“ There ’ s a group in Washington that has been plotting to remove [ Trump ] from the time he was elected , ” said Lucy Klaus , 71 , a resident of Virginia who attended the march .
Democrats “ have been doing everything in their power to make this happen .
This is the United States of America .
The people decide who the president is .
OK ?
No one else , us.
” “ Just like the Mueller investigation , everything is all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just to get Trump , ” said Macdonald Uboh , a 36-year old immigrant from Ghana , referring to the special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election .
“ You can say it ’ s all a scheme with one goal : Take out Donald Trump.
” Thousands descended on Washington , D.C. , from across the country to march against abortion .
The annual rally draws massive crowds , but Trump ’ s decision to break from precedent and attend the event injected extra energy into this year ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have avoided the March for Life gatherings , perhaps out of concern over inciting political pushback from pro-choice advocates .
This year , Trump chose to jump into the fray .
“ It ’ s amazing ” that Trump attended , said Julia Vandergrift , 22 , who traveled from Michigan to attend the march .
“ I think it speaks volumes about who [ Trump ] is as a person.
” The march comes during a critical moment in the abortion debate , as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over a 2014 Louisiana law that requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital—a move that dramatically limits access to clinics for women across the state .
Since Trump took office , his administration has moved to eliminate Title X funding for abortion providers .
He has also won over many Christian voters with promises to appoint conservative Supreme Court justices who could be willing to vote to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion .
On Friday , the Trump administration also issued a notice threatening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a state requirement that private insurers cover abortion services .
But looming over the anti-abortion march was the process taking place in the Senate that many marchers were quick to dismiss : just the third presidential impeachment trial in United States history .
Inside the Senate chamber an entirely different reality played out Friday as the House managers spent the day making their final oral arguments for why Trump should be removed from office for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress .
Under the trial rules , senators can not speak while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make their case .
As a result , the lawmakers sat silently at their desks , scribbling notes , while House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff , D-Calif. , and the rest of the prosecution team took turns describing in detail how Trump pressured a foreign power to interfere in the 2020 U.S. presidential election .
House Democrats argued the evidence proved conclusively that Trump withheld military aid and an Oval Office visit from Ukraine in order to try and pressure the country to announce an investigation into Joe Biden , the former vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his son Hunter Biden .
Schiff accused Trump of cheating to try and gain an advantage in the election .
“ Was it worth it ?
” Schiff asked at one point .
“ Because it certainly wasn ’ t worth it for the United States.
” Another House manager , Rep. Hakeem Jeffries , D-N.Y. , said Democrats “ provided overwhelming evidence of the president ’ s guilt.
” “ President Trump tried to cheat , he got caught , and then he worked hard to cover it up .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
The Republican senators sat somber faced and unmoved .
So far , they have presented a united defense of the president , arguing that his conduct does not rise to the level of impeachable offenses .
It ’ s a sentiment that reverberated outside the Capitol at the march .
Some Trump supporters said they believed his contributions to the country outweighed his personal flaws .
Many cited the strong economy , and Trump ’ s anti-abortion stance .
“ I don ’ t believe that there is a case against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 44 , a Catholic priest from New York .
“ I think that [ Democrats ] just hate him and want to undo his presidency .
”

The impeachment trial has consumed Washington this week as senators weigh the fate of Donald Trump’s presidency. But for a brief moment Friday, just a stone’s throw from the Capitol, President Trump found a friendly venue where he could address supporters on a crucial issue that drives conservative voters to the polls.
Trump rallied a crowd of anti-abortion advocates in a speech at the March for Life rally on the National Mall, becoming the first president to speak at the event.
“Together we must protect, cherish and defend the dignity and the sanctity of every human life,” Trump said. “When we see the image of a baby in the womb, we glimpse the majesty of God’s creation.” He added, “When we hold a newborn in our arms, we know the endless love that each child brings to a family.”
Noticeably absent from Trump’s speech? A lengthy mention of the ongoing impeachment trial, taking place in the Senate chamber on the opposite end of the National Mall. The president alluded to it only once in passing. “They are coming after me because I am fighting for you and we are fighting for those who have no voice,” he said.
It was a remarkable juxtaposition: House Democrats arguing for the Trump’s removal from office at the same time that a defiant president gave a speech largely ignoring the biggest fight of his political life.
The moment was not lost on the many Trump supporters who attended the march. If anything, Trump’s appearance energized those who claimed the president has done nothing wrong and is the victim of a partisan Democratic attack.
“There’s a group in Washington that has been plotting to remove [Trump] from the time he was elected.”
“There’s a group in Washington that has been plotting to remove [Trump] from the time he was elected,” said Lucy Klaus, 71, a resident of Virginia who attended the march. Democrats “have been doing everything in their power to make this happen. This is the United States of America. The people decide who the president is. OK? No one else, us.”
“Just like the Mueller investigation, everything is all about bringing one thing after the other just to get Trump,” said Macdonald Uboh, a 36-year old immigrant from Ghana, referring to the special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. “You can say it’s all a scheme with one goal: Take out Donald Trump.”
Thousands descended on Washington, D.C., from across the country to march against abortion. The annual rally draws massive crowds, but Trump’s decision to break from precedent and attend the event injected extra energy into this year’s march.
Historically, anti-abortion presidents including Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have avoided the March for Life gatherings, perhaps out of concern over inciting political pushback from pro-choice advocates. This year, Trump chose to jump into the fray.
“It’s amazing” that Trump attended, said Julia Vandergrift, 22, who traveled from Michigan to attend the march. “I think it speaks volumes about who [Trump] is as a person.”
The march comes during a critical moment in the abortion debate, as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments over a 2014 Louisiana law that requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital—a move that dramatically limits access to clinics for women across the state.
Since Trump took office, his administration has moved to eliminate Title X funding for abortion providers. He has also won over many Christian voters with promises to appoint conservative Supreme Court justices who could be willing to vote to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion. On Friday, the Trump administration also issued a notice threatening to withhold federal funding from California over a state requirement that private insurers cover abortion services.
But looming over the anti-abortion march was the process taking place in the Senate that many marchers were quick to dismiss: just the third presidential impeachment trial in United States history.
Inside the Senate chamber an entirely different reality played out Friday as the House managers spent the day making their final oral arguments for why Trump should be removed from office for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
Under the trial rules, senators cannot speak while the prosecution and White House legal team make their case. As a result, the lawmakers sat silently at their desks, scribbling notes, while House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and the rest of the prosecution team took turns describing in detail how Trump pressured a foreign power to interfere in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.
House Democrats argued the evidence proved conclusively that Trump withheld military aid and an Oval Office visit from Ukraine in order to try and pressure the country to announce an investigation into Joe Biden, the former vice president and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, and his son Hunter Biden.
Schiff accused Trump of cheating to try and gain an advantage in the election. “Was it worth it?” Schiff asked at one point. “Because it certainly wasn’t worth it for the United States.” Another House manager, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said Democrats “provided overwhelming evidence of the president’s guilt.”
“President Trump tried to cheat, he got caught, and then he worked hard to cover it up. He must be held accountable,” Jeffries said.
The Republican senators sat somber faced and unmoved. So far, they have presented a united defense of the president, arguing that his conduct does not rise to the level of impeachable offenses.
It’s a sentiment that reverberated outside the Capitol at the march. Some Trump supporters said they believed his contributions to the country outweighed his personal flaws. Many cited the strong economy, and Trump’s anti-abortion stance.
“I don’t believe that there is a case against” Trump, said Michael Panicali, 44, a Catholic priest from New York. “I think that [Democrats] just hate him and want to undo his presidency.”


pbs--2020-01-24--In final opening arguments, House managers turn to obstruction of Congress charge

From our spot above the Senate chamber , generally above the Republican side of the chamber , I have to tell you , Judy , I saw for the first time today every single senator taking notes or looking through the graphic presentation in paper form that Democrats had given out .
Up until today , Republicans had been given the choice whether to get that presentation in paper form or not .
Some Republicans have chosen not to look at it .
And I had seen several senators who were watching and listening , but not taking notes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , these desks are full of documents , every single one of them .
Also , Judy , did n't see a single senator nodding off .
And I know that 's kind of a funny thing to talk about , but these are long days .
The desk are — the chairs are hard , as Nick wrote .
And it 's very common to see for brief moments senators nodding off .
Did n't see that today .
I think this is an alert Senate .
Why is this ?
Speaking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I think there is anticipation of the president 's side presenting his case very soon , and people are focusing on getting ready , preparing for that .
I also think there is a lot of consideration of the questions senators will get to ask once the president rests his case in his opening statements , and senators are starting to hone in on that fact that they will get the chance to ask questions .
They 're trying to sort out what they want to ask .

Lisa Desjardins:
That's right.
From our spot above the Senate chamber, generally above the Republican side of the chamber, I have to tell you, Judy, I saw for the first time today every single senator taking notes or looking through the graphic presentation in paper form that Democrats had given out.
Up until today, Republicans had been given the choice whether to get that presentation in paper form or not. Some Republicans have chosen not to look at it.
And I had seen several senators who were watching and listening, but not taking notes, not looking through any paperwork. Today, these desks are full of documents, every single one of them.
Also, Judy, didn't see a single senator nodding off. And I know that's kind of a funny thing to talk about, but these are long days. The desk are — the chairs are hard, as Nick wrote. And it's very common to see for brief moments senators nodding off. Didn't see that today.
I think this is an alert Senate. Why is this? Speaking to senators, there's two factors. I think there is anticipation of the president's side presenting his case very soon, and people are focusing on getting ready, preparing for that.
I also think there is a lot of consideration of the questions senators will get to ask once the president rests his case in his opening statements, and senators are starting to hone in on that fact that they will get the chance to ask questions. They're trying to sort out what they want to ask.


pbs--2020-01-24--Recording indicating Trump wanted to 'get rid' of Yovanovitch turned over to House

A recording of President Donald Trump saying on April 30 , 2018 , that he wanted then-U.S .
Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch fired has been turned over to the House Intelligence Committee , according to a lawyer for one of the people who heard the original conversation .
Joseph Bondy , an attorney for Lev Parnas , told NewsHour Friday that Parnas , an associate of Trump ’ s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani , was at a dinner with the president and several others when Trump said he wanted Yovanovitch out .
The recording , reviewed and first reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump saying , “ Get rid of her !
Get her out tomorrow .
I don ’ t care .
Get her out tomorrow .
Take her out .
Okay ?
Do it.
” Bondy said that after news of the recording became public , Parnas searched an online database connected to his iPhone and found an hour-long video from the dinner .
Bondy then turned the iPhone video over to the House committee .
The PBS NewsHour has not obtained or independently reviewed the recording .
Bondy said the recording appears to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ recollection of that night .
He added that Parnas attended the dinner along with Igor Fruman , another of Giuliani ’ s business associates .
Both Parnas and Fruman have been indicted on federal charges including violating campaign finance laws .
According to ABC News , on the recording it appears Parnas and Fruman are telling Trump that the U.S. ambassador has been bad-mouthing him , which leads directly to the remarks by the president .
The recording was made by Fruman , according to a source familiar with it .
Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Parnas well .
He has also attacked Yovanovitch on Twitter by claiming everywhere she went “ turned bad.
” News of the recording comes as House Democrats are making the case before the U.S. Senate that Trump should be removed from office .
“ The recording itself underscores the critical importance of calling witnesses and receiving evidence , ” Bondy said .
Bondy said Friday that he hopes the new recording will be a “ tipping point ” that will lead to senators allowing Parnas to testify at the Senate trial .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosecutors in Trump ’ s impeachment trial have been given 24 hours over three days to present their arguments .
The managers are expected to conclude their presentation Friday .
Trump ’ s lawyers will then be given the same amount of time to present its defense .

A recording of President Donald Trump saying on April 30, 2018, that he wanted then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch fired has been turned over to the House Intelligence Committee, according to a lawyer for one of the people who heard the original conversation.
Joseph Bondy, an attorney for Lev Parnas, told NewsHour Friday that Parnas, an associate of Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, was at a dinner with the president and several others when Trump said he wanted Yovanovitch out.
The recording, reviewed and first reported by ABC News, appears to capture Trump saying, “Get rid of her! Get her out tomorrow. I don’t care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. Okay? Do it.”
Bondy said that after news of the recording became public, Parnas searched an online database connected to his iPhone and found an hour-long video from the dinner. Bondy then turned the iPhone video over to the House committee. The PBS NewsHour has not obtained or independently reviewed the recording.
Bondy said the recording appears to be “entirely consistent” with Parnas’ recollection of that night. He added that Parnas attended the dinner along with Igor Fruman, another of Giuliani’s business associates.
Both Parnas and Fruman have been indicted on federal charges including violating campaign finance laws.
According to ABC News, on the recording it appears Parnas and Fruman are telling Trump that the U.S. ambassador has been bad-mouthing him, which leads directly to the remarks by the president. The recording was made by Fruman, according to a source familiar with it.
Trump has repeatedly said he does not know Parnas well. He has also attacked Yovanovitch on Twitter by claiming everywhere she went “turned bad.”
News of the recording comes as House Democrats are making the case before the U.S. Senate that Trump should be removed from office.
“The recording itself underscores the critical importance of calling witnesses and receiving evidence,” Bondy said.
Bondy said Friday that he hopes the new recording will be a “tipping point” that will lead to senators allowing Parnas to testify at the Senate trial.
The seven House managers who are acting as prosecutors in Trump’s impeachment trial have been given 24 hours over three days to present their arguments. The managers are expected to conclude their presentation Friday.
Trump’s lawyers will then be given the same amount of time to present its defense.


pbs--2020-01-23--WATCH: Trump impeachment trial

WATCH: Trump impeachment trial -- January 24

House Democrats are expected Friday to conclude three days of arguments in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump .
@ @ @ @ @ to resume at 1 p.m .
ET .
Watch live in the video player .
@ @ @ @ @ , the seven House managers , who act as prosecutors during the trial , have @ @ @ @ @ shows Trump committed impeachable offenses when he asked Ukraine to investigate the Bidens and then @ @ @ @ @ House-led investigation into his conduct .
The House managers were given 24 hours over three @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump ’ s lawyers will then have the same amount of time to mount @ @ @ @ @ impeached Trump on two articles–abuse of power and obstruction of Congress–in December .
The Senate @ @ @ @ @ convict or acquit the president of those charges .

House Democrats are expected Friday to conclude three days of arguments in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.
The impeachment trial is expected to resume at 1 p.m. ET. Watch live in the video player.
Over the past two days, the seven House managers, who act as prosecutors during the trial, have outlined the evidence they say shows Trump committed impeachable offenses when he asked Ukraine to investigate the Bidens and then refused to cooperate with a House-led investigation into his conduct.
The House managers were given 24 hours over three days to make their case. Trump’s lawyers will then have the same amount of time to mount their defense.
The House impeached Trump on two articles–abuse of power and obstruction of Congress–in December. The Senate must now determine whether to convict or acquit the president of those charges.


pbs--2020-01-25--Trump's legal team begins defense in Senate impeachment trial

So it is a set of tough questions in that sense .
And I do think one of the issues that the Democrats laid out well is the answer to that question will be with us for decades or centuries in the sense that we 've been looking when we think about that question , well , what happened with the Johnson impeachment hundreds of years ago ?
What happened with the Nixon impeachment decades ago ?
And so what the answer to that question here will define the relationship between the two branches for a long period of time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the president can say , you know , you want any information from us .
We 're not participating whatsoever .
We 're not going to tell you what specifically is executive privilege .
Just no participation .
That 's why the letter this October 8th letter from the White House counsel to the House was declared by The New York Times in its headline , `` White House declares war '' on the impeachment inquiry because it really was just nothing .
You 'll get no documents , no officials , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are in the chain .
Right .
And that 's something extraordinary that I think the Democrats are trying to say to the senators , this is about us , too , as an institution .

Ryan Goodman:
So it is a set of tough questions in that sense. And I do think one of the issues that the Democrats laid out well is the answer to that question will be with us for decades or centuries in the sense that we've been looking when we think about that question, well, what happened with the Johnson impeachment hundreds of years ago? What happened with the Nixon impeachment decades ago? And so what the answer to that question here will define the relationship between the two branches for a long period of time, so can it be the case that the president can say, you know, you want any information from us. We're not participating whatsoever. We're not going to tell you what specifically is executive privilege. Just no participation. That's why the letter this October 8th letter from the White House counsel to the House was declared by The New York Times in its headline, "White House declares war" on the impeachment inquiry because it really was just nothing. You'll get no documents, no officials, no matter how low or high they are in the chain. Right. And that's something extraordinary that I think the Democrats are trying to say to the senators, this is about us, too, as an institution.


pbs--2020-01-25--WATCH: Full video of Trump appearing to say Ukraine ambassador should be removed

A video released Saturday captures President Donald Trump appearing to say he wants to “ get rid ” of the then-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine , Marie Yovanovitch .
The recording , which was provided to the PBS NewsHour by a lawyer for one of the people who heard the original conversation , is said to be from a dinner in Washington , D.C. , on April 30 , 2018– a year before Yovanovitch was actually fired .
Joseph Bondy , an attorney for Lev Parnas , told NewsHour that Parnas , an associate of Trump ’ s personal lawyer Rudy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president and several others when Trump said he wanted Yovanovitch out .
About 42 minutes into the hour-long video , Parnas appears to say , “ The biggest problem there , I think where we need to start , is we got ta get rid of the ambassador .
She ’ s still left over from the Clinton administration.
” Trump then appears to say , “ Where ?
The ambassador to Ukraine ?
” Parnas replies , “ Yes .
She ’ s basically walking around telling everybody ‘ Wait , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , just wait.
’ ” A few seconds later , Trump appears to say , “ Get rid of her !
Get her out tomorrow .
I don ’ t care .
Get her out tomorrow .
Take her out .
OK ?
Do it.
” Bondy said Parnas attended the dinner along with Igor Fruman , another of Giuliani ’ s business associates .
Both Parnas and Fruman have been indicted on federal charges , including violating campaign finance laws .
Saturday , Bondy said he released the video because he saw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s understanding .
“ Given its importance to the national interest , we decided to release this recording in a manner intended to ensure equal public access , and in an effort to provide clarity to the American people and the Senate as to the need to conduct a fair trial , with witnesses and evidence , ” he said .
The recording made by Fruman , reviewed and first reported by ABC News , appeared to capture Trump making the comments .
Bondy said that after news of the audio recording became @ @ @ @ @ @ @ connected to his iPhone and found a video sent to him by Fruman , from the dinner that was more than an hour long .
Bondy has turned the iPhone video over to congressional investigators .
Minutes before discussing Yovanovitch , Trump discussed the conflict between Russia and Ukraine , which is part of the reason Ukraine sought military aid from the United States .
In the video , someone is heard saying , “ The resources in Ukraine are tremendous.
” A voice also says Ukraine is part of pipelines in Europe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ask , “ Ukraine has oil ?
” Someone replies affirmatively .
Trump then appears to ask , “ Why aren ’ t companies going in ?
Too risky ?
” Someone says , “ Exactly .
They were supporting Clintons for all these years.
” Seconds later , Trump appears to ask , “ How long will [ Ukraine ] last in a fight with Russia ?
” Someone replies , “ Without us , not very long.
” Trump appears to echo the voice saying , “ Without us.
” Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Parnas well .
He has also attacked Yovanovitch on Twitter by claiming that every place she went “ turned bad.
” The video begins with shaky footage of a number of people standing around a dinner table .
Then about two and a half minutes in , a voice announces that the president has arrived and the camera shows Trump taking a seat in a dining chair .
Soon after , the camera turns to the ceiling of the room , capturing audio of conversations , and remains in that position for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others discuss a number of other topics including international trade deals , negotiating with countries like China and Argentina and trying to find a peace deal in the Middle East .
Trump can also be heard criticizing Germany for its energy partnership with Russia and saying other European nations contribute too little to NATO and Ukrainian efforts to combat Russia .
At one point , Trump asks how Ukraine is feeling about the situation with Russia .
“ Do they feel they are going to be O.K .
?
” Trump asked .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ be O.K .
with U.S. support and tell Trump that Petro Poroshenko , who was then the president of Ukraine but is now facing criminal corruption charges since he left office , is a “ good guy.
” Trump turns to the question of U.S. aid to Ukraine .
“ It ’ s always us that has to support everybody ?
You have to wonder why doesn ’ t Germany support them ?
Why aren ’ t these others ?
” “ They are supporting Russia , ” someone tells Trump .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and supporting Russia.
” The name “ Biden ” can be heard mentioned by someone other than Trump , but the context is unclear and the conversation continued to focus on other issues relating to Ukraine .
The release of the video recording comes the day that White House lawyers began their argument in Trump ’ s Senate impeachment trial .
The impeachment process has largely centered on the president ’ s actions toward Ukraine .

A video released Saturday captures President Donald Trump appearing to say he wants to “get rid” of the then-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch.
The recording, which was provided to the PBS NewsHour by a lawyer for one of the people who heard the original conversation, is said to be from a dinner in Washington, D.C., on April 30, 2018– a year before Yovanovitch was actually fired.
Joseph Bondy, an attorney for Lev Parnas, told NewsHour that Parnas, an associate of Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, was at the dinner with the president and several others when Trump said he wanted Yovanovitch out.
About 42 minutes into the hour-long video, Parnas appears to say, “The biggest problem there, I think where we need to start, is we gotta get rid of the ambassador. She’s still left over from the Clinton administration.”
Trump then appears to say, “Where? The ambassador to Ukraine?”
Parnas replies, “Yes. She’s basically walking around telling everybody ‘Wait, he’s gonna get impeached, just wait.’”
A few seconds later, Trump appears to say, “Get rid of her! Get her out tomorrow. I don’t care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. OK? Do it.”
Bondy said Parnas attended the dinner along with Igor Fruman, another of Giuliani’s business associates. Both Parnas and Fruman have been indicted on federal charges, including violating campaign finance laws.
Saturday, Bondy said he released the video because he saw it as critical to the public’s understanding. “Given its importance to the national interest, we decided to release this recording in a manner intended to ensure equal public access, and in an effort to provide clarity to the American people and the Senate as to the need to conduct a fair trial, with witnesses and evidence,” he said.
The recording made by Fruman, reviewed and first reported by ABC News, appeared to capture Trump making the comments. Bondy said that after news of the audio recording became public, Parnas searched an online database connected to his iPhone and found a video sent to him by Fruman, from the dinner that was more than an hour long. Bondy has turned the iPhone video over to congressional investigators.
Minutes before discussing Yovanovitch, Trump discussed the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which is part of the reason Ukraine sought military aid from the United States.
In the video, someone is heard saying, “The resources in Ukraine are tremendous.” A voice also says Ukraine is part of pipelines in Europe. In response, Trump appears to ask, “Ukraine has oil?” Someone replies affirmatively. Trump then appears to ask, “Why aren’t companies going in? Too risky?” Someone says, “Exactly. They were supporting Clintons for all these years.”
Seconds later, Trump appears to ask, “How long will [Ukraine] last in a fight with Russia?” Someone replies, “Without us, not very long.” Trump appears to echo the voice saying, “Without us.”
Trump has repeatedly said he does not know Parnas well. He has also attacked Yovanovitch on Twitter by claiming that every place she went “turned bad.”
The video begins with shaky footage of a number of people standing around a dinner table. Then about two and a half minutes in, a voice announces that the president has arrived and the camera shows Trump taking a seat in a dining chair.
Soon after, the camera turns to the ceiling of the room, capturing audio of conversations, and remains in that position for the remainder of the video. Trump and others discuss a number of other topics including international trade deals, negotiating with countries like China and Argentina and trying to find a peace deal in the Middle East.
Trump can also be heard criticizing Germany for its energy partnership with Russia and saying other European nations contribute too little to NATO and Ukrainian efforts to combat Russia.
At one point, Trump asks how Ukraine is feeling about the situation with Russia. “Do they feel they are going to be O.K.?” Trump asked.
Others at the dinner say they will be O.K. with U.S. support and tell Trump that Petro Poroshenko, who was then the president of Ukraine but is now facing criminal corruption charges since he left office, is a “good guy.”
Trump turns to the question of U.S. aid to Ukraine.
“It’s always us that has to support everybody? You have to wonder why doesn’t Germany support them? Why aren’t these others?”
“They are supporting Russia,” someone tells Trump. “A lot of countries are backstabbing us and supporting Russia.”
The name “Biden” can be heard mentioned by someone other than Trump, but the context is unclear and the conversation continued to focus on other issues relating to Ukraine.
The release of the video recording comes the day that White House lawyers began their argument in Trump’s Senate impeachment trial. The impeachment process has largely centered on the president’s actions toward Ukraine.


pbs--2020-01-25--Trump defends Sanders, stoking Democratic divisions

WASHINGTON — As tensions between Democratic presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren rose earlier this month , Sanders found himself with an unusual ally : President Donald Trump .
During a raucous campaign rally in which Trump critiqued some of his Democratic challengers , the president launched into an unprompted defense of Sanders .
Warren had accused Sanders of telling her that a woman couldn ’ t win the White House in November , but Sanders insisted he would never say such a thing .
Trump concurred .
“ I don ’ t believe that Bernie said that .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump told his supporters .
“ It ’ s not the kind of thing he would say.
” As the Democratic primary intensifies before the first contests to decide the nominee , Trump and his allies have issued a series of curiously favorable comments about Sanders .
They ’ ve played up the Vermont senator ’ s electoral strength and fundraising prowess .
And they ’ ve suggested that if Sanders doesn ’ t secure the nomination , it will be because the party rigged the primary against him .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ backers who believe the Democratic National Committee worked against him in 2016 , when Hillary Clinton won the nomination .
In offering occasional support for Sanders , Trump is taking a page out of his own playbook from the election four years ago and betting that the Democratic divisions that helped him win the White House are even deeper now .
Indeed , more moderate Democrats fear that Sanders — a self-described democratic socialist — would struggle to pull together a robust coalition in the general election .
But they also worry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough numbers for any other nominee if Sanders fails in his second quest for the party ’ s nomination .
Both scenarios would benefit Trump .
The president is closely monitoring the Democratic race , and has taken note of Sanders ’ strong fundraising and polling , according to Republicans who have spoken with him about the election .
But if Sanders stumbles in the coming weeks , Trump is also said to see an opportunity to suppress some of the senator ’ s most ardent supporters , or even win over some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people who are very anti-establishment , who have a lot of oppositional feelings about the political establishment , ” said Jennifer Palmieri , who advised Clinton ’ s 2016 campaign .
“ Sanders is appealing to them and if that doesn ’ t work for them , then the Trump team hopes they ’ ll come their way.
” Though Trump and Sanders are at odds on most major issues , they have some striking similarities .
Both rose to political prominence without the backing of their parties ’ establishment , but now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy positions .
Both men have forged visceral connections with lower income voters , in part by pledging to revamp trade policies they say have hurt American workers .
In 2016 , Sanders and Trump did share a small number of voters .
According to data from the Pew Research Center , 3 % of voters who consistently backed Sanders in 2016 Democratic primary voted for Trump in the general election .
Another 11 % of Sanders supporters voted for third party candidates over Clinton .
David Riley Campbell , 23 , was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t back Clinton against Trump ( Campbell said he didn ’ t vote for anyone in the general election ) .
He said he ’ s learned his lesson and will be “ going blue no matter who ” in 2020 .
Still , he acknowledged he would be “ much , much less enthusiastic ” about a candidate other than Sanders .
“ There ’ s a very short list of candidates I trust , ” said Campbell , who is volunteering in Iowa for Sanders before the Feb. 3 caucus .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ other Democrats among Sanders supporters that Trump ’ s team is eager to capitalize on if the senator falters in the coming weeks .
Trump has sent multiple tweets over the past week suggesting Democrats were “ rigging the election ” against Sanders because he was being pulled off the campaign trail to serve as a juror in the Senate impeachment trial during the final weeks before the caucus .
Trump never mentioned that three other senators — including Warren of Massachusetts , Sanders ’ chief progressive rival — were also marooned in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , senior Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway wrote in The Washington Post that if Democrats were serious about nominating the most electable candidate , they would side with Sanders .
He ’ s the candidate , Conway wrote , “ who actually won primary contests and proved he can play David to Goliath in key places four short years ago.
” Tim Murtaugh , a spokesman for Trump ’ s campaign , said those comments don ’ t change the fact that the president sees Sanders as a someone who could be a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Yet Murtaugh also gave a nod to Sanders ’ supporters , saying it ’ s “ obvious the knives are out ” for the senator in the Democratic primary .
“ It would be completely understandable if the Sanders camp said , ‘ Here we go again , ’ ” Murtaugh said .
Trump used a similar strategy in 2016 .
He urged Sanders to run as an independent after Sanders fell behind Clinton in the race for delegates , which determine the Democratic nominee , and openly courted Sanders ’ supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders ’ backers say their eyes are wide open to Trump ’ s strategy .
“ What they ’ re trying to do is throw a wrench into the works .
They ’ re trying to do whatever they can to keep us at each other ’ s throats , ” said Randy Bryce , a Sanders supporter and former Wisconsin congressional candidate .
Sanders ’ campaign did not respond to questions about the favorable comments from the president and his advisers .
Earlier this month , Sanders distanced himself from Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 primary against him .
“ His transparent attempts to divide Democrats will not work , and we are going to unite to sweep him out of the White House in November , ” Sanders said in a statement .
AP National Political Writer Steve Peoples in Iowa City , Iowa , and AP Director of Public Opinion Research Emily Swanson in Washington contributed to this report .

WASHINGTON — As tensions between Democratic presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren rose earlier this month, Sanders found himself with an unusual ally: President Donald Trump.
During a raucous campaign rally in which Trump critiqued some of his Democratic challengers, the president launched into an unprompted defense of Sanders. Warren had accused Sanders of telling her that a woman couldn’t win the White House in November, but Sanders insisted he would never say such a thing. Trump concurred.
“I don’t believe that Bernie said that. I really don’t,” Trump told his supporters. “It’s not the kind of thing he would say.”
As the Democratic primary intensifies before the first contests to decide the nominee, Trump and his allies have issued a series of curiously favorable comments about Sanders. They’ve played up the Vermont senator’s electoral strength and fundraising prowess. And they’ve suggested that if Sanders doesn’t secure the nomination, it will be because the party rigged the primary against him. It’s a sentiment that resonates with some Sanders’ backers who believe the Democratic National Committee worked against him in 2016, when Hillary Clinton won the nomination.
In offering occasional support for Sanders, Trump is taking a page out of his own playbook from the election four years ago and betting that the Democratic divisions that helped him win the White House are even deeper now.
Indeed, more moderate Democrats fear that Sanders — a self-described democratic socialist — would struggle to pull together a robust coalition in the general election. But they also worry his supporters might not vote in large enough numbers for any other nominee if Sanders fails in his second quest for the party’s nomination.
Both scenarios would benefit Trump. The president is closely monitoring the Democratic race, and has taken note of Sanders’ strong fundraising and polling, according to Republicans who have spoken with him about the election. But if Sanders stumbles in the coming weeks, Trump is also said to see an opportunity to suppress some of the senator’s most ardent supporters, or even win over some of their votes.
For some Democrats, it’s a worrisome prospect.
“There are people who are very anti-establishment, who have a lot of oppositional feelings about the political establishment,” said Jennifer Palmieri, who advised Clinton’s 2016 campaign. “Sanders is appealing to them and if that doesn’t work for them, then the Trump team hopes they’ll come their way.”
Though Trump and Sanders are at odds on most major issues, they have some striking similarities. Both rose to political prominence without the backing of their parties’ establishment, but now wield significant influence over those parties’ policy positions. Both men have forged visceral connections with lower income voters, in part by pledging to revamp trade policies they say have hurt American workers.
In 2016, Sanders and Trump did share a small number of voters. According to data from the Pew Research Center, 3% of voters who consistently backed Sanders in 2016 Democratic primary voted for Trump in the general election. Another 11% of Sanders supporters voted for third party candidates over Clinton.
David Riley Campbell, 23, was among the Sanders supported who didn’t back Clinton against Trump (Campbell said he didn’t vote for anyone in the general election). He said he’s learned his lesson and will be “going blue no matter who” in 2020. Still, he acknowledged he would be “much, much less enthusiastic” about a candidate other than Sanders.
“There’s a very short list of candidates I trust,” said Campbell, who is volunteering in Iowa for Sanders before the Feb. 3 caucus.
It’s that lingering distrust of other Democrats among Sanders supporters that Trump’s team is eager to capitalize on if the senator falters in the coming weeks.
Trump has sent multiple tweets over the past week suggesting Democrats were “rigging the election” against Sanders because he was being pulled off the campaign trail to serve as a juror in the Senate impeachment trial during the final weeks before the caucus. Trump never mentioned that three other senators — including Warren of Massachusetts, Sanders’ chief progressive rival — were also marooned in Washington for the trial.
On Thursday, senior Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway wrote in The Washington Post that if Democrats were serious about nominating the most electable candidate, they would side with Sanders. He’s the candidate, Conway wrote, “who actually won primary contests and proved he can play David to Goliath in key places four short years ago.”
Tim Murtaugh, a spokesman for Trump’s campaign, said those comments don’t change the fact that the president sees Sanders as a someone who could be a “complete disaster” in the White House. Yet Murtaugh also gave a nod to Sanders’ supporters, saying it’s “obvious the knives are out” for the senator in the Democratic primary.
“It would be completely understandable if the Sanders camp said, ‘Here we go again,’” Murtaugh said.
Trump used a similar strategy in 2016. He urged Sanders to run as an independent after Sanders fell behind Clinton in the race for delegates, which determine the Democratic nominee, and openly courted Sanders’ supporters.
Four years later, some of Sanders’ backers say their eyes are wide open to Trump’s strategy.
“What they’re trying to do is throw a wrench into the works. They’re trying to do whatever they can to keep us at each other’s throats,” said Randy Bryce, a Sanders supporter and former Wisconsin congressional candidate.
Sanders’ campaign did not respond to questions about the favorable comments from the president and his advisers. Earlier this month, Sanders distanced himself from Trump’s assertions that Democrats were rigging the 2020 primary against him.
“His transparent attempts to divide Democrats will not work, and we are going to unite to sweep him out of the White House in November,” Sanders said in a statement.
__
AP National Political Writer Steve Peoples in Iowa City, Iowa, and AP Director of Public Opinion Research Emily Swanson in Washington contributed to this report.


pbs--2020-01-25--The strategy behind Team Trump's impeachment defense

President Donald Trump ’ s legal team began presenting their defense on Saturday with the goal of acquitting the president in the Senate , but more immediately to convince the Republican majority to vote against having witnesses testify as part of the impeachment trial .
Political analysts and leading Republicans , including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , have said an acquittal of the president is all but certain .
But whether Republican senators will reject the option to call any witnesses is less clear .
Trump ’ s legal team is working to ensure they will not seek further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president ’ s legal strategy .
White House counsel Pat Cipollone said during his opening remarks that House managers , who concluded their three-day presentation Friday night , did not come “ anywhere close to meeting their burden ” of proving that the president committed an impeachable offense .
The president ’ s legal team argued Saturday that Trump had done “ absolutely nothing wrong ” and that House managers are asking senators to reject the will of their constituents .
“ They ’ re asking you not only to overturn the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as I ’ ve said before , they ’ re asking you to remove President Trump from an election that ’ s occurring in approximately nine months , ” Cipollone said .
“ Let the people decide for themselves.
” The president ’ s team also claims that a recording of Trump calling for the firing of then-U.S .
Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch , which surfaced Friday , is not relevant to the proceedings .
The recording was turned over to the House Intelligence Committee by Lev Parnas , an associate of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who said he was at the meeting with the president and aided Giuliani ’ s efforts to uncover damaging information about the Bidens in Ukraine .
In his closing remarks Friday night , Rep. Adam Schiff , D-Calif. , referenced a CBS report that said Republican senators were warned to vote with the president , or their heads would be put “ on a pike.
” That remark didn ’ t sit well with Republican senators — notably moderate senators like Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Maine Sen. Susan Collins — who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote for witnesses .
White House officials have denied that anyone from the president ’ s team made the statement .
“ The president has a broad array of relationships in Washington across the partisan and ideological divide , ” Eric Ueland , White House legislative affairs director , told the PBS NewsHour .
“ I have no knowledge that anyone working for the president has ever made such a statement , and I know he would never tolerate a mindset like that.
” The presidents ’ team was pleased Republican senators quickly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They believe his remarks , which suggested Republicans are at risk of failing the moral obligation of their offices , will help convince moderate GOP senators to oppose Democrats ’ efforts to call witnesses .
White House officials and the president ’ s legal team have also dismissed Schiff ’ s call Friday night for senators to vote for witnesses and then let Chief Justice John Roberts settle any disputes over executive privilege , should it be invoked by the White House .
Trump ’ s lawyers have said that additional witnesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bolton , aren ’ t necessary .
After Saturday ’ s proceedings , Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer suggested that the president ’ s legal arguments had backfired .
“ The president ’ s counsel did something they did not intend .
They made a really compelling case for why the Senate should call witnesses and documents , ” he said at a news conference .
“ They made the argument that no one really knows what the president intended ; it ’ s speculation what the president intended when he cut off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do know , ” he said , adding that Bolton and White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney might have insight .
In the next two days of arguments , the president ’ s team plans to speak at length about former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden ’ s business dealings in Ukraine , in order to justify Trump raising the Biden family in his July 25 phone call with Ukraine ’ s President Volodymyr Zelensky , according to sources on the president ’ s legal team .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ raise the so-called Steele dossier , as part of their argument that Democrats are seeking to overturn the results of the 2016 election and remove Trump from the 2020 ballot .
Trump has railed against the document — compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele as opposition research for both Republicans and Democrats — that contains unfounded , salacious claims against Trump .
The president ’ s legal team spent approximately two hours Saturday giving an overview of the “ coming attractions ” of their case .
The early dismissal for senators @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allows presidential candidates to head to Iowa to campaign , and for weary lawmakers to head home for a quick reprieve before the defense team resumes their case Monday .
The Trump team plans to use the entire day Monday to wrap up their opening arguments , using two of their three allotted days .
An early ending to the arguments would allow two days of senators ’ questions to take place over Tuesday and Wednesday .
Senators could debate issues such as calling witnesses on Thursday , and possibly a vote on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no witnesses are called , senators would deliberate about the big question on Friday : whether to remove Trump from office .
On that schedule , the president ’ s team hopes he can be acquitted — and take a victory lap — when he is scheduled to deliver the State of the Union in the House chamber the following Tuesday , Feb. 4 .

President Donald Trump’s legal team began presenting their defense on Saturday with the goal of acquitting the president in the Senate, but more immediately to convince the Republican majority to vote against having witnesses testify as part of the impeachment trial.
Political analysts and leading Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, have said an acquittal of the president is all but certain. But whether Republican senators will reject the option to call any witnesses is less clear. Trump’s legal team is working to ensure they will not seek further testimony, according to sources familiar with the president’s legal strategy.
White House counsel Pat Cipollone said during his opening remarks that House managers, who concluded their three-day presentation Friday night, did not come “anywhere close to meeting their burden” of proving that the president committed an impeachable offense.
The president’s legal team argued Saturday that Trump had done “absolutely nothing wrong” and that House managers are asking senators to reject the will of their constituents.
“They’re asking you not only to overturn the results of the last election, but as I’ve said before, they’re asking you to remove President Trump from an election that’s occurring in approximately nine months,” Cipollone said. “Let the people decide for themselves.”
The president’s team also claims that a recording of Trump calling for the firing of then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, which surfaced Friday, is not relevant to the proceedings. The recording was turned over to the House Intelligence Committee by Lev Parnas, an associate of Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who said he was at the meeting with the president and aided Giuliani’s efforts to uncover damaging information about the Bidens in Ukraine.
In his closing remarks Friday night, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., referenced a CBS report that said Republican senators were warned to vote with the president, or their heads would be put “on a pike.” That remark didn’t sit well with Republican senators — notably moderate senators like Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Maine Sen. Susan Collins — who Democrats have been hoping to convince to vote for witnesses.
White House officials have denied that anyone from the president’s team made the statement.
“The president has a broad array of relationships in Washington across the partisan and ideological divide,” Eric Ueland, White House legislative affairs director, told the PBS NewsHour. “I have no knowledge that anyone working for the president has ever made such a statement, and I know he would never tolerate a mindset like that.”
The presidents’ team was pleased Republican senators quickly pushed back on Schiff’s comments. They believe his remarks, which suggested Republicans are at risk of failing the moral obligation of their offices, will help convince moderate GOP senators to oppose Democrats’ efforts to call witnesses.
White House officials and the president’s legal team have also dismissed Schiff’s call Friday night for senators to vote for witnesses and then let Chief Justice John Roberts settle any disputes over executive privilege, should it be invoked by the White House.
Trump’s lawyers have said that additional witnesses, including former national security adviser John Bolton, aren’t necessary.
After Saturday’s proceedings, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer suggested that the president’s legal arguments had backfired. “The president’s counsel did something they did not intend. They made a really compelling case for why the Senate should call witnesses and documents,” he said at a news conference.
“They made the argument that no one really knows what the president intended; it’s speculation what the president intended when he cut off aid. But there are people who do know,” he said, adding that Bolton and White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney might have insight.
In the next two days of arguments, the president’s team plans to speak at length about former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine, in order to justify Trump raising the Biden family in his July 25 phone call with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, according to sources on the president’s legal team.
The president’s lawyers also plan to raise the so-called Steele dossier, as part of their argument that Democrats are seeking to overturn the results of the 2016 election and remove Trump from the 2020 ballot. Trump has railed against the document — compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele as opposition research for both Republicans and Democrats — that contains unfounded, salacious claims against Trump.
The president’s legal team spent approximately two hours Saturday giving an overview of the “coming attractions” of their case. The early dismissal for senators sitting in the chamber on a weekend allows presidential candidates to head to Iowa to campaign, and for weary lawmakers to head home for a quick reprieve before the defense team resumes their case Monday.
The Trump team plans to use the entire day Monday to wrap up their opening arguments, using two of their three allotted days.
An early ending to the arguments would allow two days of senators’ questions to take place over Tuesday and Wednesday. Senators could debate issues such as calling witnesses on Thursday, and possibly a vote on the issue the same day. If no witnesses are called, senators would deliberate about the big question on Friday: whether to remove Trump from office.
On that schedule, the president’s team hopes he can be acquitted — and take a victory lap — when he is scheduled to deliver the State of the Union in the House chamber the following Tuesday, Feb. 4.


pbs--2020-01-25--AP fact check: Trump's impeachment defense

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — President Donald Trump ’ s lawyers opened his Senate impeachment defense Saturday with the false assertion that Democrats tried to shut the president ’ s team out of the congressional inquiry that preceded the charges .
Actually , Democrats invited Trump to participate and he declined .
“ Why would you lock everybody out of it from the president ’ s side ?
… It ’ s evidence they themselves don ’ t believe in the facts of their case.
” Trump wasn ’ t locked out .
He rejected an invitation from the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ultimately produced the articles of impeachment .
On Nov. 29 , the committee ’ s chairman , Rep. Jerrold Nadler , D-N.Y. , sent a letter to Trump “ to determine if your counsel will seek to exercise the special privileges set forth in the Judiciary Committee ’ s Impeachment Procedures … and participate in the upcoming impeachment proceedings .
In particular , please provide the Committee with notice of whether your counsel intends to participate , specifying which of the privileges your counsel seeks to exercise .
… ” On Dec. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ participate , telling Nadler in a letter that “ House Democrats have wasted enough of America ’ s time with this charade.
” Trump and his team did not take part .
The first round of hearings , by the House Intelligence Committee , was not opened to participation by Trump ’ s team .
Those hearings resembled the investigative phase of criminal cases , when the subject of the investigation is ordinarily not brought in .
Trump complained about not being invited , then said no when the next panel invited him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate impeachment trial in their opening arguments .
This is an iffy definition of hiding something .
Cipollone spoke about the July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukraine ’ s president , which is at the heart of the impeachment case , and cited certain passages that Democrats did not play up or mention in their prosecution argument .
The rough transcript of that conversation is a matter of public record , having been released by the White House , and is far from hidden .
The passages in question were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ European countries doing nothing to help Ukraine , putting the burden on the United States .
For the record , his complaint , which he has voiced many times since , is inaccurate .
European Union institutions have given far more development assistance to Ukraine than the U.S. has provided , and individual countries in Europe as well as Japan and Canada have contributed significantly , too .
The U.S. is the primary supplier of military aid .
In the July 25 phone call , after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said his country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to help defend itself against Russia , Trump then and repeatedly pressed him to investigate Joe Biden , Trump ’ s potential 2020 election rival , and Democrats .
Trump held up nearly $ 400 million in military aid to Ukraine until Congress got wind of the freeze .
“ The record that we have to go on today is based entirely on House Democratic facts pre-cleared in a basement bunker.
” That ’ s not true .
The case also is based on text messages , emails and other documents provided to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public hearings .
Many witnesses testified and Republicans on the committee attended and questioned them , just as Democrats , did .
As for the dark reference to a “ basement bunker , ” that ’ s a secure facility at the Capitol where , at times , dozens of members of the House , from both parties , attended depositions and meetings .
When Republicans controlled the House before the last elections , the Intelligence Committee held its entire Russia investigation in that “ bunker.
” “ The security assistance flowed on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place on Sept. 25 without Ukrainian government announcing any investigations.
” True , but that was after Trump ’ s pressure campaign on Ukraine for a political “ favor ” had been exposed .
A whistleblower ’ s complaint alleging Trump abused his office had surfaced before that .
The Democrats opened a congressional investigation of the episode only a few days before Trump , on Sept. 11 , released the military assistance that Congress had approved early in the year .
It ’ s true Trump and Zelenskiy met Sept. 25 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly .
It did not carry the prestige of the White House meeting that Zelenskiy wanted and Trump tentatively offered in the July phone call .
In that call , Zelenskiy thanked Trump for inviting him not only to the U.S. but “ specifically Washington ” and Trump said : “ Give us a date and we ’ ll work that out.
” Associated Press writers Lisa Mascaro and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report .

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s lawyers opened his Senate impeachment defense Saturday with the false assertion that Democrats tried to shut the president’s team out of the congressional inquiry that preceded the charges. Actually, Democrats invited Trump to participate and he declined.
White House counsel Pat Cipollone:
“Why would you lock everybody out of it from the president’s side? … It’s evidence they themselves don’t believe in the facts of their case.”
The facts
Trump wasn’t locked out. He rejected an invitation from the House Judiciary Committee to participate in the hearings that ultimately produced the articles of impeachment.
On Nov. 29, the committee’s chairman, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., sent a letter to Trump “to determine if your counsel will seek to exercise the special privileges set forth in the Judiciary Committee’s Impeachment Procedures … and participate in the upcoming impeachment proceedings. In particular, please provide the Committee with notice of whether your counsel intends to participate, specifying which of the privileges your counsel seeks to exercise. …”
On Dec. 6, Cipollone signaled Trump would not participate, telling Nadler in a letter that “House Democrats have wasted enough of America’s time with this charade.” Trump and his team did not take part.
The first round of hearings, by the House Intelligence Committee, was not opened to participation by Trump’s team. Those hearings resembled the investigative phase of criminal cases, when the subject of the investigation is ordinarily not brought in. Trump complained about not being invited, then said no when the next panel invited him.
Pat Cipollone:
Democrats “hid evidence” from the Senate impeachment trial in their opening arguments.
The facts
This is an iffy definition of hiding something. Cipollone spoke about the July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukraine’s president, which is at the heart of the impeachment case, and cited certain passages that Democrats did not play up or mention in their prosecution argument.
The rough transcript of that conversation is a matter of public record, having been released by the White House, and is far from hidden.
The passages in question were when Trump complained about Germany and other European countries doing nothing to help Ukraine, putting the burden on the United States. For the record, his complaint, which he has voiced many times since, is inaccurate.
European Union institutions have given far more development assistance to Ukraine than the U.S. has provided, and individual countries in Europe as well as Japan and Canada have contributed significantly, too. The U.S. is the primary supplier of military aid.
In the July 25 phone call, after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said his country wanted more anti-tank missiles from the U.S. to help defend itself against Russia, Trump then and repeatedly pressed him to investigate Joe Biden, Trump’s potential 2020 election rival, and Democrats.
Trump held up nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine until Congress got wind of the freeze.
Trump lawyer Mike Purpura:
“The record that we have to go on today is based entirely on House Democratic facts pre-cleared in a basement bunker.”
The facts
That’s not true. The case also is based on text messages, emails and other documents provided to the House Intelligence Committee, which had public hearings. Many witnesses testified and Republicans on the committee attended and questioned them, just as Democrats, did.
As for the dark reference to a “basement bunker,” that’s a secure facility at the Capitol where, at times, dozens of members of the House, from both parties, attended depositions and meetings.
When Republicans controlled the House before the last elections, the Intelligence Committee held its entire Russia investigation in that “bunker.”
Mike Purpura:
“The security assistance flowed on Sept. 11 and a presidential meeting took place on Sept. 25 without Ukrainian government announcing any investigations.”
The facts
True, but that was after Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine for a political “favor” had been exposed. A whistleblower’s complaint alleging Trump abused his office had surfaced before that.
The Democrats opened a congressional investigation of the episode only a few days before Trump, on Sept. 11, released the military assistance that Congress had approved early in the year.
It’s true Trump and Zelenskiy met Sept. 25. The meeting was in New York on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly. It did not carry the prestige of the White House meeting that Zelenskiy wanted and Trump tentatively offered in the July phone call. In that call, Zelenskiy thanked Trump for inviting him not only to the U.S. but “specifically Washington” and Trump said: “Give us a date and we’ll work that out.”
Associated Press writers Lisa Mascaro and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.