, 43 tweets, 5 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
The thread of the hearings will be here:
First thing I am noticing-- "In my opinion.." "I thought" "I think"... Not facts, opinions an hearsay. Taylor being asked about the detailed timeline in his opening statement. Taylor stating that he took notes on all of his conversations.
Questioning Taylor on President Trumps decisions for ambassadorship- as though that it is a problem. Taylor again testifying to hearsay about what he heard in conversations. Now talking about call between Sondland and Taylor.
Sondland told Taylor he was wrong about POTUS intent- there was no quid pro quo. Taylor stopped answering now, Taylor "reminded" of what he said now- that "Everything" was contingent on aid, and that Sondland had made a mistake relaying information back to Ukraine.
he said Sondland said that he told Taylor he made a mistake and the WH meeting and security assistance were contingent on investigations being announced. They are now basically saying that Sondland is lying.
Taylor: POTUS through Sondland was asking Zelensky to commit to public investigations, no further information why. Being asked "Did you come to understand that Ukraine felt pressure to initiate investigations? Taylor says he got several questions from Ukranians (who?)
asking about money, and that they had begun to hear that money wouldn't come until investigations began. (This is the complete opposite of what has been said until this point....)
Taylor: Sondland said that if Zelensky didn't clear things up in public we would be at a stalemate, that this is not a quid pro quo, but we would be at a stalemate. So even though he said the words no quid pro quo, Taylors UNDERSTANDING is that there would be, word stalemate
Sondland was trying to explain the relationship and what a businessman would be thinking before he signed a check. It was similar to writing a check to someone. He used that analogy very clearly to indicate that this would require something,.
My note: So what? And we can talk to Sondland here. We don't need this guy to tell us what Sondland said.
Taylor: Ukraine doesn't owe the US anything but gratitude. There was a feeling by POTUS that he was owed somethng. (the questioner is correcting the witness on what he means....)
Q: Regardless of what you call it, QproQuo, bribery, extortion, security assistance wouldnt have been provided unless they did something to help his reelection. Taylor says all he can do is tell you what I have heard.
Taylor saying he heard this from Sondland and Morrison, that aid was contingent on investigating. Regardless of what Ukraine may say now, it was Taylors understanding that in early September, the Ukrainians believed they needed to announce the investigations.
Taylor: Ukrainians worried about assistance, and were planning to do a CNN interview to announce investigations. That was what it was interpreted as. (NONSENSE)
I don't understand why they don't just have Sondland in here, because all Taylor is doing is telling everyone what Sondland said.
As per Taylor: Zelensky was worried about the investigations, however didn't want to get involved in these activities. (Taylor has NO knowledge of anything directly.)
July 25th call: Neither of the witnesses were on the call. Questioner is going to read the transcript and focus on FOUR sections.
Taylor: We knew the aid was frozen, and we were told that Trump knew as well. (THAT doesn't make any sense. That is a problem)
Mr. Kent is stating he had no idea who Crowdstrike was until now, and that there is no Ukrainian link to the company. To my knowledge there is no evidence that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election. (They say "to my knowledge" for a reason. FARCE
5m recess, minority questioning when they return.
5m recess has turned into 20 as they all likely go collaborate on how they messed up and how they shouldn’t answer any questions from R.
Back in session. 45 m for minority. Nunes will be N.
Call transcript shows mutual cooperation over a range of issues.
Zelensky insists nothing improper about the conversation, and left recited a fictitious version of the call instead of the actual conversation. The transcript doesn’t show potus saying anything remotely like that. Dems make up facts.
Zelensky insists nothing improper about the conversation, and left recited a fictitious version of the call instead of the actual conversation. The transcript doesn’t show potus saying anything remotely like that. D
Aid went without Ukraine doing anything that they were supposed to do - victim denies crime even happened. Claim that potus tried to get them to manufacture dirt. That’s supported by no evidence.
Broader ? Of why he may have wanted answered. Dems deny that Ukraine interfered in 2016 - they cared about that for 3 full years. They have to because if they don’t, it makes sense for Trump to find out what happened.
Some of the witnesses are uninformed about election meddling in Ukraine. For ex, Chalupa admitted she’s worked with Ukraine to dig up dirt and revealed that embassy officials worked with her. Taylor, you testified that you only recently became aware of this
From the last deposition, is that correct? Taylor, yes that’s correct. Politico article quotes Ukraine as saying “it was clear they were supporting Clinton’s candidacy - I think they didn’t meet with Trump because they felt Clinton would win.”
Also said you were unaware that Ambassador wrote op ed in the hill criticizing President Trump, or that the black ledger was to undermine candidacy. (Taylor says yes)
Ohr testified that Ukraine was a source to dirty up campaign, (Leshenko)
Taylor is agreeing that he had no idea about any of this happening.
Taylor is a partisan hack. Nunes: Some government officials oppose Trumps approach to Ukraine but had no idea of what concerned him. In this case it was opposition to his campaign and support Clinton.;
Taylor: I heard that his response to the suggestion that Zelensky visit Trump was not well received and that he had concerns about Ukrainians.
Schiff is interrupting their time, and stating that Taylor shouldn't answer their questions. This is absolutely ridiculous. Ratcliffe: I sat here through the first 45m and had objections regarding facts not in evidence and leading. If it is your position that we should be
asserting federal rules of evidence.
Schiff is guiding the witness right now as well. Again.
Taylor: I don't know the exact nature of Trumps concerns. Castor: The very day the ledger was published, Manafort resigned from campaign. Reasonable to assume there were elements of Ukraine establishment out to get the POTUS. Taylor: I don't know
Is it proper for Ukraine to cooperate with admin on investigations? Taylor: Mr. Castor, the Ukrainian American relations, are very supportive. They will certainly be receptive of requests.
Taylor: It is appropriate for the DOJ to work with Ukraine. I don't know the appropriateness of these things.
Q: Were either of you involved in the prep for the 7/25 call.
A: No|
Q: We work overseas, the staff of NSC would be doing that, not us. They may solicit information.
Q: Did Col. Vindman reach out to any of you in prep for the call?
A: I was given notification the day before. Please ensure that the secure comm. link was provided.
Q: Did y ou provide any advice to Vindman?
A: No
T: no
Q: Was there a readout of the first call with Zelensky?
Taylor: no- got a read out several days later from Morrison, NSC
K: First saw Ukranian statement and next day I got a partial readout from LTC Vindman.
Q: The readout was cryptic why?
T: Because they highlights were there, not detail.
Q: Why was it cryptic?
A: Reading the transcript and looking back at their summary, there were issues to be pursued - pretty ordinary. We were with Zelensy the next day.
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with Tracy Beanz

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!