Thread by @DavidPepper

THREAD

Watch this interview of @senrobportman , who @TaylorPopielarz has tried to track down for months to answer basic questions about his inappropriate actions during the Ukraine scandal.

You will quickly see why Portman has been so shy.

1/

spectrumnews1.com/oh/cincinnati/…

Taylor starts by asking about an August memo that only recently came to light by a FOIA request— Portman had never before disclosed its existence—where his own office had asked the OMB why the Ukraine money had been held up

2/

foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/22/new…

Taylor’s question: “Did you get a direct response from Duffey to that inquiry?”

Portman’s answer: “I don’t think we ever did, we never did.”

Then he immediately jumps forward in time, rambling about other matters, including why we must fight for Ukraine.

3/

But talk about a red flag…the Chair of the Ukraine Caucus is saying that when he asked what had happened to the Ukraine aid he had fought for, he NEVER got an answer?

That's definitely something you’d want to get to the bottom of, right?

4.

Well that's Taylor's next question: “You obviously voted against hearing from witnesses. If you didn’t get a direct response from him, why not say, ‘Yeah, let’s bring him in so I can get that answer’?”

Of course!

5/

Rob’s answer?

A parade of process excuses. Blaming the House. “Yeah, well there’s a process you go through. The House chose not to do that…They didn’t even subpoena Michael Duffey…They didn’t even try.” Then he rambles again, ending on the primary in New Hampshire!?!

6/

So think about that for a second:

the Chair of the Ukraine Caucus claims he asked for an answer about Ukraine aid, NEVER got it, had the chance to get both witnesses and documents that would’ve not just answered his question, but perhaps why he’d never gotten his answer…

7/

…but he votes AGAINST being able to get the answer himself, or allow anyone else to get the answer, because he didn’t like the House’s process (and of course, the House had been stonewalled of every document)?

I can’t imagine a worse answer to Taylor’s question.

8/

Taylor moves on, to the even more problematic role Rob played re Ukraine. This is the phone call he & Trump had on Sept. 11 that became a false cover story that Trump and Portman jointly propagated onto the nation in late September

9/

cincinnati.com/story/opinion/…

Rob & Trump claim that that phone call led to the Ukraine aid being released (that’s false, and Congress already had notice the aid was being released), and they claim that Trump’s concern about Europe was the reason for the hold-up (also false).

10/

video.foxnews.com/v/608953978900…

Taylor basically explains how the narrative was false, then asks Rob the perfect question: “So do you think the president was not being truthful with you on that call about the reason he withheld the aid?”

Perfect. Should've been asked months ago..

11/

spectrumnews1.com/oh/cincinnati/…

Rob plays cute: “Well, he didn’t do a laundry list of reasons. My point was that in my call with him, he only raised one issue and that was that —“

spectrumnews1.com/oh/cincinnati/…

12/

But Taylor cuts him off: “Do you think he was being honest, though, with that one issue? Because his legal team kind of contradicted it moving forward.”

Exactly. They sent you out to say something false, and you did exactly what they told you to do

spectrumnews1.com/oh/cincinnati/…

13/

Stunningly, Rob’s OK with even that!

“Well, yeah I think he was being very honest in terms of his view about aid. I mean, it’s consistent with what he views about whether it’s aid to NATO or aid to the Koreans”

14/

But the question wasn’t about Trump’s absurd, unhinged view on aid, Rob, and whether he believes his own fantasies.

It was whether him telling you that that was THE reason for the Ukraine aid hold up which you repeated to the world, was dishonest?

15/

You would assume any one, let alone a US Senator, would be troubled that they had been told to lie to the country about something so important.

But Rob actually still covers for the president who put him out there to lie: “yeah I think he was being very honest”

16/

Still, even Rob admits: “Of course, you know, we learned later in the impeachment process and in the trial there were other reasons out there”

I'll say!

But that also means what you said & repeated to the country wasn’t true. That’s a big deal

17/

spectrumnews1.com/oh/cincinnati/…

And again later: “But my only point was in my conversation with him, that was the only issue that he raised. I’m not suggesting he didn’t raise other issues with other people or have other concerns.”

18/

spectrumnews1.com/oh/cincinnati/…

But that’s exactly what you were suggesting to the nation when you told that story about your phone call over and over again, and when Trump echoed it and said you “backed [him] up”


You misled the country, and you’re still defending the guy who put you out there to do it

19/

Bottom line: at least Portman is finally admitting that the false cover story about the phone call did not accurately portray what really happened.

He now admits there were “other issues,” but seems wholly untroubled that he had been put out there to say the opposite.

20/

So Taylor appropriately asks: “Wouldn’t that warrant, then, bringing in witnesses or new evidence just to learn about —“

Portman cuts him off, then basically dodges the question, rambling on about impeachment standards, etc.

21/

spectrumnews1.com/oh/cincinnati/…

But Taylor’s point is dead on: what really happened around this phone call and the wholly false cover story Portman and Trump propagated would've been exposed by witnesses and evidence at the Senate trial.

Mulvaney was on the call, for example.

22/

But by voting against those coming out, Portman voted to protect himself and Trump.

This is why Portman had absolutely no business voting on any of these things at all. He had an enormous conflict of interest, and slammed the door shut on countless unanswered questions.

23/

Finally, Taylor asks Portman about the recent purge of officials by Trump.

Portman’s answer, of course: “Well, in terms of those actions, you serve a president and he has the choice as to who he wants to have in his administration”

24/

spectrumnews1.com/oh/cincinnati/…

Just to enable the president a little more: “I frankly was surprised that some of those individuals stayed as long as they did, given the fact that there must have been a lack of trust there.”

Thank you @TaylorPopielarz for your diligence.

END