rumitoid

The reasoning will go like this for his supporters and maybe others: If the transcript makes him look guilty, why insist people read it? That makes no sense. Ergo, it is just a stunt by democrats and there is no reason to read it. Just trust the president.

However, President Donald Trump's latest defense in the impeachment inquiry is to call on people to "read the transcript" of his July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

But legal experts say the transcript, which is actually a summary of the call and not a verbatim record, is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against Trump.

"This is not hearsay, these are his own words," Asha Rangappa, a lawyer and former FBI special agent told Insider. "What we hear him doing is using congressionally authorized aid as personal leverage for an e******n benefit."

Rangappa said Trump is trying to "normalize the call" and his insistence that the conversation was "perfect" amounts to a "Jedi mind trick."

resident Donald Trump has echoed this over and over in recent days while continuing to insist he's done nothing wrong amid the escalating impeachment inquiry.

Trump seemingly believes a memo the White House released on his July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is exonerating, but legal experts say it's an extremely damning piece of evidence and that releasing it could be the biggest mistake the administration has made in the escalating scandal.

The document, which contrary to Trump's characterization is not a verbatim transcript but a summary of the call, shows Trump urging a foreign leader to investigate a top political rival. This could constitute an abuse of power that undermines US national security.

The so-called transcript is also corroborated by other documents and witness testimony in the impeachment inquiry that Trump has sought to discredit. To put it another way, Trump handed investigators evidence that could potentially be instrumental in him becoming the third president to be impeached.

Asha Rangappa, a lawyer, former FBI special agent, and Yale lecturer, told Insider the White House summary on the call "is one of the most damning pieces of evidence we've received."

"This is not hearsay, these are his own words," Rangappa added. "And what we hear him doing is using congressionally authorized aid as personal leverage for an e******n benefit."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-wants-people-read-one-184800387.html

Ricktloml

Oh good grief, there are just as many "legal experts" who say the transcript exonerates President Trump. What is a fact is Schiff outright lied when he pretended to read the transcript, and he made the whole thing up. THAT of course is just fine with you l*****ts because for you the end always justifies the corrupt means

CarryOn

Exactly … and I think the t-shirts should say, "Read the Transcript … and Watch Quid Pro Quo Joe's Video"

PeterS

The trouble for Trump is that there are too many transcripts for people to read. Fortunately next week we can listen to Trump's accusers as they speak about what Trump wanted to be done and we won't have to worry about no sorry ass transcripts.

This is what Republicans wanted and this is what they are going to get. No transcripts please. Just tell me the bad news and we can all go home...

Wonttakeitanymore

Just quit using our tax dollars to fund your h**e! We v**ed for him, the witch didn’t win! Ovomit was a dismal failure get over it and let our president do his job making America great again! God blessed America and will continue to do do in spite of “ you people “!!!!!

kemmer

Hahahahaha.... At the top of the "transcript", it says in red block letters, THIS IS NOT A TRANSCRIPT.
It's simply a summary.

nonalien1 Loc: Mojave Desert

If the transcript is the most damaging evidence against him, I say case dismissed back to work. GO. TRUMP!!

kemmer

It’s not. Please pay attention.

CarryOn

Your first paragraph makes no sense. So it's "trouble for Trump" if people DO NOT read all the transcripts, but better for the dems if the whole of the testimony is revealed. Hmmm ….

What the Republicans want is fairness and t***sparency. The dems are now allowing testimony of all future witnesses to be done in public …. but it makes all of us wonder why the first witnesses were deposed in secret. Even if the written testimony of those early witnesses is made public, it doesn't speak to the limitations placed on Republicans in their questioning or the potential witness coaching by shifty ….. nor does it allow the public to actually watch the witnesses respond … which is often more revealing than the verbal response itself.

None of this will matter when it gets to the Senate, because all of shifty's shenanigans will be exposed and the dems will be revealed for the sorry ass, biased, unethical, immoral, Trump-hating fools that they are … no transcripts needed for that revelation.

Ricktloml

Exactly. Are the former witnesses going to be recalled, (the Democrat/socialists sure don't mind recalling President Trump's appointees and associates,) so the Republicans can publicly question them?

CarryOn

If shifty does not allow them to be recalled in the House investigations, then I hope the Senate can call them for a very public grilling …. if it even gets that far ….

kemmer

Mitch McTurtle and Miss Lindsey Graham have already stated that the Senate will acquit Trump no matter what kind of evidence or testimony is presented.

Both of them should be expelled from the Senate.

CarryOn

Well, first of all, if anybody ought to be expelled from Congress it is shifty … he is a proven liar, with plenty of video evidence from just about every news outlet, as evidence.

McConnell and Graham are more informed of what is going on in this sham of an investigation than any of us. They most likely already have enough information from those who are involved to know that this whole thing is a farce. From the questionable wb claim, to shifty's connections with said wb, to the now released proof of bias of the wb's attorney and his long standing plan to get this president impeached, etc., etc., etc. When President Zelensky himself .. you know, the other major participant in the phone call in question … publicly states "no push," "no pressure," "no quid pro quo" …… then that may be good enough for them. All the Senate has to do is ask Zelensky to provide them with a statement … Over and done ….

…. but it would be fun if they first put the wb, as well as h****r and joe, in the hotseat …. just to watch them squirm for a while ….

kemmer

You live in an astonishing dream world. Graham said in effect Trump was too stupid to plan a quid pro quo.

CarryOn

FYI He did end up reading the testimony (which should make you feel infinitely better), and his conclusion is that the administration’s Ukraine policy was too 'incoherent' for it to have orchestrated the quid pro quo that is at the heart of the probe.

His exact words were:

"What I can tell you about the Trump policy toward the Ukraine, it was incoherent. It depends on who you talk to. They seem to be incapable of forming a quid pro quo."

He did not call Trump stupid. While it obviously was not meant as a compliment, he appeared to be referring to the group of witnesses called by shifty and their "incoherent" testimonies.