Schiff and media narrative about Ukraine is not supported by the witnesses he called
...If Schiff calls these witnesses to the public hearing he will again be embarrassed. There is a reason there is no Republican support for his coup attempt. The charges are baseless. Schiff does have allies in the media who are willing to ignore the facts and push the Democrat narrative, but the left-wing media has long since lost control of all the media and is constantly being exposed. The same people who pushed the Russian collusion hoax and never apologized for it are the same people who pushed the sex ring hoax against Kavanaugh and never apologized for it, should not expect us to believe them this time when they are so eager to ignore the facts that contradict their narrative and pretend that the Bidens were not engaged in corruption and influence pedaling.
Despite the countless headers, amounting to little more than leaks from Adam Schiff and anonymous “insiders,” once the Schiff hearings got underway it was clear the factual basis for claiming Trump’s call to Ukraine’s president was improper bore the same relationship to the contents of the call as Schiff’s “parody” of it.The Department of State “star witnesses” in their secret basement hearings proved disastrous for him and the impeachment effort. As the rolled-out transcripts this week reveal. William B Taylor, Jr., was the senior American diplomat in Ukraine. He “admitted in congressional testimony last month that he was not part of the July 25 phone call between the U.S. and Ukrainian presidents, that he didn’t see a transcript or readout of it until late September when it was declassified and released, and that he has never even spoken to President Donald Trump.” His source for the president’s intentions was the New York Times.If the Times had somehow read into the anodyne Trump-Zelensky conversation Trump’s mind, it was clear that there was no evidence their mind-reading was accurate. Not only did Ukraine’s president deny any pressure, but the timeline of military aid doesn’t follow the Times’ fable:Under questioning from Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, Taylor also testified that the Ukrainian government wasn’t aware U.S. military funding had been temporarily suspended until late August, and then only after the information was leaked to the news media, meaning an alleged quid pro quo would have been impossible.“So, if nobody in the Ukrainian government is aware of a military hold at the time of the Trump-Zelensky call, then, as a matter of law and as a matter of fact, there can be no quid pro quo, based on military aid,” Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor, said. “I just want to be real clear that, again, as of July 25th, you have no knowledge of a quid pro quo involving military aid.”“July 25th is a week after the hold was put on the security assistance,” Taylor testified. “And July 25th, they had a conversation between the two presidents, where it was not discussed.”“And to your knowledge, nobody in the Ukrainian government was aware of the hold?” Ratcliffe asked.“That is correct,” Taylor responded.Taylor also testified that he didn’t see any official readout of the July 25 phone call until it was declassified and released by Trump in late September.“I did not see any official readout of the call until it was publicly released on September 25th,” he said.Taylor also admitted that U.S. Ambassador to the EU, Ambassador Gordon Sondland, “told me many times that President Trump said it was not a quid pro quo.” He also admitted that Ukraine’s president never committed to conduct the investigations that the President asked for before military aid was released to Ukraine.Lost in all this is an even more serious reason to question the wisdom the bureaucrats' in the foreign policy and national security establishments rush to provide military assistance to Ukraine -- evidence of “Chinese attempts to buying up some Ukrainian technology.” Something about which the administration rightfully had serious concerns."[T]here is substantial reason to question a key underlying assumption of the House Democratic narrative that Ukraine is a such a reliable friend of the United States, deserving of our unquestioned support to combat Russian aggression, that President Trump’s hesitancy in immediately releasing the military aid jeopardized vital U.S. national security interests. Combating Chinese military ambitions is certainly vital to U.S. national security.”A second witness, former State Department official George Kent, did no more to advance Schiff’s case for impeachment than did Taylor. Kent raised concerns about the “appearance of conflict of interest stemming from [Hunter} Biden’s position on Burisma’s board and testified “that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovich was prepared by the Obama State Department to address questions about Mr. Biden’s position during her Senate confirmation process.”As this was during the time Hunter’s father, Joe Biden, then Obama’s vice president, was running Ukraine policy, it means the Obama administration was well aware of the problem....