RUSH: Just before the end of the previous hour, John Ratcliffe of Texas was questioning Ambassador Taylor. And he said, “Can either of you, by the way, can either of you two guys –” he didn’t say that, but, I mean, you’ve got these two foreign policy nerds up there, these Obama holdovers, and they’re ticked off. In fact, some Democrat babe just asked them, “So, there are two foreign policy channels, there’s the regular foreign policy channel that you’re in and the irregular foreign policy channel that the president used?”
(doing impression) “Yes, that’s exactly right, Madam Congresswoman, exactly right, irregular and irregular foreign policy channels. Of course, we at the interagency group here needing to talk about assistance –” use all this gobbledygook lingo. So Ratcliffe says, “Can either of you two guys name for me the impeachable offense here? Can you name for me the impeachable offense in the phone call?” Dead silence. Absolute dead silence. Taylor doesn’t say anything, Kent doesn’t say anything, they look at each other, nothing.
Then Ratcliffe tries to make a point and Schiff moves in, and Schiff starts trying to stop the line of questioning, and a kerfuffle happens. While the kerfuffle is going on with Schiff trying to make sure that no damage occurs, Taylor is trying to get everybody’s attention. He’s raving around, he’s pointing. He wants to say something.
He finally wants to answer the question: Is there anything in this phone call impeachable? Schiff sees that, stops the kerfuffle. “Ambassador Taylor, did you want to answer this?” (impression) “Yes, I do, in my Walter Cronkite voice, I definitely want to answer the question about the impeachable offense in the phone call. I definitely do.”
So Schiff thinks, my God, finally nirvana. And you know what Taylor said? “I want to remind everybody here, I’m not here dealing with impeachment. I’m not here to deal with partisan things. I’m not here, I have no interest in the outcome.” You could have heard the lead balloon drop on the chairman’s chair.
So Ratcliffe finally finds his way through the goop. “Can either of you two guys tell me what the impeachable offense is here?” Nothing. Dead silence. And then Taylor says, “I just want to remind everybody, I’m not here for that. I don’t know. I am not interested in partisanship or the outcome.”
So the answer to the question, “Could either of you two guys identify the impeachable offense,” is, “No, we don’t know what the impeachable offense is.” Pelosi, are you getting close to making a decision on shutting this down? Look. That’s not all. Then Jim Jordan. Jim Jordan was great. It might have been Ratcliffe. I’m not sure. But I think it was Jordan.
Somebody said, just observing to the two witnesses, somebody said, “Look, so here’s what I’ve picked up today. Four people are saying five different things in six different conversations, and that gave you your clear understanding?” Now, what Jordan’s getting at here is that these guys don’t know Trump, they’ve not talked to Trump, that everything they’re saying is their opinion based on what they have been told by others.
Remember Taylor said in the last 40 minutes, “My understanding is only coming from people I talk to. My understanding of these events is only coming from people I’ve talked to.” And then Kent chimed in with his being an expert in anti-corruption and rule-of-law issues for 16 years. That may be my favorite of the whole day. “Yes, I am a 16-year expert in anti-corruption and rule-of-law issues.”
So Taylor admits that he only knows anything because of what people have told him. So Jordan summarizes it. It might have been Ratcliffe. Four people, and they would be Yovanovitch, Sondland, Kent, and Taylor, so four people are saying five different things, came out of six different conversations, and that gave you your clear understanding?
And Taylor says, “I’m not advocating either position. I want it known that I’m not advocating –” So Taylor has been reduced now to two times, maybe three times in the last 35 minutes, imploring everybody to understand here that he’s not advocating anything, which is classic diplospeak. It is classic diplomatic gobbledygook. And this is why I have a problem with him.
“I’m not advocating either position.” Why not? If one position is clearly right and one is wrong, why not advocate the one that’s right? But you see, diplomats can’t do that. You know what the key to diplomacy is, folks? Honestly. Do you know what it is? Never solving anything. Diplomacy is pure one thousand percent devotion to process, not solutions. Because when solutions happen, bureaucracies are no longer needed. When solutions occur, diplomacy is no longer needed, and diplomats are no longer needed. And, folks, I am not exaggerating.
These people, it is clear, they are experts in process. They love the process of diplomacy. The substance, it’s just an element of the process. And with every key juncture, William Taylor, “I’m not advocating either position.” — even when asked, “Can you name the impeachable offense?” silence. “I want everybody to know I’m not here for that. That’s not why I’m here.” You could surprise Schiff. Schiff thinks that you’re here to help impeach Trump.
Mr. Taylor, Schiff only cares about whether or not you can move the impeachment ball forward. That’s all Schiff cares about. What did you think you were doing here today? I’m only half seriously, half jesting asking that question. What do these guys think they’re doing here today, if they’re not there to advocate a particular position. And of course when does Taylor say that? He says that at every juncture the Democrats are gonna take it in the shorts. “I’m not interested in either position. I’m not advocating either position.”
Okay. I’m gonna go back to the phones. It’s been a while. People have been waiting patiently, and I feel guilty that I haven’t gotten enough in. So we go to Greer, South Carolina. This is Larry. I’m glad you waited, Larry. Great to have you. How are you doing?
CALLER: I’m doing fine, and hello. I really was struck when they said — and I asked the call screener if you guys had caught it — when they said that these emerging and young democracies have to be taught not to use their justice system for political purposes and retribution. And I thought, why are you testifying in front of this body, then, if that’s the case? And where the heck were they in 2012 when the IRS was stealing the free speech rights of the right-wingers during the election?
RUSH: Wait a minute. See, that is a classic, classic example of diplospeak and devotion to process. Tell me again what one of them said.
CALLER: Emerging and young democracies have to be taught not to use their justice system for political purposes and retribution.
RUSH: Okay. Now, look at what’s contained in there. First there’s arrogance. Then there’s condescension. And then there is the belief that these emerging and young countries don’t know what they’re doing until these two guys come in and tell ’em how to do things. And then they say they must be taught not to use their justice system for political purposes and retribution. Well, as you so correctly point out, then maybe we should use the FBI and the CIA and their involvement in the 2016 presidential election as an example of what shouldn’t be done, right?
CALLER: That’s exactly correct. The Obama administration used every bit of the surveillance state to surveil a political opponent in Donald Trump and his transition and his presidency.
RUSH: Right. So we, a big democracy in a big country, we can do it, but you little small fry, don’t you do it, because I am an expert in anti-corruption and rule of law. And I’m lurking out here to nail you with my expertise in anti-corruption and rule of law. And you young, upstart little democracies that couldn’t get across the street without us, you better not use your Justice Department for political purposes. Classic illustration. Total classic.
CALLER: It would seem to me if they truly believe that, they need to start teaching it in Washington, D.C.
RUSH: Exactly.
CALLER: They seem to be in the right spot to teach that lesson.
RUSH: Exactly. But they don’t believe it. They don’t believe it. It sounds great. It’s one of these things that’s gonna get all kinds of great applause from politically correct liberals. See, these are brilliant people. They understand fairness, and they understand diplomacy. They understand how to treat people. In other words, what these guys are saying, if I may strip this bare, what these guys are saying is, to young democracies, like you people, you’re running Ukraine, don’t you dare ever act like the Democrat Party in the United States acts. That’s what they’re essentially saying. Of course, they would never admit that’s what they’re saying, but when they call out using the Justice Department to advance political preferences, why, what have we been dealing with here since 2016? Thank you, Larry, very much.
Greg in Atlanta. You’re next. Great to have you with us, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Hello, sir. I’ll make my comment quick. I’ve read the transcripts. Millions of people have read the transcripts. That simple fact puts me and all of us who have read the transcripts at least two steps, I think it’s more in the case of Taylor, closer to the call than either of these guys when they originally got their dander up or panties in a twist or whatever you want to call it.
Unlike Taylor and Kent, our opinion was not tainted by all the intermediate points of contact, you know, that little telephone game they played, “Oh, I heard it from someone who heard it from someone.” But why wasn’t I called to testify? Or any of us, for that matter, called to testify instead of these two guys —
RUSH: Oh, come on now, you know the answer to why you weren’t called to testify. These guys were called to testify specifically because — see, this is the danger. Let’s go back to something, folks, that is very, very relevant and very important for you to remember when putting all of this in context. Whatever it was, two weeks ago, three weeks, it may be a month now, when Schiff was conducting a hearing, it was not officially an impeachment inquiry, he was conducting a hearing.
And he read what he wanted people to think was from the transcript of Trump’s call with the president-of-Ukraine in which he said that Trump told the president of Ukraine, “You’re gonna dig up dirt on my political opponent. You’re gonna make it up if you have to. And I’m gonna tell you this seven times. And you don’t get any aid from us until you do it. And furthermore, I don’t want to hear back from you until you’ve dug up the dirt or made it up on my political opponent.”
That’s what Schiff said Trump told the Ukraine president. It was 30 minutes later that finally a Republican called him out on it. But the point is Adam Schiff totally made it up. Donald Trump did not order anybody to make up dirt or to dig up dirt. And he did not tell the president of Ukraine that you’re not gonna get aid ’til you have found me some dirt on Biden, because they got their aid, and there still hasn’t been an investigation.
But the point is Trump didn’t say it. Schiff made it up. So Schiff starts out with a lie because he doesn’t have what he wants. He wants people to think that’s what Trump said, but Trump didn’t say it. So now he starts these hearings behind closed doors, leaking excerpts of depositions, and he does the same thing. He’ll take Taylor in a 30-minute answer and leak two sentences from it out of context to make it look like Taylor said something he didn’t say or any of these other witnesses.
So they build a case that’s based on lies, made-up lies that Schiff is hoping, then, in public to be able to make people believe are true. That’s what he’s doing here today. And Taylor and Kent can’t come through because Schiff has set them up to do something they can’t do. And that is name an impeachable offense that Trump has engaged in on that phone call.
So Schiff starts out building a lie, then builds a case around the lie, gets the media believing the lie and the case, then feels they’re ready to go public. And this is what Jonathan Turley means in his column today; they don’t have a foundation for any of this. Because there isn’t any evidence.
Trump did not do what Schiff wants you to think he did. Schiff knows Trump didn’t say those things. Schiff is making it up and he’s lying. It’s psychopathic. But it’s also classically political. He’s making it up and hoping, then, to build a case the American people will believe on the lie. And today we go public with it at all and this is where the magic is supposed to happen.
At the end of this day what Schiff was hoping is that his witnesses would convince enough Americans that Trump had indeed said, “You make up the dirt, you dig up dirt, I don’t care how you do it, you get dirt on Biden or you’re not getting the aid.” But that didn’t happen. Schiff has an impossible task here. I wouldn’t say impossible. I think it’s been done. There are still people asking, “What did Nixon really do? I’ve never really understood what Nixon did.”
But Nixon was the victim of complete total bipartisanship. Schiff is pulling this off, trying to on the basis of a fabrication that he is hoping witnesses will, if he can control the questioning, which is he trying to do, he wants these two witnesses to actually confirm the lie that he told of whatever it was three weeks, a month ago.
This is where the Democrats have been throughout this entire procedure with Trump-Russia collusion, the Steele dossier, whatever it is, they have never had evidence. Trump has not done anything they’ve accused him of doing. He hasn’t committed a crime, impeachable offense nowhere, anywhere, at any time, during any of this. At the end of the day that’s why Pelosi’s gonna have to do something about this because there’s nothing underneath this to hold it up.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Here are the sound bites that I was paraphrasing earlier. Up first is John Ratcliffe. He’s from Texas. And he is asking ambassador to Ukraine, William Walter Cronkite Edward R. Murrow Taylor, and deputy assistant secretary of state and expert in anti-corruption and rule of law, George Kent, about impeachment.
RATCLIFFE: In this impeachment hearing today where we impeach presidents for treason, bribery or other high crimes, where is the impeachable offense in that call? Are either of you here today to assert there was an impeachable offense in that call? (:02 second pause) Shout it out. Anyone? (:02 second pause/Ratcliffe then ruffles papers)
TAYLOR: Mr. Radcliffe, if I can just respond, let me just reiterate that I’m not here…
RATCLIFFE: I’ve got one minute left.
TAYLOR: I know you…
RATCLIFFE: Let me just…
TAYLOR: I know you only got a minute left.
RATCLIFFE: …make this point.
TAYLOR: I’ve just got 30 — I’ve got 30…
SCHIFF: Please allow the witness…
RATCLIFFE: I – I…
SCHIFF: …you asked the witness a question. The witness will…
RATCLIFFE: I’ll withdraw the question.
RUSH: Oh, I’m sorry. I thought Taylor’s answer was gonna be part of that. That was the kerfuffle. Schiff says, “Please allow the witness to answer the question.” And Ratcliffe says, “Look. I don’t have a lot of time here. I just wanted these guys to answer the question and move on.” And Schiff said, “You asked the witness a question. The witness will answer the question.” And Ratcliffe, “Okay. I’ll withdraw it.” See, Ratcliffe thinks he’s made the point. He asked the question, there’s two seconds of silence, nobody said anything. And then Taylor finally did, after raising his hand and pointing, he did answer the question.
TAYLOR: I would just like to say that I’m not here to do anything having to do with the country to decide about impeachment. That is not what either of us are here to do. This is your job.
RUSH: Oh. Schiff could be bamboozled by that one. Do you think Schiff thinks that’s why they’re there? You think Schiff believes they’re not there to have anything to do with the country deciding about impeachment? Ms. Pelosi, are you still down with this? Do me a favor. Plays these two things back-to-back, play 26 and 27 again as though they’re one bite in three, two, one.
RATCLIFFE: In this impeachment hearing today where we impeach presidents for treason, bribery or other high crimes, where is the impeachable offense in that call? Are either of you here today to assert there was an impeachable offense in that call? (:02 second pause) Shout it out. Anyone? (:02 second pause/Ratcliffe then ruffles papers)
TAYLOR: Mr. Radcliffe, if I can just respond, let me just reiterate that I’m not here…
RATCLIFFE: I’ve got one minute left.
TAYLOR: I know you…
RATCLIFFE: Let me just…
TAYLOR: I know you only got a minute left.
RATCLIFFE: …make this point.
TAYLOR: I’ve just got 30 — I’ve got 30…
SCHIFF: Please allow the witness…
RATCLIFFE: I – I…
SCHIFF: …you asked the witness a question. The witness will…
RATCLIFFE: I’ll withdraw the question.
TAYLOR: I would just like to say that I’m not here to do anything having to do with the country to decide about impeachment. That is not what either of us are here to do. This is your job.
RUSH: Well, then what the hell are you there for? Why are you there? This is an impeachment hearing, and you are not there, you have nothing to do with the country’s decision about impeachment? Well, what did Schiff tell you your purpose is? Maybe I’m the lone wolf on this, but to me this is rather profound.
We got the two witnesses that are gonna nail Trump today, according to all the prepublicity, we’re gonna have blockbuster news, we’re gonna have one of the greatest dramatic TV shows ever, Adam Schiff and the Democrats are gonna finally nail Donald Trump. And the star witness says six hours into it that he’s not there for impeachment.
(Taylor impression) “I’m not here to do anything having to do with having the country decide about impeachment. I’m not interested in the outcome here. That’s not what either of us are here for. It’s your job.”
No, folks, I don’t believe that. No, no, no. These are diplomats, (doing diplomat impression) “Oh, I don’t have an opinion on anything other than I think Trump’s a rotgut smear. No, I don’t have an opinion, I don’t know anything other than what I’ve been told, and what I’ve been told is that Trump and Giuliani are subhuman primates. I don’t know why I’m here.”
Well, I’ll guarantee you Adam Schiff knows why you’re there, and you’re the star witnesses. You’re the first two witnesses. You are the guys nailing the coffin shut on the presidency of Donald Trump.
Up next, this is Jim Jordan. This is about 15 minutes prior to the bite that we just played. This is Jim Jordan literally destroying Taylor’s clear understanding. Taylor, remember, is saying: “My understanding is only coming from people I’ve spoken to.” Taylor hasn’t talked to Trump, Taylor was not on the phone call, Taylor doesn’t know anything other than what he’s been told, and this is what Jordan is reacting to.
JORDAN: What you have in front of you is an addendum that Mr. Sondland made to his testimony that we got a couple of weeks ago. It says: “Declaration of Ambassador Gordon Sondland, I, Gordon Sondland, do hereby swear and affirm as follows.”
I want you to look at bullet point number two, second sentence. “Ambassador Taylor recalls that Mr. Morrison told Ambassador Taylor that I told Mr. Morrison that I conveyed this message to Mr. Yarmack on September 1st, 2019 in connection with Vice President Pence’s visit to Warsaw, and a meeting with President Zelensky.”
And this is his clarification. We got six people having four conversations in one sentence and you just told me this is where you got your clear understanding. This is what I can’t believe, and you’re their star witness. You’re their first witness. You’re the guy, based on this, based on, I mean, I’ve seen church prayer chains that are easier to understand than this.
RUSH: That was well done. That was bye-bye, Taylor. I want to play this again, because he’s literally reading from amended testimony by Gordon Sondland. Now, Taylor has testified to all this stuff today, but he doesn’t know anything firsthand. He’s the star witness, he doesn’t know anything firsthand. And here is Jim Jordan putting it in its proper characterization.
JORDAN: What you have in front of you is an addendum that Mr. Sondland made to his testimony that we got a couple of weeks ago. It says: “Declaration of Ambassador Gordon Sondland, I, Gordon Sondland, do hereby swear and affirm as follows.”
I want you to look at bullet point number two, second sentence. “Ambassador Taylor recalls that Mr. Morrison told Ambassador Taylor that I told Mr. Morrison that I conveyed this message to Mr. Yarmack on September 1st, 2019 in connection with Vice President Pence’s visit to Warsaw, and a meeting with President Zelensky.”
And this is his clarification. We got six people having four conversations in one sentence and you just told me this is where you got your clear understanding. This is what I can’t believe, and you’re their star witness. You’re their first witness. You’re the guy, based on this, based on, I mean, I’ve seen church prayer chains that are easier to understand than this.
RUSH: Right. And what is this about? This is about a phone call. This is about a whistleblower’s report of a phone call and the whistleblower didn’t hear it, either. A phone call for which a transcript has been released and everybody knows what was said. And so all of this hearsay regarding the phone call is irrelevant. And the two star witnesses were not even on the phone call and are admitting that their testimony results from what other people have told them they think about what happened.
Ms. Pelosi, how much life does this have left in it? What is the real objective here? Because if this was to be the beginning of nails in the coffin of the Trump presidency, your nail gun is shooting blanks.