After careful use of breaks to extend testimony; provide mid-morning and mid-day press statements by impeachment Chairman Adam Schiff; and maximize the manipulation of Ambassador Sondland’s testimony, the impeachment committee gavels back into session late in the day to continue their construct.

For this late evening session two deep state operatives, Laura Cooper, Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary for Ukrainian and Eurasian affairs and David Hale, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, continue the impeachment effort:

Fox News Livestream – Fox Business Livestream – PBS Livestream Link

.

.

Representatives Michael Turner, Jim Jordan, John Ratcliffe and Elise Stefanik question the multitude of contradictions present in the testimony of Ambassador Gordon Sondland.

Michael Turner called Sondland’s testimony “somewhat circular,” and questioned the ambassador’s assertion that “everyone was in the loop.”

.

Additionally, Rep. Jim Jordan questioned Gordon Sondland about his testimony there was a “quid pro quo” in which U.S. aid and a White House meeting were contingent on Ukraine agreeing to investigate the 2016 elections and the Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

.

Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, questioned Gordon Sondland.

.

Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., questioned Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, on Nov. 20, in a public hearing as part of the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump.

.

Last month Nikki Haley purchased a $2.4 million home in Kiawah Island, Charleston county, South Carolina (link).   Nikki Haley released her book “With All Due Respect” on November 12th (link).  Mrs. Haley also took a position on the board of directors for Boeing Co, likely an extension of success for her prior efforts recruiting Boeing to the state. (link)

The board position, home purchase and book tour follows a very predictable pattern for those who follow GOPe politics closely.  Indeed, there is speculation Nikki Haley was/is positioning for a 2024 presidential bid; speculation that generally aligns with the pattern.

However, there are some recent Big Club moves that indicate a slightly different timeline; perhaps a dual-purposed timeline.  [All citations embedded] Ambassador Haley has launched a Super-PAC [FEC Registration ID C00679472]  called “Stand For America“.  SuperPAC’s are not required to file extensive information.

In addition Haley has launched a similarly named Stand For America website (LINK) with the accompanying 501-c(4) non-profit status; and launched the accompanying traditional source & social media affiliates [ YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram ] you would expect to see with an advanced political campaign.

It appears the registration for most of the activity is currently in New York, NY.   In combination with the board and book it takes a team to manage the totality of the political network as constructed.  That team means financing. The network has to get paid.

Now, at first blush – to the casual observer, this level of political apparatus would generally indicate an aspiring campaign infrastructure.  However, two parts of the assembly are too advanced to be projecting a position five-years into the future.

(1) Putting a SuperPAC together, “Stand For America”, immediately requires a legal assembly while affording the benefit of unlimited donor contributions.  Only at the point where the candidate declares an intent to run for office does a leadership PAC (more traditional) become the vehicle for limited campaign contributions; and a disconnect between the candidate and the SuperPAC becomes legally required.

(2) The more interesting aspect, that indicates a more earlier timed entry into elections, is the visibility of the RNC sharing the Trump donor base with Nikki Haley allowing Stand For America to start contacting Trump donors and requesting preliminary “registration” for support.  If you have contributed directly to Donald Trump you are likely receiving email contacts from Nikki Haley via Stand For America right now.

Nikki Haley, via Stand For America’s initial use of the RNC provided database, appears to be requesting recipients to sign up or “register their support”; they are also providing the opportunity to donate directly to the SuperPAC.  The infrastructure for donations is fully assembled.  [Donations to qualified SuperPAC’s do not need to be reported to FEC]

It would be almost too proactive to have this advanced infrastructure for a 2024 race.  The RNC data-sharing of the MAGA voter/donor files is also curiously early for a 2024 race.

Considering the abject lack of activity from RNC President Ronna McDaniel in actual electioneering work; and considering the failures (inactivity) of the RNC in the 2018 mid-terms and the 2019 elections; Ms. McDaniel’s only significant accomplishment has been the fundraising….

…And that fundraising is entirely because of people donating to President Trump.

The RNC is riding the coattails of President Trump’s ability to generate small donor support.  The RNC database has grown ONLY because of the historic scale of small grass-roots donors to President Trump.  Nothing RNC President Ronna McDaniel has done independently has contributed to the success of RNC fundraising.  The RNC is notably absent in the actual ground-level work for local candidates; heck, many local races don’t even have a republican candidate (see Virginia).

So the questions are: Why is the RNC sharing the data-file of President Trump’s donors right now?  Why is Ronna McDaniel giving future candidate Nikki Haley access to those valuable donor lists four years ahead of a Nikki Haley campaign?

One concerning answer to that question might be the current status of the impeachment effort.   The email from Nikki Haley’s PAC actually seems to lean in that direction.  They don’t mean to expose themselves, but they do.

Notice the contact subject line: “I will always stand with our president”…  Then notice how the body of the contact has nothing to do with Nikki Haley supporting President Trump:

…Instead the body of the information is entirely about promoting Nikki Haley, it doesn’t mention President Trump even once.

If you decide to click on the link to “become a founding member”, again it takes you to the registration for Nikki Haley’s SuperPAC. Screengrab below:

Put it all together and there is a very nefarious picture from the Club.

As we said earlier; Haley would be crushed if she came out to challenge President Trump or was seen to be positioned against the MAGA voters.  So Haley is doing what Haley does best, she is positioning her most immediate political self-interest to receive maximum benefit by riding in the Trump passenger seat.

If the DC UniParty is successful in eliminating, or fatally wounding President Trump, Haley will proclaim her support in an effort to replace him.

That’s how Haley works.

Haley is the female version of Mitt Romney.

Haley has a plan.

2024 if necessary, but 2020 if possible.

The RNC Club supports the plan.

Chopper pressers are the best pressers. Earlier today President Trump delivered impromptu remarks to the media as he departed the White House traveling to Austin, Texas.

The President Trump is traveling to Austin, Texas to tour the Apple Manufacturing Plant. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, Ambassador Gordon Sondland testifies before the House Intel Committee. [Video below, Transcript Added]

.

[Transcript] – THE PRESIDENT: So, thank you very much. We’re going to Austin, Texas. Apple is opening up a fantastic facility. They’re spending a tremendous amount of money. And I’ve been asking Tim Cook from the day I got elected — from the campaign, I’ve been asking Tim Cook to, if they would, we want to see Apple build here; that way, you have no tariffs. There’s no tariffs. When companies come to our country and they build, there’s no tariffs.

The economy is doing unbelievably well. We continue to talk to China. China wants to make a deal. The question is: Do I want to make a deal? Because I like what’s happening right now. We’re taking in billions and billions of dollars.

I’m going to go very quickly — just a quick comment on what’s going on in terms of testimony with Ambassador Sondland. And I just noticed one thing, and I would say that means it’s all over. “What do want from Ukraine?” he asks me, screaming. “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories.” This is Ambassador Sondland speaking to me. Just happened. To which I turned off the television.

“What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories…What do you want?” “What do you want?” “It was a very short and abrupt conversation” that he had with me. They said, “He was not in a good mood.” I’m always in a good mood. I don’t know what that is. He just said — now he’s talking about what my response.

So, he’s going: ‘What do you want? What do you want? I hear all these theories. What do you want?’ Right?

And now, here’s my response that he gave — just gave. Ready?

You have the cameras rolling?

“I want nothing.” “That’s what I want from Ukraine.” That’s what I said. “I want nothing.” I said it twice. So, he goes — he asks me the question: “What do you want? I keep hearing all of these things. What do you want?” He finally gets me — I don’t know him very well. I have not spoken to him much. This is not a man I know well. Seems like a nice guy, though. But I don’t know him well. He was with other candidates. He actually supported other candidates — not me. Came in late.

But here’s my response. Now, if you weren’t fake news, you’d cover it properly.

I’d say to the Ambassador in response: “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky” — President Zelensky — “to do the right thing.” So here’s my answer: “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Then he says, “This is the final word…from the President of the United States.” “I want nothing.”

Thank you, folks. Have a good time. I’m going to Texas.

END 11:40 A.M. EST

[White House] Ambassador Sondland’s testimony made clear that in one of the few brief phone calls he had with President Trump, the President clearly stated that he ‘wanted nothing’ from Ukraine and repeated ‘no quid pro quo over and over again.’ In fact, no quid pro quo ever occurred. The U.S. aid to Ukraine flowed, no investigation was launched, and President Trump has met and spoken with President Zelensky. Democrats keep chasing ghosts.”  ~Stephanie Grisham

Day four of the public impeachment hearings again takes place in two parts. Gordon Sondland, U.S. Ambassador to the European Union, will testify first at the public hearing before the House Intelligence Committee at 9am ET.

In the afternoon session Laura Cooper, Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary for Ukrainian and Eurasian affairs and David Hale, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, will be testifying at 2:30pm ET

Fox News Livestream – Fox Business Livestream – PBS Livestream Link

.

.

There are three current court cases that touch upon whether the House “impeachment inquiry” is following a constitutional process.

♦The first case is the House Oversight effort to gain President Trumps’ tax returns as part of their impeachment ‘inquiry’ and oversight.  That case is currently on-hold (10-day stay) in the Supreme Court; outcome pending.

♦The second case is the House Judiciary Committee (HJC) effort to gain the grand jury information from the Mueller investigation.  The decision by DC Judge Beryl Howell was also stayed by a three member DC Appellate court.  Oral arguments were November 12th, the decision is pending. [Depending on outcome, could also go to SCOTUS]

♦The third case is the HJC effort to force the testimony of former White House legal counsel Don McGahn.  Issue: subpoena validity.  The HJC has asked for an expedited ruling. Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson has announced she will deliver her ruling on Monday, November 25th:

WASHINGTON DC – […] “The Judiciary Committee anticipates holding hearings after HPSCI’s public hearings have concluded and would aim to obtain Mr. McGahn’s testimony at that time,” the committee wrote, referring to the impeachment inquiry hearings led by the House Intelligence Committee. “Thus, there is an urgent need for final resolution of the matter now pending before this Court.”

The House’s letter to federal Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson in Washington points out that it is considering impeaching Trump for obstruction of justice, for which McGahn would be a key witness since he spoke to special counsel Robert Mueller for the obstruction investigation, and for lying to Mueller, after testimony at Roger Stone’s criminal trial raised questions about Trump’s written answers to investigators about Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Jackson said she will rule by the end of the day Monday. (read more)

The issue at stake is whether the legislative branch can penetrate the constitutional firewall which exists within the separation of powers.

Remember, the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on any ancillary case that touches upon the validity of the House impeachment process.  The Supreme Court has not ruled on any case that touches the impeachment “inquiry”.

In addition to the Trump Tax Case (SCOTUS now), there are two other cases from the HJC where they are attempting to use the framework of a constitutional impeachment process as the underlying authority for their endeavors.  Those cases are: (1) the Grand Jury  material from the Mueller investigation (DC Court of Appeals); and (2) The Don McGahn subpoena case.

If the House loses the Tax case in SCOTUS or either HJC case in appeals or SCOTUS it will likely mean there is no constitutional foundation for the “impeachment inquiry.”

Without the constitutional recognition of the judicial branch then: (a) Pelosi/Lawfare have to restart the process with a genuine House vote; or (b) the ongoing impeachment process will have no recognized constitutional standing; and (c) the Senate could ignore any House impeachment vote, cast without recognized constitutional standing.

Over the next ten days the status of each case will start to play out in the courts.

Representative Jim Jordan does an outstanding job of encapsulating the impeachment fiasco and motives of entrenched administrative bureaucrats who didn’t like the diplomatic approach taken by President Trump and Special Envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker.

In essence State Dept. officials George Kent and Bill Taylor were butthurt having been cut out of the direct Ukraine policy and diplomacy being organized by State Dept. Special Envoy Kurt Volker.  Additionally, U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch was butthurt about being sidelined and no longer having most influence or access to Ukraine affluence.

Meanwhile, back in Washington DC, Jennifer Williams and Alex Vindman were aghast at President Trump’s direct expectation that Ukraine corruption -writ large- including corrupt officials speaking negatively about the U.S, must cease.  Lt. Col. Vindman, believing he alone had control over White House policy toward Ukraine; and with his feelings hurt because he felt smaller; manufactured a false narrative to his sketchy CIA resistance member Eric Ciaramella to construct a false whistle-blower leak.

Meanwhile, after the Trump-Zelensky call, envoy Kurt Volker arranged a series of meetings and diplomatic contacts with President Zelensky and U.S. officials; people he knew that President Trump would later respect their opinion.  Upon return to debrief President Trump affirmations of intent were made, and a U.S-Ukraine relationship was restarted under new leadership.

“Mr. Volker you did your job”….  WATCH:

.

Earlier today President Trump held a cabinet meeting while allowing a press availability for comments to media. [Video and Transcript Below]

.

[Transcript] – THE PRESIDENT: Well, I want to start by saying that, Rick, you’ve been very special. You’re my friend. You’ve been an incredible representative of this country and this administration. What you’ve done on energy is unsurpassed. I don’t know if anybody has done it better. And you have a fabulous man, at your recommendation, following you up.

SECRETARY PERRY: Indeed.

THE PRESIDENT: And he is going to be very, very outstanding. I have no doubt about it. I know him also. But he was your choice. And what you’ve done, really, would be hard to duplicate.

So you were a great governor of Texas and you were a great Secretary of Energy. And I’m not sure what you were better at, but I can tell you, as far as energy is concerned, we couldn’t have asked for anything better. And I want to thank you for your work. We’re going to be friends for a long time.

SECRETARY PERRY: Yes, indeed. Thank you, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT: So, I want to just thank you for the outstanding job.

SECRETARY PERRY: Well, thank you, Mr. President. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Thank you also for the prayer.

Also, I want to wish Chad — you’re going to be in a very non-controversial position. (Laughter.) And I have no doubt you’re going to do incredibly well. Our numbers on the border have gone down at record levels. People haven’t seen anything. I want to thank Mexico for that, to a large extent.

We have loopholes that are all over the place. They could be changed in, as I say, 15 minutes if the Democrats did something, but they don’t want to do anything. They’re either bad people or incompetent people — one or the other — because it can only be one of those two.

We have three or four loopholes that would make it so easy, but they don’t want to do anything about it. But we’ll get it done. We probably have to wait until 2020 to get it done, so we can control things.

But I just want to thank you very much. It was great meeting your family the other day. And have fun as Acting, and let’s see how things work out.

But the numbers that are being produced at the border now, the decline is record-setting. It’s incredible what’s happened. So — and there are a lot of reasons for it. Mexico has helped. Mexico, as of today, has 27,000 soldiers on our southern border guarding. And they also have soldiers on their — on what they call their southern border. And we call it a different name, but they call it their southern border.

But we have a tremendous amount of help. I think they have about five or six thousand soldiers there. Plus, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, we have agreements signed with them that nobody thought it would even be possible to get. And now, when people come from those countries, we bring them right back. And they’ve been very receptive. They’ve been great. All three countries have been very good.

So there have been tremendous changes made on our border, and I just want to wish you — you’ve been there for a long time, and you’ve seen it in good times and bad times. But right now, it’s been really very strong.

Despite our good economy, we have the greatest economy we’ve ever had. And a lot of people want to come up and take advantage of the economy. And we want them to come up and we want them to be a part of this country, but they have to do it through a legal process. They have to do it legally and they have to do it through merit too. We want people with skill that can come in and help our companies and make us even greater.

But we’re having the greatest economic year we’ve ever had and, I guess you could say, the greatest employment year, because at this moment, we’re close to 160 million people. That’s more people than have ever worked in the history of our country. And African American employment, Asian American employment, and unemployment, by the way — both — because it’s — they are slightly different terms, if you think about it.

But I can talk to our great Secretary of — our new Secretary and very talented Secretary of Labor.

But unemployment and — and employment for African American, for Asian American, for Hispanic American is the best in the history of our country. For women, best in 71 years. I mean, we’re doing numbers that we’ve never done before.

I saw this morning on — it was just announced that Nasdaq, for just this year, is up 27 percent. And, to me, I don’t view it as 27 percent; I view it as jobs. It’s just jobs. Very simple.

The overall stock market is through the roof from the time of the election. It probably — I guess it’s now going to be — it’s to be bordering really on 70 percent from the time of the election. That’s something that nobody would have thought possible.

And they announced another number this morning. That was a number that was very warm to my heart. Since the election, we’ve created $11 trillion in worth. Now, China has gone down by double that number, and we’ve gone up by $11 trillion. So when — whoever it was that was going to be President, they said, “Within two years, China would overtake the United States as the world’s largest economy.” We’re so far ahead of them right now, it’s not even close. And if you have smart people in this position, they’ll never catch us. They’ll never catch us.

So we’ve accumulated — we’ve picked up 11 trillion — not billion, not million — trillion dollars in wealth, in worth, since the time of the election.

And as you probably know, I think the number I saw was $24 trillion down — I think it’s higher than that — for China and for a lot of other countries. If you look at Europe — and that’s despite the fact that Europe is not doing well; despite the fact that China is doing poorly. They’re having the worst year in 57 years. And other things are happening.

The other thing: We’re taking in tremendous — billions and billions of dollars in tariffs. We’re giving some of those to the targeted farmers because China targeted our farmers. So we’re giving some of those tariffs, like — Sonny, I guess we gave $16 billion for last year, $12 billion for the year before, because that’s the amount of money that China took from our farmers in targeting them. And they got it back, and I think the farmers are very, very happy. Now China is buying again.

We just signed a tremendous trade deal with Japan; it’s $40 billion. It’s a tremendous — $40 billion a year. That’s a tremendous trade deal. And a lot of that goes to the farmers and manufacturers and tech companies.

We just signed a deal recently with South Korea, and that’s been a beauty too.

So we have a lot of good things happening. We have to get USMCA signed. Nancy Pelosi can’t get it off her desk. Just can’t do it. The Democrats want to have it. The unions want it. The farmers want it. The manufacturers want it. I think the woman is grossly incompetent.

And we’re having a problem, because Mexico and Canada are calling, saying, “What’s going on?” And it’s sitting on her desk. She doesn’t need Democrats, because the Democrats are going to vote for it. All she has to do is put it up for a vote. She’s said, for months now, “Oh, well, no.” She likes it, she wants it, she likes it, she wants it.

The woman is grossly incompetent. All she wants to do is focus on impeachment, which is just a little pipe dream she’s got. And she can keep playing that game.

And I’ve been told — and who knows if this is so, but I think it’s so; I have pretty good authority on it — that’s she’s using USMCA, because she doesn’t have the impeach — impeachment votes. So she’s using USMCA to get the impeachment vote. And it doesn’t matter, because right now you have a kangaroo court headed by little Shifty Schiff, where we don’t have lawyers, we don’t have witnesses, we don’t have anything.

And yet, I just got to watch — and the Republicans are absolutely killing it. They are doing so well. Because it’s a scam. It’s a big scam. They’re doing something that the Founders never thought possible and the Founders didn’t want.

And they’re using this impeachment hoax for their own political gain to try and damage the Republican Party and damage the President, but it’s had the opposite effect. Because you’ve seen the polls and we’re now the highest — I’m the highest I’ve ever I’ve ever been in the polls. You don’t hear that on television because the news and the Democrats are one and the same. But that’s the story.

One other thing, I thought I’d bring it up while we’re here: I went for a physical on Saturday. My wife said, “Oh, darling, that’s wonderful.” Because I had some extra time. Because it looks like January could be a busy month, if she is able to get the vote, which she should be able to. The woman is highly overrated. The woman is highly incompetent. And if she’s able to get the votes — or maybe she’ll get it by using USMCA.

But I went for a physical. And I came back, my wife said, “Darling, are you okay?” “What’s wrong?” “Oh, they’re reporting you may have had a heart attack.” I said, “Why did I have a heart attack?” “Because you went to Walter Reed Medical Center.” That’s where we go when we get the physicals.

I said, “I was only there for a very short period of time.” I went — did a very routine — just a piece of it; the rest of it takes place in January — did a very routine physical. Visited the family — visited a couple of groups, but visited the family of a young soldier who was very badly injured, who was in the operating room. I toured the hospital for a little while. I was out of there very quickly.

I got back home. And I get greeted with the news that, “We understand you had a heart attack.” I was called by our people in public relations. “Sir, are you okay?” I said, “Okay from what?” “The word is you had a heart attack. CNN said you may have had a heart attack. You had massive chest pains. You went to the hospital.”

These people are sick. They’re sick. And the press really, in this country, is dangerous. We don’t have freedom of the press in this country; we have the opposite. We have a very corrupt media. And I hope they can get their act straightened out because it’s very, very bad and very, very dangerous for our country.

Thank you very much. Go ahead. Please. Thank you. Thank you. Please, go.

Q Mr. President, do believe Lieutenant Colonel Vindman is credible, sir?

THE PRESIDENT: I don’t know him. I don’t know, as he says, “Lieutenant Colonel.” I understand somebody had the misfortune of calling him “Mister,” and he corrected them.

I never saw the man. I understand now he wears his uniform when goes in. No, I don’t know Vindman at all.

What I do know is that even he said that the transcript was correct. And if anybody reads the transcripts — I had two calls with the President of Ukraine, who, by the way, said there was no pressure whatsoever, there was no anything. They don’t — they probably think — they can’t — they probably can’t even understand what’s going on with this country.

But Vindman — I watched him for a little while this morning and I think he — I’m going to let people make their own determination. But I don’t know Vindman. I never heard of him. I don’t know any of these people, other than I have seen one or two a couple of times; they’re ambassadors.

But these are names that are — like Taylor; like Kent, with the nice bowtie. Wonderful bowtie. Maybe I’ll get one for myself someday. I don’t know who Kent is. I don’t know who Taylor is. All of these people are talking about — they heard a conversation of a conversation of another conversation that was had by the President.

What’s going on is a disgrace and it’s an embarrassment to our nation. And, in the meantime, we can’t get USMCA approved because Nancy Pelosi is grossly incompetent. She is incompetent. And you’re about to find that out.

Thank you all very much. Thank you.

Q The China deal. It’s been a month since the agreement in principle —

THE PRESIDENT: Say it?

Q It’s been a month since you had an agreement in principle. I was wondering if you can explain what the holdup is.

THE PRESIDENT: Look, China is going to have to make a deal that I like. If they don’t, that’s it. Okay? I’m very happy with China right now. They’re paying us billions and billions. We’ll be over a hundred billion dollars in the not-too-distant future. China — they never gave us 10 cents.

And I’ve told you: I gave a lot of money to the farmers. I’m helping people that need help because China is paying us tremendous — and they’re paying for it. Those tariffs are not paid by us. Those tariffs are paid because they’re devaluing their currency and pouring cash into their economy. Their supply chains are being killed. And I said it: They had their worst year in 57 years.

Now, with that being said, I have a good relationship with China. We’ll see what happens, but I’m very happy right now. If we don’t make a deal with China, I’ll just raise the tariffs even higher. Thank you very much.

END 12:04 P.M. EST