Mulvaney Tears Into Wallace Quid Pro Quo Argument, 'I Did Not Say That'

White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney laced into Fox News anchor Chris Wallace after the host insisted that he said there was a quid pro quo with the Ukraine.
Quid Pro Quo has become the catch phrase for journalists this past week as they insist that Mulvaney “admitted” to having one.
Anyone who listened to the press conference Mulvaney gave should be able to know that is not what he said, and that is what he explained to Wallace.
Rush Transcript:
WALLACE: All right let’s have a conversation. Here’s my first question. Why did you say that in that briefing that President Trump had ordered a quit pro quote that investigating the Democrats, that aid to Ukraine depended on investigating the Democrats why did you say that.
MULVANEY: Again that’s not what I said that’s what people said I said. I’ll say to get and hopefully people will listen to this.
There are two reasons we held up the aid. We talked about this at some length the first one was the rampant corruption in Ukraine.
Ukraine by the way is so bad in Ukraine that in 2014 Congress passed a law making us requiring us to make sure the corruption was living in the right direction.
Corruption is a big deal and everyone knows it. The president was also concerned that whether or not other nations, specifically European nations were helping with foreign aid to the crane as well.
We talked about that for quite a while. I did that then mentioned in the past of the president had mentioned to me from time to time about the DNC server. He had mentioned this over to other people publicly.
Even mention it to president Zelensky and the phone call but it wasn’t collected to the aid. That’s where I think people got sidetracked up the press conference. Two reasons for holding back the eight –
WALLACE: Let me pursue that the because I believe that anybody listening to what you said in that briefing could come to only one conclusion, let’s play what you said.
MULVANEY AT PRESS CONFERENCE: He also mentioned to me in the past that the corruption related to the DNC server absolutely, no question about that. But that’s it and that’s what we held up the money.
WALLACE: What you just described is a quid pro quo. As funding will not flow unless the investigation into the Democrats server happened as well.
When asked specifically by Jonathan Karl was investigating Democrats one of the conditions for holding up the aide. It was that part of the quid pro quo and you said it happens all the time.
MULVANEY: Go back and watch what I said before that. There is a long answer about corruption. Then I said the exact same thing I just said now which is that he mentioned in passing gas, but the reason we held back the aide with the two reasons I mentioned.
I can prove it. The aide flowed. Once we were able to satisfy ourselves that corruption was actually that they were doing better with it we got that information from our folks from the conversation and once we were able to establish we had the office of management and budget to research and other countries aide to Ukraine it turns out they don’t get any lethal aid but they don’t get a considerable amount of money.
Once those two things were cleared the money flowed. There was never any question between the flow of money and the server.
WALLACE: I hate to go through this but you said what you said in the fact is after that exchange with Jonathan Carl you were asked another time why the aide was held up. What was the condition for the aide. You didn’t mention two conditions, you mentioned three conditions. Let’s listen to all three of them because you stated it very clearly let’s listen.
MULVANEY: Three issues. The corruption in the country, whether or not other countries were participating in support of the Ukraine, and whether or not they were cooperating in an ongoing investigation with our department of department of justice must be that’s completely legitimate.
WALLACE: Not only did you say that investigating the Democrats was one of the three conditions, not to that you would just said that you would talk about coming investigating the Democrats was part of the quid pro quo.
You also said if I made it was part of the Justice Department investigation into the origins of the Russia probe. The fact is that not only the depressed think you said it, here’s what a statement that was put out by the senior justice Department official.
If the White House is withholding aide in regards to the cooperation of any investigation to the department of justice that is news to us. Everybody thinks that’s not what you said and you didn’t. You said right there, three points not to.
MULVANEY: A couple different things you said I said there was a quid pro quo, I never use that language.
WALLACE: You are asked by Jonathan Carl and you said that happens all the time.
MULVANEY: Reporters will use their language all the time. My language never said quid pro quo but that let’s get to the heart of the matter.
Look at that list of three things. What was I talking about? Things that were legitimate for the president to do. It’s legitimate for the president to want to know what’s going on it with the ongoing investigation into the server.
Everybody acknowledges that at least I think most normal people do. It’s completely legitimate to ask about that. Number two, it’s legitimate to tie the aide to corruption, it’s legitimate to tie the aide to foreign aid to other countries.
That’s what I was talking about. Can I see how people looked at the wrong way? Absolutely. There isn’t a quid pro quo. Chris, you’ve been in these briefings you know how back and forth it is you know how rapid-fire it is.
Look to the facts on the ground things that you can actually sort of certified and what should put this issue to bad is that the money flowed without any connection whatsoever to the DNC server.
WALLACE: In your first answer that you gave you said that’s why we held up the money. For if you just said here that it was for two reasons, now you are acknowledging it was for three reasons, if you held up the money for three reasons that’s a quid pro quo. Got a satisfy us on that. Maybe the president backed off that spot that was the proposition here.
MULVANEY: Not acknowledging there’s three reasons.
WALLACE: You said three reasons.
MULVANEY: I recognize that. Go back to what actually happened in the real world. Go to the phone call. Which we have released I hope you get a chance to talk about that.
It’s bigger the president never mentions the eight or at all in the phone call. As an Seo by the way need you to do this this in this or else the money won’t flow.
We all know enough about this president that he feels very strongly about something he’s going to put that out there directly and that didn’t happen.
I recognize that a folks that I didn’t speak clearly maybe on Thursday folks misinterpreted what I said about the facts are absolutely clear and they are there for everybody to see.
WALLACE: In the briefing you flatly denied any connection between holding up the aide and investigating Joe Biden and his son, right? In his phone call with president Zelensky, President Trump specifically mentions the Biden. Give me a favor, pushed all summer that it was investigating the company that paid Hunter Biden.
A former investigation official testified before Congress John Bolton was so disturbed by the way you are directing people to work with Rudy Giuliani he said I am not part of whatever drug deal that he was speaking metaphorically, of whatever drug deal the U.S. Diplomat and Mulvaney are cooking up.
No question you’re following the president’s orders but your fingerprints are all over linking aid to Ukraine with investigating the Biden’s.
MULVANEY: That’s not true, I’ll take one of those of the time which is the Bolton thing because I read that no surprise because John Bolton never complained to me about it, nobody at NSC ever complained to me about anything that was going on.
I didn’t see the testimony this week because none of us have seen the testimony which is another story entirely. I did get a chance to read his opening statement and he said that both the never complained to them, Fiona Hill ever got a chance to complain to them.
WALLACE: Fiona Hill is the one the testified come that’s where the quote came from. She complained to her boss. John Bolton.
MULVANEY: Who did what?
WALLACE: Who told her to go immediately to a lawyer at NSC and to complain about it.
MULVANEY: Who works for John Bolton. John Bolton didn’t say anything to anybody doesn’t that raise a red flag? The first 20 talk but of the president’s phone call because of the end of the day that’s what this is really about. That’s why we are here is the president phone call with Ukraine.
I’ve done the same thing to come I don’t blame you personally commute on the same thing many news outlets have done. You said to me a favor and then immediately to the Biden’s.
Go look at the transcript of the phone conversation. It’s to be a favor and take a look at the DNC server then he talks about corruption in the Ukraine come he talks about Rudy Giuliani, the president of the Ukraine comes he talks about a closed cooperation between the countries.
He talks about corruption come he talks about getting a new ambassador to the U.S. The president gets on and talks about Bill Barr, the president talks about a new ambassador between our countries, and then the very end of that passage mentions the Bidens.
Everybody else puts it on puts it on TV and says do me a favor look at the Bidens. Go look at the transcript yourself.
Mulvaney Tears Into Wallace Quid Pro Quo Argument, 'I Did Not Say That' Mulvaney Tears Into Wallace Quid Pro Quo Argument, 'I Did Not Say That' Reviewed by STATION GOSSIP on 09:44 Rating: 5

No comments:

Powered by Blogger.