u ever go to jail for doing the right thing? If literally everybody in the world said you should release this aid and then he releases the aid, do you go to jail for that? Is that evidence of guilt that you did what everybody thought was a good idea to do? Doesn't matter when you did it. It doesn't matter when you did it. If you did something that was a reasonable thing to do it's hard to see that as putting you in jail.

Wait there's more. There's more from CNN's website. But the timeline revealed Tuesday in conjunction with the transcript of testimonies from Office of Management and Budget official... embark. And listen to the lead up now. Remember complexity is a big part of the story so if the public can't understand the story it's like it didn't happen. So see how hard it is to understand the story.

But the timeline revealed Tuesday in conjunction with the transcript of testimony from Office of Management and Budget official Mark Sandy and that's just the beginning of the sentence. I have not even gotten to the content of the sentence yet. So after all that outlines an indisputably clear set of facts about the bizarre way the Ukraine aid was handled. What? It outlines an indisputably clear set of facts about the bizarre way the Ukraine aid was handled. Is bizarre against the law? In whose opinion was it bizarre? What kind of accusation is bizarre? Okay when do we go to jail for being bizarre?

Now then they also say new revelations put Trump on shaky ground. That's the headline. Okay he's on shaky ground because, here's the because. The developments on Tuesday illuminated the fact that there's still much to learn about the president's actions regarding Ukraine aid. Is it against the law that there's much to learn? Does that put you on shaky ground because there's much to learn about it? That's not much.

How about the confusion that Sandy the OMB guy and other line level OMB aides have felt about why the Ukraine aid was being withheld along with their inability to get answers showing how the Trump administration's unusual enterprise was shrouded in secrecy even from the very people who are handling the money. Shrouded in secrecy. Now this is quite a shocking allegation because the allegation here is that a large bureaucracy was not communicating well. I've never heard of this before. Are you kidding me? CNN's breaking big news. The large bureaucratic government of the United States has people within it who don't know what the others intend and they're not communicating well. First time I've ever heard of something like that.

So they're turning a normal bureaucracy where people are complaining about the boss, they don't know why the boss is doing what the boss is doing. I literally got rich just writing about that. I mean that's the Dilbert office every single day. In Dilbert's office the employees don't know why the boss is doing what the boss is doing and they imagine it's for the wrong reasons. That's every employee with a boss. But it's got turned into news because it's bizarre and it's putting them on shaky ground.

So that's how CNN had to turn a lot of nothing into something by words. Through the power of words they turned nothing really. This new evidence against the president, it is evidence against the exculpatory stuff. In other words it's less exculpatory than it was but it's not evidence of crime which is completely different.

So I thought I made a note but I didn't. So Byron York was tweeting around a lawyer's analysis of why President Trump is not necessarily in any trouble illegally in a sort of a clever legal argument about why the bribery charge won't be a good play. But I tweeted back and I'm starting to get some good agreement with this that everybody's thinking past the sale. In fact this is one of the greatest persuasion plays I've seen in years. Better than maybe better than anything Trump has done. But the Democrats have managed to make everybody think past the sale.

So if we're arguing about whether there was bribery or quid pro quo or who said what or what the timeline, all of those things, we're talking about a hundred percent of them are past the sale that we haven't talked about. And the sale is whether the president was appropriately asking for an investigation. Was it the president's job to look into it? And the answer is yes. It was unambiguously in the interest of many of the citizens in the United States, not all of them, not every single person cared, but there certainly were plenty of citizens in the United States who were aware of the Biden Burisma thing who wanted some more information on that. And they would be happy to know that nothing happened because this is a potential next president of the United States and they'd be happy if they found that something happened and we'd be glad we found out so we didn't get into any kind of blackmail situation or influence by Ukraine.

So now just the fact that many of the people in the United States were not following the story and therefore were not interested in calling for this investigation doesn't change the fact that if they did know about it it would be legitimate. There's much that our government does that we the citizens are not voting on or clamoring for. They're just ordinary the business of the government. So the government knows what it needs to do. This serves the public. So the president was asking the same question of Ukraine that many citizens that voted for him would also want to know. And also people who did not vote for him would also like to know the answer to that. They might not ask for it. They might prefer he didn't ask for it but that's a political question. They still want to know the answer. The information is still important.

Now even if it comes out that there's nothing there which I imagine would be the outcome, we'd like to know. We'd like to know if there's nothing there. So I'm waiting for the world to catch up to me and realize that the entire thing has been thinking past the sale.

So you saw me tweet and talk about Michael Harriot's article in The Root in which he was talking about Buttigieg and I said it was really good writing and you should read it. Ben Shapiro wrote an article that was rerun on Fox News and he was talking about the Root article going vira