5.1k SHARES Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Pinterest Reddit Print Mail Flipboard

Advertisements

Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney refuses to testify under oath, but after former National Security Council official Dr. Fiona Hill delivered an explosive testimony on Thursday, Mulvaney is throwing a fit via his lawyer.

In a statement, Mulvaney’s lawyer said, “Fiona Hill’s testimony is riddled with speculation and guesses about any role that Mr. Mulvaney played with anything related to Ukraine. She bases much of her testimony about him on things allegedly heard from unnamed staffers, guards in the West Wing, and ‘many people.'”

The statement continues, “This inquiry continues to be a sham. No court in this country would give any weight to testimony about Mr. Mulvaney as speculative as Ms. Hill’s. Neither should Congress or the public.”

Advertisements

The full tantrum from Mulvaney’s lawyer, Bob Driscoll:

Fiona Hill’s testimony is riddled with speculation and guesses about any role that Mr. Mulvaney played with anything related to Ukraine. She bases much of her testimony about him on things allegedly heard from unnamed staffers, guards in the West Wing, and “many people.” The fact is that Ms. Hill has never met Mr. Mulvaney other than in passing, and has never discussed anything with him regarding Ukraine. We have no idea why Ms. Hill believes Mr. Mulvaney was so heavily involved, especially in light of Ambassador Sondland’s contrary testimony that he only spoke very infrequently to Mr. Mulvaney and had zero substantive conversations with him about Ukraine. This inquiry continues to be a sham. No court in this country would give any weight to testimony about Mr. Mulvaney as speculative as Ms. Hill’s. Neither should Congress or the public.

Still no denial, still not under oath

Mick Mulvaney – the guy who literally admitted there was a Ukraine quid pro quo – is spouting off about Hill’s strong testimony on Thursday, but his statement is missing one major thing: a denial.

The short tantrum spends a lot of time criticizing Hill’s sources and the fact that Mulvaney only met her “in passing,” but nowhere does he deny or offer evidence to contradict what she testified on Thursday.

Mulvaney’s defense would have a little more credibility if he crawled out from behind his lawyer and delivered it under oath. Unfortunately for the acting White House chief of staff, perjury is a crime.

Follow Sean Colarossi on Facebook and Twitter