Mediaboss Marketing

Debbie Wasserman Schultz has launched a bid for a coveted congressional post: the chairmanship of the all-important House Appropriations Committee.

Two months ago, U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz hosted a panel discussion on Venezuela policy in her South Florida district. To her right sat the most powerful woman in the United States, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Also in the room, other members of Congress, Venezuelan community leaders and a platoon of media.

Wasserman Schultz surged in the spotlight, transitioning from the nuances of immigration policy to firing salvos at Republicans, deriding fellow Floridian Rick Scotts plan as "full of bull crap." Scotts spokesman returned fire accusing Wasserman Schultz of the "same old partisan nonsense we've heard from her for years."

It was vintage Wasserman Schultz equal parts policy wonk and combative firebrand. The very mix that catapulted the Broward County Democrats political career from the Florida Legislature to Capitol Hill to chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee.

>>READ: South Florida lawmaker leaned on mentor Elijah Cummings: He had do the right thing in his DNA

On Nov. 21, Wasserman Schultz launched a bid for a coveted congressional post: the chairmanship of the all-important House Appropriations Committee.

Fellow House Democrat U.S. Rep. Darren Soto of Winter Haven said it is time for a Florida member to sit in a leadership post.

"We are the third most populous state in the union, and yet we dont have any folks in leadership," said Soto, who believes his Florida colleague has the right mix of experience and youth for generational change compared to her rivals, who are in their 70s.

>>RELATED: Speaker Pelosi in Weston calls on Trump, Senate to give Venezuelans temporary protected status

Wasserman Schultz, 53, is currently a member of the committee, along with two other South Florida congressmen, U.S. Rep. Lois Frankel, D-West Palm Beach, and U.S. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Miami.

Provided Democrats retain control of the House after the 2020 election, the desired leadership position would become available because of the announced retirement by current chair Nita Lowey, D-New York, who has served on Capitol Hill for 31 years.

Its expected Wasserman Schultz will be competing against two other rivals: U.S. Reps. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio and Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut.

"I think that Debbie Wasserman Schulz has built consensus wherever she has gone," said Florida Democratic supporter Mitchell Berger. "I think its a wonderful idea. I think it will be good for the nation, good for Florida."

>>PRIOR STORY: Protesters shout Shame on you! at Debbie Wasserman Schultz at Florida delegate breakfast

A stumble on the path for leadership

There was a time when Wasserman Schultz appeared to be on a fast-track to a top U.S. House committee chairmanship. One word changed that: WikiLeaks.

The trove of emails leaked during the summer of 2016 included communications that suggested DNC officials were favoring nominee Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders during that years Democratic presidential primaries.

As the chair of the DNC, and someone that Clinton herself had described as a "longtime friend," Wasserman Schultz took the brunt of progressives and Sanders delegates ire. When she appeared at a Florida delegate breakfast at the convention site in Philadelphia, Wasserman Schultz was loudly booed.

"All of a sudden, quite a number of folks in the room went up in the front, so it blocked my view," remembered Clinton delegate John Ramos, who was in the room when Sanders delegates successfully disrupted Wasserman Schultzs speech. "They were chanting and just made it difficult for her to speak."

The outcry forced Wasserman Schultz to resign as DNC chair and, as punishment, she was not allowed to publicly lord over what would have been a crowning achievement: Presiding over the first political convention to nominate a woman for president in the cradle of the countrys founding documents.

Whats more, Wasserman Schultz returned from the political torching in Philadelphia to face, for her, a serious, unprecedented primary challenger in that falls 2016 congressional election.

Wasserman Schultz survived that political disaster. But even after Democrats took control of the House in the 2018 blue wave, others got committee chairmanships. Meanwhile, The Squad, including U.S. Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, took center stage on setting the tone and influencing the direction of the party.

Wasserman Schultz and her allies on the Hill say the 2016 controversy will not factor into her bid for the Appropriations chair.

"I think its water under the bridge as far as the members are concerned," said Soto, praising the congresswomans "larger-than-life work ethic" and reputation. "There is a big concern right now about having new blood in leadership."

The congresswoman says she will compete on her merits.

"I wouldnt have made the decision to run if I didnt feel confident that I could be competitive," she said last month after speaking at an anti-Trump rally in Sunrise organized by the Florida Democratic Party. "I spent a month before I made a final decision on whether I was going to seek the chairmanship, talking to my colleagues, asking their opinion, getting feedback."

One Florida progressive leader said he is less enthusiastic about seeing her in a House leadership position unless she acknowledges key facets of the progressive agenda.

"If people felt that in your previous position as DNC chair that there was a lack of transparency, youre now trying to be in charge of all this money. You would hope that there would be, like, this exercise in the utmost transparency," said Dwight Bullard, a former state senator and political director for the progressive group New Florida Majority.

Ramos, in his third term as state committeeman and first term as DNC member, put it more bluntly.

"They really hold their grudges," he said, adding that he does not believe many progressives have forgiven Wasserman Schultz, even though she has the experience and connections for the powerful position. "Its not going to be an easy path."

Then there is another issue, in the 15 years since Wasserman Schultzs first election to Congress, the Democratic Party has shifted. The 2018 wave election ushered an era of progressive fervor embodied by The Squad. Thats been evident in the early stages of the presidential race among Democratic rivals, and in the five debates since June.

So, Bullard said, the issue isnt just a question of "forgiveness."

"Really the question of capability or forgiveness has everything to do with a recognition by Congresswoman Wasserman-Schultz that this is where we are today as opposed to the narrative thats framed around what shes done in the past," said Bullard, a 2016 Sanders delegate.

That will include addressing issues like burdensome student loan debt, high healthcare costs, climate change and sea level rise in the face of government spending on endless wars and subsidies to fossil fuel companies, he added.

"AOC and some of the more progressive names that have popped up, theyre naming these things all the time theyre kind of screaming it from the rafters," he said. "There are people out there who live on the struggle bus every day, trying to make ends meet and thinking and hoping that someone will take an actionable step to give them some sense of relief ... Thats not a pie-in-the-sky kind of thing, thats real life."

Bullard, who served with Wasserman Schultz in the Florida Legislature, believes that she speaks out on issues important to people outside of her district and demonstrates that she has overcome past transparency problems, she could win the leadership position.

Ramos said he encourages the various factions of the Democratic Party to "play nice" especially headed into the crucial 2020 election year.

"Youre going to have discord, it comes with the territory. And since were a big tent party, it gets messy," he said. "Its sad because we need 2020 is so important and its all hands on deck."

Ramos said he is supportive of the congresswomans bid for the House Appropriations leadership job.

"You just have to walk away from that and just nod your head," he said. "Theres that saying, We eat our own."

At the end of the day, however, the decision will be made by House Democrats, if they retain their majority.

A steering and policy committee composed of about a third of the House Democratic caucus will recommend a candidate, and then the full caucus of Democrats will vote on the pick.

In her letter announcing her candidacy for the post, Wasserman Schultz stressed knowledge, experience and a commitment to reforms in the appropriations process so not to continue operating from continuing resolution to continuing resolution.

"We need to bring the appropriations process into the 21st century," she said. "You never take any election for granted. I have to seek and secure the support of my colleagues and Ill be working on doing that over the course of the next year."

Reporting contributed by Hannah Morse

The rest is here:
Wasserman Schultz seeks top House post, will progressives back her? - Palm Beach Post

Working in different locations presents various logistical problems for companies a problem Progressive TSL aims to tackle.

The company has been around since 2004 and focuses on various systems finance, procurement, inventory management with a focus on upstream companies.

What makes us unique is that we do everything around it as well. We have IT capabilities and weve got consultants who really know the oil and gas business, who understand the challenges. Companies often come to us when carrying out acquisitions when theyre looking at process challenges and having controls that are enforced, Progressives CEO Chris Walcot told Energy Voice. We have a vertical knowledge of the sector.

The nature of Progressives work has changed in response to the cycles in the oil prices. Before the crash, more of the companys work was driven by transactions, acquisitions, divestments, the CEO said. Progressive was able to provide an understanding of data and how to migrate information.

As prices fell, the company found it was more in demand to help companies make cost savings. This manifests in areas such as inventory and procurement control. When the oil price was $110 per barrel, some companies saw the solution to everything as being to write a cheque. When the crash came, everyone was suddenly very focused on maximising the effectiveness of expenditure.

With prices stabilising, companies must focus on how to hold on to those lessons that have been learnt. Organisations need to keep controls when expanding and managing it effectively this time, Walcot said.

Areas

The company has a rough 50:50 split between the UK and Africa, bringing knowledge of regional operational challenges to its work.

There are certainly different challenges in almost every location, Walcot continued. Regulatory burdens on UK operators have increased over the last 10-20 years. The challenges are there for good reason, with increased focus on health and safety, he said, while working in some remote areas in Africa poses its own difficulties.

There are unique challenges around working in deserts, for instance, environmental challenges, data connectivity, all those things have a unique aspect. Some countries have challenging regulatory requirements, things like complex tax requirements, which you need to be able to address and address effectively. If youve not done it before, that can be very daunting.

Progressive, Walcot notes, has largely done it before. Were able to take the learnings from previous project and reuse them and it means we can do them to a high quality but also be able to deploy systems and new processes and controls quickly.

Timing

Such speed is particularly useful when working towards a major event such as an IPO. While, ideally, companies begin working with Progressive early on sometimes opportunities dictate otherwise.

A variety of companies come to Progressive for assistance, with Walcot saying the sweet spot was the small to mid-caps. Putting in place the right processes early on helps companies as they go through that initial growth period, he said, helping with the various transitions along the way.

Often a company going through a period of change will seek particular assistance. Seplat Petroleum, for instance, came to Progressive about 18 months before listing. Nigeria-focused Seplat wanted to be able to demonstrate that it had the required systems and controls in place before making its pitch to the market.

We helped them initially to put a finance system in place and, as theyve evolved, weve helped them move through a series of other stages, with procurement and inventory management, Walcot said. We get engaged at different stages but we aim to get involved as early as we can.

Maurel et Prom signed Progressive up in September to provide finance and asset management work, in Paris, Gabon and Tanzania. Maurel, which is majority owned by Pertamina, has a stake in Seplat. Maurel is making sure that they have the things in place to help them with their future growth plans.

Not all companies have the ability to work with Progressive over the long term. The company worked with Chrysaor on its $3 billion acquisition of a package of assets in the North Sea, from Shell, which completed in 2017. This type of work has much tighter deadlines, with Walcot saying there is a date in the diary when it has to be completed and you have to make sure what they have to make sure that everythings in place.

Complexity

Companies are becoming more and more aware of the amount of data that can be produced from operations and, with this, is a new awareness of how this is stored and owned. If a company outsources its operations and maintenance (O&M) to a service provider the ownership of the data that comes from that work is an important note.

Companies we work with want to hang onto the data that a provider is using. If, in three or five years time, you want to change supplier, and you dont have that data, you have a problem. If you have the data and theyre accessing the data on your systems and you want to change your supplier, you could just change your supplier. Theres not so much pain around transition, Walcot said. Having that data, having access to it and being able to analyse it is critical.

The industrys ability to adopt to new technology is a challenge, the Progressive CEO said, but even more is that of changing peoples behaviour. Having a system can be great, and theres amazing things that can be done with artificial intelligence for instance, but if no one is going to use it, it doesnt change anything.

See the rest here:
Making progress with Progressive TSL - News for the Oil and Gas Sector - Energy Voice

By ANN BROWN

The day before the Independence Day holiday last summer, local progressivesfiled a petitionironically named Alaskans for Better Elections, which would destroy the integrity of Alaskas elections. If passed, the ballot initiative would bring us ranked-choice voting. The petition was sponsored, in part, byformer District 22 Rep. Jason Grenn.You may remember that Mr. Grenn wassoundly defeatedby now-Rep. Sara Rasmussen in 2018. Are sour grapes on the menu here?

In a ranked-choice general election, voters would rank their choice of four candidates for a given office. Candidates garnering more than 50% of the vote in the first ranking would win office immediately. If no one person wins a majority, candidates are whittled away and ranking continues until one individual is declared the winner.

This initiative is backed nearly entirely by Outside donations; its major supporter is a Colorado-based organization thatgave $500,000 in one pop last month.

Progressives will say this election system brings more moderate voices to the Legislature. Perhaps that is the way Mr. Grenn sees himself. When viewed in practicality, however, this initiative can largely be seen as a plan by progressives to take control of Alaskas political system. Ranked-choice voting has been implemented in Maine, as well as in municipalities in California and Michigan, locations which can hardly be considered strongholds of conservative political thought.

Perhaps what is probably most appealing to Mr. Grenn and his initiative supporters is, however, that ranked-choice voting enables candidates with limited voter support to win elections. Maybe Mr. Grenn believes he could have defeated Rep. Rasmussen in 2018, even without support from his constituents, under this system. All Mr. Grenn would have had to do to continue to be considered is not be the candidate with the lowest votes received; he could have persisted in the race long after his expiration date.

Consider this a 2015 study of four local elections in Washington and California using ranked-choice ballots found that the winner in all four elections never received a majority of the votes. This is because voters usually do not rank all possible candidates.

For the sake of expediency and their own sanity, voters typically only list their top two or three candidates. If those candidates are eliminated, then so are the votes of these individuals. Under a ranked-choice system, ballots that do not include the ultimate victors are summarily cast aside.

While this creates the appearance of a majority of votes in favor of the winner, it obscures actual voter choices; its a system that fundamentally disenfranchises voters.

In Maines2018 federal congressional race, the conservative incumbent was thrown out, despite receiving a plurality of votes in the initial election. Maines Secretary of State eliminated more than 14,000 ballots that didnt rank the remaining candidates and handed the win to the liberal challenger.

Australias 2010 election had a strikingly similar outcome; the liberal party took over the House, despite receiving 38% of the initial vote. The conservative party received 43% of the vote, but was somehow denied victory.

One can see why progressives are so excited about this proposal. It reeks of elitism and is engineered to pad the fortunes of liberal candidates. Alaskan voters, dont let yourselves be taken in. If this initiative reaches your ballot next year, vote it down.

Ann Brown, formerly of Fairbanks, now lives in Anchorage. She is an experienced trial lawyer who was the managing partner of her firms branch office, with a focus on labor and employment law. Currently retired, she is the vice chair of the Alaska Republican Party.

Like Loading...

Originally posted here:
Ranked choice voting? Why progressives want it here - Must Read Alaska

All the while their representatives in the House of Representatives endured a marathon debate coming after painstaking, months-long investigations through various committees before voting for impeachment, their arguments coming in impassioned bursts about this "solemn day" and Trump's "travesty of law".

To be fair, Trump's six-page stream-of-consciousness letter to Nancy Pelosi, proclaiming his looming impeachment a declaration of war, was an atypical display of sustained exertion. But back in Congress his unwavering Republicans reverted to the less-is-more template the sort that countered Hillary Clinton's deluge of forgettable policy offerings in 2016 with pledges to build a wall and make things great again. They rose briefly to their feet for a moment's silence to honour the Americans who voted for Trump at that election. These voters being dead, apparently.

To the Democrats' claims that Trump's dealings with Ukraine and Congress undermined the rule of law, the Republicans effortlessly flip the accusation to allege with genius timing that even Jesus enjoyed more due process before he was nailed. Some might see this assertion as a metaphor for Democrats killing Christmas. For at the same time the Democrats in Congress were opening their veins in defence of the constitution:Trump was in Michigan addressing the very much alive blue-collar workers he lured into his camp in 2016, bearing a cheerful message for them and for the roughly half of the population still in his camp Merry Christmas! (And, OK, a rather lengthy, "I did nothing wrong.")

In the near future, Senate Republicans will almost certainly embrace simplicity when, after a trial and formal deliberation, they'll carefully consider the articles of impeachment and on each and every one of them declare: Nyet.

Whatever his outsize flaws, Boris Johnson does not deserve to be lumped with his so-called conservative counterpart across the Atlantic. But as a rallying cry, "Get Brexit Done" rendered with faint backing vocals about raising spending on services has that pared-down Trumpian quality.

As journalist Andrew Sullivan observed in New York magazine, Johnson plotted a course that might actually bring the UK out of the "epic, years-long, once-impossible-looking mess he helped make." What more did Johnson need than three plain words?

Well, he was helped immeasurably by a Labour "Opposition" that responded with a mammoth utopian manifesto. Corbynites being so remote from a cynical and jaded public, it never occurred to these apparatchiks that the very idea of policy volume would be enough to send terrified workers into the arms of an avuncular toff.

To "Get Brexit Done", Labour answered: "Hail the new Green Industrial Revolution, free full-fibre broadband for everyone, the workers collectively owning 10 per cent of companies, nationalisation of rail, mail, water and energy, giving the people of the Chagos Islands and their descendants the right to return to the lands from which they should never have been removed."

In Australia, after its shock election loss in May, Labor finally embraced brevity in a 500 word post-mortem that acknowledged "a cluttered policy agenda", and the "size and complexity" of its spending announcements contributed to the party's defeat. To its shopping list of promises on negative gearing, childcare, education, franking credits (I still have no idea what that was about), Scott Morrison responded, broadly speaking, with tax cuts. Tax cuts and a lump of coal. Tax cuts and religious freedom.

I can only agree with those who warn that conservative and right-wing populism is likely to keep winning in the near future. Not because the "workers" are dumb. Not even because their would-be saviours are too clever, though they are too energetic. Too optimistic. The broad left correctly diagnoses societal ills such as economic inequality and wage stagnation; it just can't offer a credible cure.

Loading

So while presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders gives himself a heart attack blitzing America's trailer parks, perhaps America's left-behinds would be better helped by progressives finding a few choice words to swing an election. Say: "Crooked Donald." And: "Merry Christmas."

Julie Szego is a Melbourne writer.

Original post:
Sorry, progressives, we can expect the right to keep marching onwards - Sydney Morning Herald

Progressivism in the United States today is defined by political partisanship, and has wrongly become synonymous with a a single party. The reality is that true progress requires disparate groups to come together in honest debate. At a time when members of one party have co-opted progressivism, let us recall that the successful progressive movement of the early twentieth century started with Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican, and ended with Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat.

As a progressive Republican in New York, that issue is close to my heart.

Sharing the full story, not just the headlines

Progressives agree that in the United States nobody should lack food, housing, education or healthcare. At the same time, an essential American ideal is the freedom to aspire for choice in all areas of life and the ability to achieve it through hard work and innovation. While both sides might agree on a forward-looking initiative, they may seek to achieve it in different ways.

Progressives do not easily disqualify individuals. We look for the common ground. We are happy to work with members of the other party on matters that are beneficial for the local constituents they represent. And we are eager to work with anyone who shares a vision for a future in which the United States is a global leader, never subject to the values of other countries and their leaders.

A progressive Republican like me knows that aspiration flows from capitalist forces that unleash incentive, growth and progress. Republicans know that only American-style wealth allows us to talk about food, healthcare, education and housing as human rights. American-style wealth only exists where there is American-style democracy. As a nation, we were the first progressives, revolting against monarchy and embracing democracy. The United States served as a model for other nations with respect to democracy in the nineteenth century. Then, in the twentieth century, we funded and facilitated successful democracies in Europe and around the world.

The socialist twitch in Europe would not have been made possible without American intervention in the Second World War, and continued American funding and protection through the end of the century. Republican progressives reject the notion that American-subsidized European socialism is a relevant model for our country.

As progressive Republicans, we appreciate the potential impact that laws and legal systems have in the lives of people. We believe that the law distinguishes us from animals, facilitating peaceful resolution. And progressive Republicans want law to err on the side of compassion. It is not a weapon to be wielded by for-profit lawyers. We support strong enforcement of laws meant to curb prosecutorial misconduct, and legislation where it is not enough. We also support reforms that reduce legal fees and that compel lawyers to work in their clients legal and financial interests.

We want to craft government so that it is compatible with our most ambitious plans for the future and that involves rethinking our federal agencies and bureaus. We cannot wait until the markets compel governmental change, or until it is too late. There are certain areas where markets are paralyzed and where government must take the lead in order for investments to follow. Consider twentieth-century federal regulation, the type which even the most conservative people would agree is necessary. Without air traffic control, commercial airliners would not be possible. Without government regulation of radio frequencies, there is no investment in broadcast radio, television, cellular phones and satellites.

Accused of abusing his office by pressing the Ukrainian president in a July phone call to help dig up dirt on Joe Biden, who may be his Democratic rival in the 2020 election. He also believes that Hillary Clintons deleted emails - a key factor in the 2016 election - may be in Ukraine, although it is not clear why.

EPA

Believed to be a CIA agent who spent time at the White House, his complaint was largely based on second and third-hand accounts from worried White House staff. Although this is not unusual for such complaints, Trump and his supporters have seized on it to imply that his information is not reliable.Expected to give evidence to Congress voluntarily and in secret.

Getty

The lawyer for the first intelligence whistleblower is also representing a second whistleblower regarding the President's actions. Attorney Mark Zaid said that he and other lawyers on his team are now representing the second person, who is said to work in the intelligence community and has first-hand knowledge that supports claims made by the first whistleblower and has spoken to the intelligence community's inspector general. The second whistleblower has not yet filed their own complaint, but does not need to to be considered an official whistleblower.

Getty

Former mayor of New York, whose management of the aftermath of the September 11 attacks in 2001 won him worldwide praise. As Trumps personal attorney he has been trying to find compromising material about the presidents enemies in Ukraine in what some have termed a shadow foreign policy.In a series of eccentric TV appearances he has claimed that the US state department asked him to get involved. Giuliani insists that he is fighting corruption on Trumps behalf and has called himself a hero.

AP

The newly elected Ukrainian president - a former comic actor best known for playing a man who becomes president by accident - is seen frantically agreeing with Trump in the partial transcript of their July phone call released by the White House.With a Russian-backed insurgency in the east of his country, and the Crimea region seized by Vladimir Putin in 2014, Zelensky will have been eager to please his American counterpart, who had suspended vital military aid before their phone conversation.He says there was no pressure on him from Trump to do him the favour he was asked for.Zelensky appeared at an awkward press conference with Trump in New York during the United Nations general assembly, looking particularly uncomfortable when the American suggested he take part in talks with Putin.

AFP/Getty

The vice-president was not on the controversial July call to the Ukrainian president but did get a read-out later.However, Trump announced that Pence had had one or two phone conversations of a similar nature, dragging him into the crisis. Pence himself denies any knowledge of any wrongdoing and has insisted that there is no issue with Trumps actions.It has been speculated that Trump involved Pence as an insurance policy - if both are removed from power the presidency would go to Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, something no Republican would allow.

AP

Trump reportedly told a meeting of Republicans that he made the controversial call to the Ukrainian president at the urging of his own energy secretary, Rick Perry, and that he didnt even want to.The president apparently said that Perry wanted him to talk about liquefied natural gas - although there is no mention of it in the partial transcript of the phone call released by the White House. It is thought that Perry will step down from his role at the end of the year.

Getty

The former vice-president is one of the frontrunners to win the Democratic nomination, which would make him Trumps opponent in the 2020 election.Trump says that Biden pressured Ukraine to sack a prosecutor who was investigating an energy company that Bidens son Hunter was on the board of, refusing to release US aid until this was done.However, pressure to fire the prosecutor came on a wide front from western countries. It is also believed that the investigation into the company, Burisma, had long been dormant.

Reuters

Joe Bidens son has been accused of corruption by the president because of his business dealings in Ukraine and China. However, Trump has yet to produce any evidence of corruption and Bidens lawyer insists he has done nothing wrong.

AP

The attorney-general, who proved his loyalty to Trump with his handling of the Mueller report, was mentioned in the Ukraine call as someone president Volodymyr Zelensky should talk to about following up Trumps preoccupations with the Bidens and the Clinton emails.Nancy Pelosi has accused Barr of being part of a cover-up of a cover-up.

AP

The secretary of state initially implied he knew little about the Ukraine phone call - but it later emerged that he was listening in at the time. He has since suggested that asking foreign leaders for favours is simply how international politics works.Gordon Sondland testified that Pompeo was "in the loop" and knew what was happening in Ukraine. Pompeo has been criticised for not standing up for diplomats under his command when they were publicly criticised by the president.

AFP via Getty

The Democratic Speaker of the House had long resisted calls from within her own party to back a formal impeachment process against the president, apparently fearing a backlash from voters. On September 24, amid reports of the Ukraine call and the day before the White House released a partial transcript of it, she relented and announced an inquiry, saying: The president must be held accountable. No one is above the law.

Getty

Democratic chairman of the House intelligence committee, one of the three committees leading the inquiry.He was criticized by Republicans for giving what he called a parody of the Ukraine phone call during a hearing, with Trump and others saying he had been pretending that his damning characterisation was a verbatim reading of the phone call.He has also been criticised for claiming that his committee had had no contact with the whistleblower, only for it to emerge that the intelligence agent had contacted a staff member on the committee for guidance before filing the complaint.The Washington Post awarded Schiff a four Pinocchios rating, its worst rating for a dishonest statement.

Reuters

Florida-based businessmen and Republican donors Lev Parnas (pictured with Rudy Giuliani) and Igor Fruman were arrested on suspicion of campaign finance violations at Dulles International Airport near Washington DC on 9 October.Separately the Associated Press has reported that they were both involved in efforts to replace the management of Ukraine's gas company, Naftogaz, with new bosses who would steer lucrative contracts towards companies controlled by Trump allies. There is no suggestion of any criminal activity in these efforts.

Reuters

The most senior US diplomat in Ukraine and the former ambassador there. As one of the first two witnesses in the public impeachment hearings, Taylor dropped an early bombshell by revealing that one of his staff later identified as diplomat David Holmes overheard a phone conversation in which Donald Trump could be heard asking about investigations the very day after asking the Ukrainian president to investigate his political enemies. Taylor expressed his concern at reported plans to withhold US aid in return for political smears against Trumps opponents, saying: It's one thing to try to leverage a meeting in the White House. It's another thing, I thought, to leverage security assistance -- security assistance to a country at war, dependent on both the security assistance and the demonstration of support."

Getty Images

A state department official who appeared alongside William Taylor wearing a bow tie that was later mocked by the president. He accused Rudy Giuliani, Mr Trumps personal lawyer, of leading a campaign of lies against Marie Yovanovitch, who was forced out of her job as US ambassador to Ukraine for apparently standing in the way of efforts to smear Democrats.

Getty Images

One of the most striking witnesses to give evidence at the public hearings, the former US ambassador to Ukraine received a rare round of applause as she left the committee room after testifying. Canadian-born Yovanovitch was attacked on Twitter by Donald Trump while she was actually testifying, giving Democrats the chance to ask her to respond. She said she found the attack very intimidating. Trump had already threatened her in his 25 July phone call to the Ukrainian president saying: Shes going to go through some things.Yovanovitch said she was shocked, appalled and devastated by the threat and by the way she was forced out of her job without explanation.

REUTERS

A decorated Iraq War veteran and an immigrant from the former Soviet Union, Lt Col Vindman began his evidence with an eye-catching statement about the freedoms America afforded him and his family to speak truth to power without fear of punishment.One of the few witnesses to have actually listened to Trumps 25 July call with the Ukrainian president, he said he found the conversation so inappropriate that he was compelled to report it to the White House counsel. Trump later mocked him for wearing his military uniform and insisting on being addressed by his rank.

Getty Images

A state department official acting as a Russia expert for vice-president Mike Pence, Ms Williams also listened in on the 25 July phone call. She testified that she found it unusual because it focused on domestic politics in terms of Trump asking a foreign leader to investigate his political opponents.

Getty Images

The former special envoy to Ukraine was one of the few people giving evidence who was on the Republican witness list although what he had to say may not have been too helpful to their cause. He dismissed the idea that Joe Biden had done anything corrupt, a theory spun without evidence by the president and his allies. He said that he thought the US should be supporting Ukraines reforms and that the scheme to find dirt on Democrats did not serve the national interest.

Getty Images

An expert on the National Security Council and another witness on the Republican list. He testified that he did not think the president had done anything illegal but admitted that he feared it would create a political storm if it became public. He said he believed the moving the record of the controversial 25 July phone call to a top security server had been an innocent mistake.

Getty Images

In explosive testimony, one of the men at the centre of the scandal got right to the point in his opening testimony: Was there a quid pro quo? Yes, said the US ambassador to the EU who was a prime mover in efforts in Ukraine to link the release of military aid with investigations into the presidents political opponents. He said that everyone knew what was going on, implicating vice-president Mike Pence and secretary of state Mike Pompeo. The effect of his evidence is perhaps best illustrated by the reaction of Mr Trump who went from calling Sondland a great American a few weeks earlier to claiming that he barely knew him.

AP

A Pentagon official, Cooper said Ukrainian officials knew that US aid was being withheld before it became public knowledge in August undermining a Republican argument that there cant have been a quid pro quo between aid and investigations if the Ukrainians didnt know that aid was being withheld.

Getty Images

The third most senior official at the state department. Hale testified about the treatment of Marie Yovanovitch and the smear campaign that culminated in her being recalled from her posting as US ambassador to Ukraine. He said: I believe that she should have been able to stay at post and continue to do the outstanding work.

EPA

Arguably the most confident and self-possessed of the witnesses in the public hearings phase, the Durham-born former NSC Russia expert began by warning Republicans not to keep repeating Kremlin-backed conspiracy theories. In a distinctive northeastern English accent, Dr Hill went on to describe how she had argued with Gordon Sondland about his interference in Ukraine matters until she realised that while she and her colleagues were focused on national security, Sondland was being involved in a domestic political errand.She said: I did say to him, Ambassador Sondland, Gordon, this is going to blow up. And here we are.

AP

The Ukraine-based diplomat described being in a restaurant in Kiev with Gordon Sondland while the latter phoned Donald Trump. Holmes said he could hear the president on the other end of the line because his voice was so loud and distinctive and because Sondland had to hold the phone away from his ear asking about the investigations and whether the Ukrainian president would cooperate.

REUTERS

Accused of abusing his office by pressing the Ukrainian president in a July phone call to help dig up dirt on Joe Biden, who may be his Democratic rival in the 2020 election. He also believes that Hillary Clintons deleted emails - a key factor in the 2016 election - may be in Ukraine, although it is not clear why.

EPA

Believed to be a CIA agent who spent time at the White House, his complaint was largely based on second and third-hand accounts from worried White House staff. Although this is not unusual for such complaints, Trump and his supporters have seized on it to imply that his information is not reliable.Expected to give evidence to Congress voluntarily and in secret.

Getty

The lawyer for the first intelligence whistleblower is also representing a second whistleblower regarding the President's actions. Attorney Mark Zaid said that he and other lawyers on his team are now representing the second person, who is said to work in the intelligence community and has first-hand knowledge that supports claims made by the first whistleblower and has spoken to the intelligence community's inspector general. The second whistleblower has not yet filed their own complaint, but does not need to to be considered an official whistleblower.

Getty

Former mayor of New York, whose management of the aftermath of the September 11 attacks in 2001 won him worldwide praise. As Trumps personal attorney he has been trying to find compromising material about the presidents enemies in Ukraine in what some have termed a shadow foreign policy.In a series of eccentric TV appearances he has claimed that the US state department asked him to get involved. Giuliani insists that he is fighting corruption on Trumps behalf and has called himself a hero.

AP

The newly elected Ukrainian president - a former comic actor best known for playing a man who becomes president by accident - is seen frantically agreeing with Trump in the partial transcript of their July phone call released by the White House.With a Russian-backed insurgency in the east of his country, and the Crimea region seized by Vladimir Putin in 2014, Zelensky will have been eager to please his American counterpart, who had suspended vital military aid before their phone conversation.He says there was no pressure on him from Trump to do him the favour he was asked for.Zelensky appeared at an awkward press conference with Trump in New York during the United Nations general assembly, looking particularly uncomfortable when the American suggested he take part in talks with Putin.

AFP/Getty

The vice-president was not on the controversial July call to the Ukrainian president but did get a read-out later.However, Trump announced that Pence had had one or two phone conversations of a similar nature, dragging him into the crisis. Pence himself denies any knowledge of any wrongdoing and has insisted that there is no issue with Trumps actions.It has been speculated that Trump involved Pence as an insurance policy - if both are removed from power the presidency would go to Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, something no Republican would allow.

AP

Trump reportedly told a meeting of Republicans that he made the controversial call to the Ukrainian president at the urging of his own energy secretary, Rick Perry, and that he didnt even want to.The president apparently said that Perry wanted him to talk about liquefied natural gas - although there is no mention of it in the partial transcript of the phone call released by the White House. It is thought that Perry will step down from his role at the end of the year.

Getty

The former vice-president is one of the frontrunners to win the Democratic nomination, which would make him Trumps opponent in the 2020 election.Trump says that Biden pressured Ukraine to sack a prosecutor who was investigating an energy company that Bidens son Hunter was on the board of, refusing to release US aid until this was done.However, pressure to fire the prosecutor came on a wide front from western countries. It is also believed that the investigation into the company, Burisma, had long been dormant.

Reuters

Joe Bidens son has been accused of corruption by the president because of his business dealings in Ukraine and China. However, Trump has yet to produce any evidence of corruption and Bidens lawyer insists he has done nothing wrong.

AP

The attorney-general, who proved his loyalty to Trump with his handling of the Mueller report, was mentioned in the Ukraine call as someone president Volodymyr Zelensky should talk to about following up Trumps preoccupations with the Bidens and the Clinton emails.Nancy Pelosi has accused Barr of being part of a cover-up of a cover-up.

AP

The secretary of state initially implied he knew little about the Ukraine phone call - but it later emerged that he was listening in at the time. He has since suggested that asking foreign leaders for favours is simply how international politics works.Gordon Sondland testified that Pompeo was "in the loop" and knew what was happening in Ukraine. Pompeo has been criticised for not standing up for diplomats under his command when they were publicly criticised by the president.

AFP via Getty

The Democratic Speaker of the House had long resisted calls from within her own party to back a formal impeachment process against the president, apparently fearing a backlash from voters. On September 24, amid reports of the Ukraine call and the day before the White House released a partial transcript of it, she relented and announced an inquiry, saying: The president must be held accountable. No one is above the law.

Getty

Democratic chairman of the House intelligence committee, one of the three committees leading the inquiry.He was criticized by Republicans for giving what he called a parody of the Ukraine phone call during a hearing, with Trump and others saying he had been pretending that his damning characterisation was a verbatim reading of the phone call.He has also been criticised for claiming that his committee had had no contact with the whistleblower, only for it to emerge that the intelligence agent had contacted a staff member on the committee for guidance before filing the complaint.The Washington Post awarded Schiff a four Pinocchios rating, its worst rating for a dishonest statement.

Reuters

Florida-based businessmen and Republican donors Lev Parnas (pictured with Rudy Giuliani) and Igor Fruman were arrested on suspicion of campaign finance violations at Dulles International Airport near Washington DC on 9 October.Separately the Associated Press has reported that they were both involved in efforts to replace the management of Ukraine's gas company, Naftogaz, with new bosses who would steer lucrative contracts towards companies controlled by Trump allies. There is no suggestion of any criminal activity in these efforts.

Reuters

The most senior US diplomat in Ukraine and the former ambassador there. As one of the first two witnesses in the public impeachment hearings, Taylor dropped an early bombshell by revealing that one of his staff later identified as diplomat David Holmes overheard a phone conversation in which Donald Trump could be heard asking about investigations the very day after asking the Ukrainian president to investigate his political enemies. Taylor expressed his concern at reported plans to withhold US aid in return for political smears against Trumps opponents, saying: It's one thing to try to leverage a meeting in the White House. It's another thing, I thought, to leverage security assistance -- security assistance to a country at war, dependent on both the security assistance and the demonstration of support."

Getty Images

A state department official who appeared alongside William Taylor wearing a bow tie that was later mocked by the president. He accused Rudy Giuliani, Mr Trumps personal lawyer, of leading a campaign of lies against Marie Yovanovitch, who was forced out of her job as US ambassador to Ukraine for apparently standing in the way of efforts to smear Democrats.

Getty Images

One of the most striking witnesses to give evidence at the public hearings, the former US ambassador to Ukraine received a rare round of applause as she left the committee room after testifying. Canadian-born Yovanovitch was attacked on Twitter by Donald Trump while she was actually testifying, giving Democrats the chance to ask her to respond. She said she found the attack very intimidating. Trump had already threatened her in his 25 July phone call to the Ukrainian president saying: Shes going to go through some things.Yovanovitch said she was shocked, appalled and devastated by the threat and by the way she was forced out of her job without explanation.

REUTERS

A decorated Iraq War veteran and an immigrant from the former Soviet Union, Lt Col Vindman began his evidence with an eye-catching statement about the freedoms America afforded him and his family to speak truth to power without fear of punishment.One of the few witnesses to have actually listened to Trumps 25 July call with the Ukrainian president, he said he found the conversation so inappropriate that he was compelled to report it to the White House counsel. Trump later mocked him for wearing his military uniform and insisting on being addressed by his rank.

Getty Images

A state department official acting as a Russia expert for vice-president Mike Pence, Ms Williams also listened in on the 25 July phone call. She testified that she found it unusual because it focused on domestic politics in terms of Trump asking a foreign leader to investigate his political opponents.

Getty Images

The former special envoy to Ukraine was one of the few people giving evidence who was on the Republican witness list although what he had to say may not have been too helpful to their cause. He dismissed the idea that Joe Biden had done anything corrupt, a theory spun without evidence by the president and his allies. He said that he thought the US should be supporting Ukraines reforms and that the scheme to find dirt on Democrats did not serve the national interest.

Original post:
As a progressive Republican, I want to work with Democrats but this partisan impeachment makes it hard - The Independent