Lol! Are you being obtuse? It's THE transcript of the call. Or are you, like the moronic caller today, also implying that "pertinent parts" of the conversation were left out or edited out? Really???
I don't think you're obtuse
@XenaLee . I think you are unable or unwilling to debate the fact that it's a memo and titled as such, and I think when President Trump says it's a word for word "transcript," and repeats it, and repeats it, you accept it. I would like to see the original in the super secret server. I don't know that I will see it, but I'm very certain the rats will see the "perfect call," in all it's glory. I don't trust the President because IMO he's got a huge track record of telling yarns. Really.
https://qz.com/1717869/why-its-wrong-to-call-the-white-house-ukraine-memo-a-transcript/On September 25, the White House released what it called a “full, unredacted transcript†of US president Donald Trump’s phone call with president Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. In the fine print, though, it specifies that it’s “not a verbatim transcript of a discussion.†News outlets struggled to figure out what to call it, with the New York Times calling it a “reconstructed transcript†and the Washington Post saying “rough transcript.†Before long, #NotATranscript was trending on Twitter, as people recognized something fundamentally misleading in calling a document a “transcript†if it was not a verbatim record of what was said. But what’s behind this, and why does it matter?
more at link
