So the Trump team plans to coach the testimony…send him to say what they want him to say…but withhold any documents that may be incriminating. In other words, they’re still obstructing Congress!!
2 Likes
I am a lawyer and not as prescient as you. I wouldn’t know how to question a witness about documents I’ve never seen. There will likely be thousands of pages of documents. When you do get the documents and then want to call him back – and you will want to call him back – he going to refuse to come back. So you’re back in court and he is going to tell the judge he’s a busy person and he has already testified and shouldn’t have to again. Congress will hope the judge sees the game he’s playing but what if the judge doesn’t? And of course, no matter how the judge rules you’re going up thru the DC Circuit to the SC and how much time is that going to take?
17 Likes
This is a guy who was recruited and tasked this Ukrainian mess by Donald Trump. He probably should be headed to Federal prison. I wouldn’t trust anything he says.
5 Likes
Self-important conservative rich assholes who are also gigantic COWARDS when push comes to shove and he’s afraid of the subpoena. He might talk.
6 Likes
And told his mouth-breathers that Biden had to kiss Obama’s ass to get the VP job. He’s making it hard for those hedge funders on Wall Street to vote for him … (and never tell anyone that they did of course).
4 Likes
You know, the phrase “drinking the Kool-Aid” is the kind that has drifted pretty far from its original meaning, like “break the mold.” Today it means being such an extreme partisan that you believe your own propaganda, but originally it meant to commit suicide for a cause. Those House guys, though, they’re kind of making it a twofer there.
18 Likes
I thought that phrase was in reference to believing massive amounts of lies—as it originated with Jim Jones and the poison Kool-Aid. But maybe that’s what you mean? Oh whoops - sorry, I do see that’s what you meant.
4 Likes
Official documents are not his to produce. We can call this an excuse, but it’s still the law.
What you’re asking for is a whistle-blower willing to take a big risk …
5 Likes
You’re probably right about this, but I believe that at this point, there is an outside chance that Sondland will do whatever is best for himself, he is not a politician so if the Republican shun him it won’t really hurt him, he is already rich and doesn’t need the Wingnut Welfare Network (They need him!). So maybe he got tired of playing Metternich and will do the right thing for him, and screw Trump, he didn’t like that much to begin with.
3 Likes
The people who were seated directly behind Trump in red T shirts nodding, smiling and laughing at every hateful thing Trump uttered for the whole night were family members of law enforcement or their supporters. The T Shirts looked like this:
That’s the Minneapolis police union leader Bob Kroll shaking Trump’s hand last night. Minneapolis Mayor Frey said that police could not attend political events like Trump’s rally in uniform. Bob Kroll then had those T shirts designed and sold them to other Law enforcement officers and their supporters via Facebook.
7 Likes
If Sondland can be truthful, the most interesting part to know is what happened in the span of 5 hours between his text with Taylor on Sept 9!
Taylor:
As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign,”
Five hours later…Sondland:
“… The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quo’s of any kind…”
Clearly Sondland is parroting the Extorionist-in-Chief’s talking point. And the Stable Genius Extortionist-In-Chief probably do not know that solicitation (I need a favor though) is unlawful and quid pro quo is an additional crime!
6 Likes
An interesting question as to how Sondland testifies. Does he throw himself off the train that we can see is headed over a cliff? Has he consulted a good lawyer to know that he has exposure to that cliff in the near future? Perhaps he knows how Marie Yovanovitch will testify, and he knows the gig is up, so he testifies straight up? Who will become the John Dean of the Favors Affairs?
5 Likes
It was Trump, in the Oval Office, with the telephone.
We have the signed confession.
Quid pro quo, withholding funds, etc, - icing on the cake. But that’s all standards the Republicans defending Trump have set.
POTUS asked a foreign leader to launch an investigation into his chief political rival.
Right now there’s a ton of noise while Trumplandia tries to change public opinion and stall the investigation. But it really just seems to be noise. They have yet to formulate a single valid legal argument - just a thousand different versions of “it isn’t fair” or “it wasn’t that bad” or “I know you are but what am I?”
18 Likes
It was a career diplomat, ambassador to many latin-american countries, no point being associated with Pompeo now.
9 Likes
I can say this as a lawyer who has taken hundreds of depositions . . . depositions and cross-examination are useless without documents. We do have a whole bunch of his texts that will provide fodder for examining him. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/10/04/us/politics/ukraine-text-messages-volker.html.
Crucial is the following exchange:
[9/9/19, 12:47:11 AM] Bill Taylor: As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.
[9/9/19, 5:19:35 AM] Gordon Sondland: Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump’s intentions. The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quo’s of any kind. The President is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelensky promised during his campaign I suggest we stop the back and forth by text If you still have concerns I recommend you give Lisa Kenna or S a call to discuss them directly. Thanks.
In the first text, Taylor has obviously gotten the impression that Trump is conditioning military aid to Ukraine on Ukraine’s “help with [Trump’s] political campaign.” 5 hours pass before Sonderland responds - or a White House lawyer responds for him - with the clear command to stop leaving a written record of the conversation.
So, two questions immediately come to mind: (a) what was said to Taylor to give him the quid pro quo impression; and (b) what transpired in the 5 hour gap (we know that Sonderland contacted the White House) to result in such a lawyer-ly denial of the quid pro quo.
18 Likes
The proceeds are earmarked for the cutest little uniforms for wayward immigrant children in Minneapolis.
2 Likes
Feisty? Poor choice of descriptors. What I read was pure filth.
ETA: I’m sure Sondland also has concerns about the success of hotels that he owns, especially after this:
Blumenauer Urges Boycott of Provenance Hotels, the Chain Founded By Gordon Sondland
Portland congressmen wants patrons to stay away from the ambassador’s boutique hotels until Sondland testifies in front of impeachment committee
8 Likes
Good. Baby steps. But good.
1 Like
I am a litigator. Sondland is a very successful businessman with lots of money to pay very good lawyers to give him honest advice. I’m not a criminal lawyer, but I can assure you that I would not permit any client, even a civil defendant, with even an iota of criminal exposure, to give sworn testimony to a government panel or entity without a promise of immunity. What that tells me is that, he’s been guaranteed protection against possible criminal exposure,…and not by Schiff. It’s certainly possible that he intends to take the Fifth or assert privilege as to anything relevant, but I can’t see how communications with another nation or foreign actors would be privileged.
14 Likes