Sondland revises Quid Pro Quo testimony

[M14 Shooter]

I wonder what dirt the Democrats have on Sondland to extort him into reversing his testimony? ...

It's called perjury! Sondland lied and they have the text messages to prove it (you forgot about those) and they have the testimony of all the other people involved. SOndland knew he was going to go to jail for perjury so he had to tell the truth.

Unsupportable nonsense.

They have the text messages between Sondland and the others discussing the Quid pro quo the evidence is too overwhelming!!! Have a nice day!!!! Enjoy the impeachment party!!!!

I hope your safe space has plenty of crayons and play-doh, and your mother makes sure her guns are locked up.

 

[justoffal]

Sondland Updates Impeachment Testimony, Describing Ukraine Quid Pro Quo Sondland Updates Impeachment Testimony, Describing Ukraine Quid Pro Quo

Is that the walls closing in on the White House?

YAWWWWWWWWWAN.....


JO

 

[justoffal]

I think he’s lying

anyway, even if true trump didnt say it

but if you want to jail the ambassador for qid pro quo be my guest

deep State keeps a thorough file on every United States diplomat politician and or government employee.

They probably have video footage of him doing something naughty somewhere.

Jo

 

[CrusaderFrank]

ZOMG!!! Wait until Mueller gets this and adds it to this report!! ZOMG ^2!! What if Mueller has Stormy Daniels make an appointment for Avenatti to interview them and add that to the Mueller Report?!! They'd get him 4, 5 times!!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

anyway, even if true trump didnt say it

Of course he did. You do understand that he had other dicusssions withhis staff, right?

 

[g5000]

A: And my understanding at the time was that even though he agreed in the meeting that we had with him, say, okay, I'l invite him, he didn't really want to do it. And that's why the meeting kept being delayed and delayed . And we ended up at a point in talking with the Ukrainians -- who we'll come to this, but, you know, who had asked to communicate with Giuliani that they wanted to convey that they really are different. And we ended up talking about, well, then, make a statement about investigating corruption and your commitment to reform and so forth.

Q: Is that the statement that you discussed in your text messages

A: Yes

Q: around August of 2019?

A: Yes

Q: Okay

A: Yeah. To say make a statement along those lines. And the thought behind that was just trying to be convincing that they are serious and different from the Ukraine of the past.

Q: I believe in the text messages, and we'll probably go through it, but you sent a proposed statement to Mr. Yermak for President Zelensky to release. Is that correct?

A: It was the other way around. He sent it to me.

Q: Okay. And in at least one version of that statement include references to investigations into Burisma Holdings , correct?

A: That i s correct.

Q: And also into the 2016 election interference?

A: That is correct.

Q: Why did you single out those two specific allegations

A: Right.

Q: for the statement that President Zelensky was going to release

A Yes.

Q: in order to get the White House visit?

A: Right. He sent a draft statement to me, and I discussed it with Gordon SondIand, our ambassador to the European Union, and with Rudy Giuliani, we had a conference call together, because I was hoping that this would be convincing, that this is --

Q: Convincing to who?

A: To Giuliani, and therefore that information flow reaching the President would be more positive than it had been. And Rudy did not find that convincing. He said that if they're not willing to investigate those things, Burisma --

Q: Referring to the two allegations we were discussing?

A: Burisma correct -- Burisma and 2016, then what does it mean? And so we talked about it, and I said, well, if it said Burisma, let's be clear, we' re talking about the Ukrainian company and Ukrainians that may have violated Ukrainian law or whether any Ukrainians may have tried to influence U. S. elections, that's what we' re talking about. And that was yes, you know, that is what we were talking about. I then wrote a version I added that to the statement that Mr. Yermak had sent me so we could look at i and say Gordon and I, i believe, looked at it say, is this what we're talking about? Gordon says, yes. I sent that to Andrey Yermak and discussed it with him. And in that conversation with Andrey and a subsequent conversation I advised him, this is not a good idea.

Q: Why did you think what specifically was not a good idea?

A: To --

Q: And why did you think that?

A: Yeah. I advised him that making those specific references was not a good idea, that a generic statement about fighting corruption and, you know, if anyone had tried to interfere in U.S. domestic politics, it's unacceptable, we have to make sure that never happens again, that's fine. But making those specific references, I said, is not a good idea. Andrey's argumentation, let me start with that, was that, first off, he didn't want to see any evidence destroyed by --

Q: What do you mean by that?

A: By--yes. Very important point. Prosecutor General Lutsenko was at this time still in office, and so the one who's making these allegations, which, you know, there is no-- no evidence was brought forward to support. I thought they were very self-serving and not credible.

Q: And not only that, since Prosecutor General Lutsenko made those allegations, didn't he later come out and retract the allegations as completely false?

A: Yeah. I believe that he did.

Q: Okay.

A: Yeah. And so he said, first off , we don't want to if there is any evidence here, we don't want to say this and then have Lutsenko destroy it. Secondly, we don't want to commit to anything that we might do as an investigation without having our own prosecutor general in place, that is the new team that took office. And my comment back to hjm was I think those are good reasons. And in addition, I just think it's important that you avoid anything that would look like it would play into our domestic politics, and this could. So just don't do it. I agree with so I told Andrey, I agree with you, don't do it.

Q: So you believe that if the Ukrainians were to announce that they were pursuing investigations into what we've been describing as the two allegations, that could have an impact on U. S. domestic politics?

A: Yeah. For the reason that you highlighted earlier, which is that it was known that Hunter Biden was a board member of Burisma, so it could be interpreted that way.

Q: And would it be fair to say that if the Ukrainians announce that they were opening an investigation into those two allegations, it could accrue to the benefit of President Trump's reelection campaign?

A: We didn't discuss that.

Q: Do you believe that it could be perceived that way here in the United States?

A: Clearly, because it has now been perceived that way.

 

[mascale]

So the US President is bound to faithfully executive the laws of the United States. NYTimes now reports new testimony alluding to likely how many labor hours were involved in planning the "Perfect" Surprise attack level phone call. There was no such concept of faithful execution of the laws at all intended.

Sondland Updates Impeachment Testimony, Describing Ukraine Quid Pro Quo

BonSai(?)! maybe it is not(?). Banzai! it seems to be!

The request of the favor of an investigation--without warrant, probable cause, and so-stated with basis, mostly in talking "voices:" Actually could have set up a pretext for "Investigatory" incursions by armed investigator cadres into the US National Sovereignty itself. NYCity itself recently comes to mind. Aiding in that could have been the Red-Hatters favorite ally: Vladimir Putin.

It is not the job of the US President to instigate foreign investigations and incursion into the protected Constitutional sovereignty of the United States. Persons born are a part of that sovereignty. Planning potentially lethal stuff is not a part of it.

So Banzai is not even supposed to be a part of the job description: President of the United States of America. . .and even Guam(?).

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Recalling a time when many things were well-understood!0

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

deep State keeps a thorough file on every United States diplomat politician and or government employee.

They probably have video footage of him doing something naughty somewhere.

Jo

All the idiotic shit you cultists make up would apply double to the orange turd. How do you guys not get this?

 

[B. Kidd]

Opinion pieces only.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Trump's fucked

Yep.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I hope your safe space has plenty of crayons and play-doh, and your mother makes sure her guns are locked up.

Says the cultist having a hissy fit...

 

[Lesh]

I think he’s lying

anyway, even if true trump didnt say it

but if you want to jail the ambassador for qid pro quo be my guest

He was doing what he was told to do by the Orange Criminal..Uhoh...that;s trouble for Trump then...and a conspiracy

 

[g5000]

Giuliani and Trump were clearly pushing for a domestic personal political gain for Trump. The corruption angle was nothing but a smokescreen to cover their slandering of Joe Biden for Trump's personal gain.

 

[Siete]

I wonder what dirt the Democrats have on Sondland to extort him into reversing his testimony? ...

a jail cell for lying

 

[g5000]

WITNESS: I saw Donald Trump shoot the victim in broad daylight on Fifth Avenue

TARD: Opinion piece!

 

[The Banker]

I wonder what dirt the Democrats have on Sondland to extort him into reversing his testimony? ...

It's called perjury! Sondland lied and they have the text messages to prove it (you forgot about those) and they have the testimony of all the other people involved. SOndland knew he was going to go to jail for perjury so he had to tell the truth.

Unsupportable nonsense.

They have the text messages between Sondland and the others discussing the Quid pro quo the evidence is too overwhelming!!! Have a nice day!!!! Enjoy the impeachment party!!!!

I hope your safe space has plenty of crayons and play-doh, and your mother makes sure her guns are locked up.

Enjoy the impeachment bud!!! Quid Pro Quo... my 3 favorite words!!! AHAHA!!!!!!

 

[justoffal]

deep State keeps a thorough file on every United States diplomat politician and or government employee.

They probably have video footage of him doing something naughty somewhere.

Jo

All the idiotic shit you cultists make up would apply double to the orange turd. How do you guys not get this?

First of all shit head....what makes you think that all of those who support Trump don't understand who he is where he came from and what he's capable of?

The office of the President of the United States requires a ruthless, bloodthirsty and at times dishonest person to master it.

Landslide 2020 baby!

Jo

 

[g5000]

We are now seeing the reasons behind the closed door hearings. For the same reason the Republican House Benghazi hearings were behind closed doors. It keeps witnesses from being able to coordinate their testimonies. If they don't line up, you know someone is lying.

In this case, the testimonies all align perfectly.

 

[Picaro]

Ah, some more spam with zero credibility. I guess you losers hope to throw so much shit on the walls in your silly campaigns nobody can tell if it's daylight outside. lol

 

[g5000]

Volker is more than fair to Trump. His integrity and honesty and fairness all come through very strongly in his testimony.