Read on Twitter
He forgot to do his "I don’t remember" routine here.
Here’s where Sondland discusses the early September call he had with Trump. Sondland says he called because he was confused about why the aid had been withheld. He says he asked Trump an open-ended question what he wanted from Ukraine. He says Trump said "nothing," and no QPQ.
Let’s dwell in this. First, per Sondland, Trump, unprompted, said there is no "quid-pro-quo." That suggests Trump had discussed that issue with someone prior to the call. Second, Sondland is being dishonest.
He now admits (as Taylor testified - attached) that he told Yermak on Sept 1 that aid wouldn’t flow without announcing investigations. Therefore, Sondland knew enough to tell the Ukrainians that they must announce investigations if they want their aid.
It gets worse. Via Morrison, Taylor was told that Trump told Sondland that while it isn’t a quid-pro-quo, Zelensky must go announce the investigations of Biden and 2016.
This is important. Not only did Sondland make material omissions about what Trump told him in early September, he still maintained that omission in his revision by saying he only presumed there was a linkage. Taylor and Morrison show Trump told him Zelensky must do so.
What that suggests is when Sondland says he called Trump to clarify whether there was a linkage between aid and investigations, he is lying. He knew enough already, and then he leaves out Trump’s own incriminating statement. He is trying to protect himself and, still, Trump.
Well, I’m reading Sondland’s testimony again. And if you were wondering if Taylor’s testimony that Sondland told his aide on July 26 that all Trump cared about was the Biden investigation might have contradicted Sondland’s testimony—the answer is yes!
Sondland testified that he didn’t see or hear Biden mentioned until he read the July 25 call transcript in late September. If he told Taylor’s aide in late July that all Trump cared about is the Biden investigation, then he lied.
This is interesting. Sondland says that after the security aid was released, the WH meeting "morphed" into a U.N. meeting, ordered from above him.
If you’ll recall, this is where Trump said he didn’t pressure Zelensky, and Zelensky agreed, saying he doesn’t want to be involved.
If you’ll recall, this is where Trump said he didn’t pressure Zelensky, and Zelensky agreed, saying he doesn’t want to be involved.
A good question to run down would be whether, when the WH meeting changed to the U.N. meeting, Trump’s ask changed. Did Trump ask him to say there was no pressure?
It’s possible. It’s also possible Trump put him on the spot. Worth noting here.
It’s possible. It’s also possible Trump put him on the spot. Worth noting here.
Another lie about when he knew Burisma meant Biden. Fun!
Sondland’s dedication to affirmatively lying about stuff is almost impressive
"I don’t recall having been told [that aid was dependent on the announcement] by then" implies he DID learn they were linked at some point, which he still claims today he does not know
!["I don’t recall having been told [that aid was dependent on the announcement] by then" implies he DID learn they were linked at some point, which he still claims today he does not know](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EJTMuJkWkAAZ45w.jpg "\"I don’t recall having been told [that aid was dependent on the announcement] by then\" implies he DID learn they were linked at some point, which he still claims today he does not know")
Past Sondland, I’ve got some bad news about things you are about to remember you did which, in your words, cast doubt on your character
Good thinking, buddy.
Also, worth noting he doesn’t deny he spoke to the Ukrainians about the aid freeze before it went public August 28. His memory is just hazy. Again.
Also, worth noting he doesn’t deny he spoke to the Ukrainians about the aid freeze before it went public August 28. His memory is just hazy. Again.
This is repetitive, but here is one more instance of when Sondland lies about knowing there’s a linkage between frozen aid and the announcement of investigations. He says as of late August he didn’t know there was a connection. Sept 1, he tells Yermak no aid w/o investigations.
Oof. Sondland (1), Vindman (2). Sondland insists he doesn’t remember telling the Ukrainians on July 10 that they’ll get a meeting in return for investigations of 2016 and Biden. Vindman says he said it. Leading to Bolton’s "drug deal" line.
Sondland is bad at lying. This is about a convo he had with Zelensky July 19 before an aborted July 20 call with Trump. Sondland appears to have told Zelensky he needs to agree to investigations as Volker did ahead of July 25 call. Sondland doesn’t know what Volker meant tho.
Sondland says that ahead of Trump’s July 25 call, if they primed Zelensky, it would’ve only been to agree to anti-corruption. Democratic counsel then reads him Volker’s July 25 text where he says WH told him if Zelensky agrees to "get to the bottom" of 2016, they’d get a meeting.
Sondland’s preferred timeline—that as of July 25 all he knew about was a general anticorruption focus—falls apart with those texts. So Sondland throws Volker under the bus.
Note: Volker’s text was to Yermak, not Sondland, which is why he can claim (separate from Vindman and Hill’s testimony) that he wasn’t aware of a connection at this point.
Sondland has a really bad habit of saying his inner gear-turning out loud. Here he’s thinking, I can’t remember what message I instructed Volker to pass to Yermak, because the message came from Trump.
Sondland pauses to speak privately with his lawyer, and then helpfully summarizes the timeline his lawyer told him to stick to—he only knew about general anticorruption before August. Which, as we know from plentiful evidence regarding what he said on July 10, is a lie.
Siri, show me a canonical example of what a pre-planned question-and-answer with a witness looks like
100% chance Republicans try to use this in her public testimony to discredit her as a crazed anti-Trump ideologue.
Oh, nbd. Just the Republican staff lawyer asking Sondland to provide him with some of what Republicans would call "hearsay." I seem to remember Republicans having s problem with hearsay?
Sondland, my boy. This is painful.
Here, when discussing the Aug 11 statement mentioning 2016 and Burisma Volker sent to Yermak for them to release, which Sondland says was consistent with what Rudy asked for, Sondland emphasizes he doesn’t know if that’s what Trump wants or just what Rudy wants.
That’s remarkable, if true. (It’s not, but let’s assume it is for a sec.) It would mean that on July 10, Sondland instructed the Ukrainians they must investigate 2016 and Biden; and on Sept 1 said there’s no aid without investigations—without knowing if that’s what Trump wanted.
That would be malpractice on a massive scale. It would mean Sondland was dictating terms to a foreign nation to receive a WH meeting and aid, and the terms were benefits to the president’s campaign. And he didn’t know if that’s what Trump wanted! That makes no sense!
Huh. Sondland met privately with @DevinNunes in Brussels on August 16. Sondland says it was very casual. Maybe they discussed how afraid of cows Devin is?
