politics Trump Whistle-Blower

‘Was There A Quid Pro Quo? Yes’: Gordon Sondland Throws Trump, Giuliani, Pompeo Under Bus In Stunning Opening Statement

"I followed the directions of the President. Everyone was in the loop. It was no secret."

"I followed the directions of the President. Everyone was in the loop. It was no secret."
This content has been archived. Log in or Subscribe for full access to thousands of archived articles.

7 comments on “‘Was There A Quid Pro Quo? Yes’: Gordon Sondland Throws Trump, Giuliani, Pompeo Under Bus In Stunning Opening Statement

  1. Regardless of the nasty shit that comes up, it continuously fails to stick to ‘Teflon-Trump’ and his crew, how I don’t understand

    • Because who’s to stick it to him? Barr? The Senate? His supporters will back him with all the fervor of a cult leader until he does something that would display him to not be the successful wealthy strongman he fronts himself as. Perhaps his taxes would do it if he turns out to actually be dirt poor and owe tons of money to Russia… but maybe not even that… maybe if his wife left him? Maybe if another country like Russia or China attacked a naval vessel and he refused to attack back? I have no idea what would disillusion them at this point.

    • He is building the wall and Black Lives Matter has been silenced. Any further questions?

  2. Smoking (Gatling) gun. Suspect that Rudy and Pompeo are making lots of calls to lawyers this morning..

  3. vicissitude

    We still have a lingering conflict pending. This impeachment is a matter of bribery and as Pelosi said, she wants trump in prison. Thus, as a criminal matter, the current impeachment inquiry is a step towards that greater goal (for the greater good) but this is where things get very sticky in terms of DOJ and AG barr. In theory, barr will have to recuse himself, if American law is to be upheld. Hopefully, in this impeachment inquiry, a door will open to suggest that the entire trump campaign, if not the entire GOP have limitations in what roles they play in the criminal process.

    See: § 45.2 Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship.

    (a) Unless authorized under paragraph (b) of this section, no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with:

    (1) Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution; or

    (2) Any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial interest that would be directly affected by the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/45.2

  4. vicissitude

    Please make time to read this link. I think Pelosi is building a criminal case and this doesn’t end in the Senate. Barr will need to recuse himself, but the mechanics of how trump is tried for bribery is unprecedented — and it seems as the impeachment inquiry is racing along, building an airtight case. Impeachment in the tradition sense isn’t on the table, this is about putting the chosen one in prison!

    “If I strike the president from the indictment, will he or she agree to waive any defense of the statute of limitations that may expire while he or she is in office?” If the president refuses to waive the statute of limitations, that itself would be a good reason for permitting the indictment, while postponing any further proceedings.

    https://www.lawfareblog.com/indicting-president-not-foreclosed-complex-history

  5. As a commenter on a thread elsewhere so aptly put it, the best way to characterize Gordon Sondland is as a cartoon penis.

    “And, of course, the highest honor in my public life came when President Trump asked me to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to the European Union”…..after I wrote a $1 Million check to Trump’s inaugural committee to buy the position. I thought this would be easy.

Speak On It

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Skip to toolbar