At 6:23am on Tuesday morning, the president of the United States used Twitter to announce that he will not consent to have the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, give a deposition to the House impeachment inquiry.
I would love to send Ambassador Sondland, a really good man and great American, to testify, but unfortunately he would be testifying before a totally compromised kangaroo court, where Republican’s rights have been taken away, and true facts are not allowed out for the public….
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 8, 2019
It’s important that Trump called Sondland “a really good man and a great American,” It’s not too surprising, either. Although not initially a supporter, Sondland has been a very generous donor to the president, and that’s why he landed a plum diplomatic job in Europe despite the fact that his experience is in the hotel industry.
However, Trump is lying about why he won’t let him testify and he may live to regret vouching for Sondland’s character.
To understand why, you should read an article the Wall Street Journal published on October 4th. It details a conversation that Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin had with Sondland on August 30th. The senator had been reading press reports that military aid to Ukraine was being held up and this concerned him because he is the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Europe and Regional Security Cooperation. He contacted Sondland and learned something troubling:
Sen. Ron Johnson said that Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, had described to him a quid pro quo involving a commitment by Kyiv to probe matters related to U.S. elections and the status of nearly $400 million in U.S. aid to Ukraine that the president had ordered to be held up in July…
…Under the arrangement, Mr. Johnson said Mr. Sondland told him, Ukraine, under its newly elected president, would appoint a strong prosecutor general and move to “get to the bottom of what happened in 2016—if President Trump has that confidence, then he’ll release the military spending,” recounted Mr. Johnson.
“At that suggestion, I winced,” Mr. Johnson said. “My reaction was: Oh, God. I don’t want to see those two things combined.”
The next day, August 31, Sen. Johnson talked directly with Trump. He was scheduled to meet Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky on September 1 and he wanted clarity on the situation. According to Johnson, Trump said that there was no quid pro quo but he did not deny that he was interested in having a prosecutor appointed who would look into the 2016 election. Johnson admits that he informed the president at this time that Sondland had told him otherwise.
When private and secure text messages from September 9 between Sondland, Ambassador Kurt Volker and Ukrainian embassy charge d’Affaires Bill Taylor were released, it showed that Taylor also understood the situation to involve a quid pro quo. By this time, however, Sondland knew better than to go along with that interpretation.
What this shows is that the quid pro quo was understood quite clearly by the State Department officials on the ground who were responsible for Ukraine. By the time of this exchange, Sondland had heard back from Sen. Johnson and spoken directly with Trump. He did not want them texting about a quid pro quo even on a classified system.
It should be obvious why the impeachment inquiry wants to talk to Sondland and also why the president will not allow this.
As for Sondland, he is not pleased with this development.
“Ambassador Sondland is profoundly disappointed that he will not be able to testify,” said a statement from the envoy’s attorney, Robert Luskin. “Ambassador Sondland traveled to Washington from Brussels in order to prepare for his testimony and to be available to answer the Committee’s questions.”
It’s unclear what authority Trump has to prevent Sondland’s testimony or how long it will take for the House to secure it. But he’s one of the key witnesses in this case and he’s eager to cooperate.
As for Senator Johnson, when he had that call with Trump on August 31 and was told there was no quid pro quo, he naturally asked that he be permitted to tell this to the Ukrainian president the next day when they met in person.
In the call, Mr. Johnson said he also asked Mr. Trump if he could be authorized to tell the Ukrainians that support was coming. “He did not give me that authority,” Mr. Johnson said in a separate interview Wednesday. He said Mr. Trump assured him: “I hear what you’re saying; you’ll probably be happy with my decision.”
The true test is usually what people do rather than what they say. Trump said there was no quid pro quo but would not permit Johnson to deny it to the Ukrainians.
Trump says that the process is unfair to him, but he’s obstructing justice with his treatment of Ambassador Sondland, and it will potentially serve as one of several articles of impeachment.
Volker testified. He resigned, and brought the documents. Sondland could do the same thing if he really wants to testify.
Potentially serve as obstruction of justice? Is there nothing stronger than this rather meaningless incentive? Like jail?
And now we have a new criteria for defying congress- they are too partisan! I’ll bet quite a few founding fathers, ex legislators and oh hell, convicted Watergate felons are rolling over in their graves on that one. Pelosi really needs to have a vote in the house authorizing Schiff to use congress’s power of inherent contempt to jail or fine individuals that don’t respond to a subpoena immediately, or we are going to be stuck with some really awful precedents about stonewalling congress.
Jail – physical discomfort is the only thing they will respond to…there is no other option for Congress. Defiance of the law = jail time. It is a simple slogan even the brain dead Trumpies can grasp.
With yesterday’s absurd and unconstitutional National Trumpalist declaration of the Divine Right of Stonewalling, we are (with the possible exception of another July 25 Whistleblower) at the end of the “information” process and at the Constitutional Crisis stage of the national collapse. There will be no John Deans of the 21st Century, decades of “conservative” brainwashing and billionaire plutocrat creation has seen to that. Der Trumper, Justice Minister Barr (who wrote this unconstitutional stonewall letter) and Trumper’s “conservative” toadies and enablers in House and Senate have ended the last vestige of the Old Republic. This leaves the Dem (constitutional) party with nothing but recourse to the “conservative”-controlled courts. Such recourse is time consuming and ultimately very likely pointless, as Roberts’ Repubs will back the “conservative” executive over the lib’rul House. House Dems could presumably try to hold various National Trumpalists in contempt and levy fines, but again, that’s a slow moving process that ultimately takes them straight to Roberts’ Repubs, the (actual) Kangaroo Court.
So get what you can from the whistleblowers and draw up the articles of impeachment, Dems. Demand the full text of the Shakedown call and have Barr stonewall it with his bad faith “arguments”. If the articles include just the Ukraine Shakedown, fine. Al Capone was ultimately jailed for tax evasion, not murder. The non-brainwashed segment of the population is generally aware that Der Trumper is egregiously unfit for office, a megalomaniacal conman, and a clear and present danger to the nation and its (failed) constitution, if not to the world. So hold the vote and take it to the senate. If our patriotic “conservatives” want to remove this open and obvious threat, they can. If not, that’s the end of the old constitutional republic, because the left certainly should not sit back and meekly allow stonewalling by “conservative” prezes, but respect all the old restraints for (future) Dem executives–should they exist.
I don’t think you’re right. I agree with this guy:
“’You know what you need to know from the documents that we already have,” said Rep. Gerry Connolly, a Virginia Democrat. “It is why I think the stonewalling is counterproductive and ultimately futile. There are going to be more people coming forward irrespective of White House stonewalling. All it does is persuade the public … (the President) is resisting for a reason.’
“The White House stonewalling of the investigation could become wrapped up in the articles of impeachment that are drafted as obstruction of Congress.”
https://kfor.com/2019/10/09/democrats-plot-next-phase-in-impeachment-including-new-wave-of-subpoenas/
I would also pay close attention to the analysis by Lawrence Tribe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fc2cba4klQI
“It’s important that Trump called Sondland “a really good man and a great American…”
He said the same thing about Michael Flynn, and look where he’s at — on his way to prison.
Sondland has a lot to lose, and he needs to be reminded that the way Trump rewards those who decide to keep quiet and go down with Trump end up, as in the case of Michael Cohen, going down for him. Trump will not hesitate to throw him under and back the bus up over him.