Sondland changed his sworn statement numerous times.
His first statement said there was no quid pro quo.
Then, supposedly because some other witness's testimony reminded him that he had in fact said there was a quid pro quo.
This was very major, which is why dishonest Adam Schiff and the Articles of impeachment cited Sondland so much, because Sondland was a first hand witness.
The only witness with first hand knowledge who was claiming there was a quid pro quo.
But when questioned Sondland admitted that he didn't have any first hand knowledge of a quid pro quo; he "presumed" there was one.
When further questioned Sondland testified that when he talked to Trump about it not only did Trump say there was no quid pro quo, rather emphatically according to Sondland, but that he, Trump, didn't want a quid pro quo.
Clearly Sondland testified that there was a quid pro quo hoping that no one would ask him about his conversation with Trump.
No honest person would testify that there was a quid pro quo by Trump when the only information that he had from Trump himself was that there was.
If Sondland was honest and thought there was a quid pro quo he'd have testified that while Trump denied it he, Sondland, though there was one.
That's not what he did. He effectively lied to Congress until forced to admit to the truth.
So of course Trump fired him.
Why would any President retain the services of an Ambassador, who serve solely at the pleasure of the President, who lied to Congress about him?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment