Sondland said everyone at the highest level of the administration knew about a quid pro quo demanded of Ukraine and that it was explicitly directed by Trump. "We followed the President’s orders.... Everyone was in the loop. It was no secret."
He continued: "I know that members of this Committee have frequently framed these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: Was there a 'quid pro quo?' As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes."
Sondland also made clear that what Trump wanted from the Ukrainians was clear — he wanted their public announcement that they were investigating Joe Biden's son. He didn't care, however, if they actually investigated him.
"He had to announce the investigations," Sondland testified, referring to the Ukrainian president. "He didn’t actually have to do them.... They had to be announced in some form."
Further, the ambassador noted that Michael Pence, the Vice President, knew that military aid to Ukraine was conditioned on the investigation announcements (details here) "I mentioned to ... Pence before the meetings with the Ukrainians that I had concerns that the delay in aid had become tied to the issue of investigations," he testified.
While Sondland's testimony was still ongoing, several legal pundits noted that the revelations suggested Trump had committed bribery by withholding the military aid, including Ken Starr, whose federal prosecution triggered the impeachment of President Bill Clinton (details here). This is an important distinction because bribery is one of the listed high reasons spelled out in the Constitution for impeaching a President.
To this end, Benjamin Wittes, the editor in chief of Lawfare wrote an excellent essay yesterday on this very topic (link here) titled "Gordon Sondland Accuses the President of Bribery."
He concludes his piece with this: "A witness with first-hand knowledge of both U.S. interactions with the Ukrainians and the President’s own conduct today accused ... Trump of soliciting a bribe from a foreign head of state. Whether or not this would qualify as a bribe under the criminal law, I would have no hesitation describing it as one if I were a member of Congress considering the impeachment of a President."
There are still many more witnesses to come. Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Speak up!