Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDavid Corn: Donald Trump's No-Quid-Pro-Quo Defense Is Crushed. The GOP Didn't Get the Memo.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/11/donald-trumps-no-quid-pro-quo-defense-is-crushed-the-gop-didnt-get-the-memo/Donald Trumps No-Quid-Pro-Quo Defense Is Crushed. The GOP Didnt Get the Memo.
Gordon Sondlands dramatic testimony bolsters the Democrats case for impeachment.
David Corn
What do you do when your whole world falls apart? That is, what do you do when you say there was no quid pro quo, but a credible witness declares there was?
That was the bombshell testimony delivered by Gordon Sondland, the Republican hotelier who earned himself a US ambassadorship by donating $1 million to President Donald Trumps inauguration committee. In a dramatic appearance before the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday, Sondland made it clear that Trump had set up a pay-to-play-ish foreign policy operation. Its not complicated: When Sondland and other US officials encouraged Trump to work with the new Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump expressed contempt for Ukrainians and said, Talk to Rudy. When they talked to Rudy Giuliani, the presidents lawyer, Giuliani told them that before the Ukrainians could get a much-desired phone call and sit-down with Trump, Kyiv had to announce the opening of political investigations that Trump wanted. And Sondland and his colleagues, trying to salvage the US-Ukraine relationship, then spent months working with the Ukrainians to try to make this deal happen.
snip//
The Republicans just could not bring themselves to accept reality. Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) declared that the hearing was based on speculation, presumption, and opinion. He noted that Sondland had no evidence that Trump blocked the security assistance to pressure Zelensky. (Sondland testified that his direct knowledge of a quid pro quo related only to that possible White House visit for Zelensky.) Jordan did not repeat his no-linkages mantra. Perhaps that would be a denial too far. But he reprised another favorite refrain: The military aid was eventually released, so there was no quid pro quo. Jordan did not mention that the assistance was released after the White House learned of the whistleblowers complaint and Congress began an investigation. Yes, they got caught, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said at the hearing in response to Jordan.
Overall, the Republican effort was sad. True, Trump, Fox News, and other conservative media highlighted Sondlands testimony that he had received no direct quid-pro-quo order from Trump. But one key feature of this scandal is that Sondland did not have to receive such instruction from the guy at the top. Trump had set up a situation in which he did not need to explicitly command his underlings to squeeze the Ukrainians. That was Giulianis job. The Republicans may be inching toward a throw-Rudy-under-the-bus position. But before they arrive there, they are kicking up the-Ukrainians-did-it dust, sticking with their absurd claims that Trump was motivated by a concern for corruption and the possible misuse of US assistance, obsessing over the whistleblower who started the Ukraine scandal, and insisting the real scandal is about the Bidens.
I want to get back to the facts, Nunes said after Sondland was questioned by the Democrats. The facts, though, are not on his sideor Trumps. Sondland drew a damning big-picture portrait that corroborated whats already known: Trump exploited his office in an attempt to gather political ammo that could influence the 2020 election and that could clear him of the Russia taint. During a break in the hearing, I asked Nunes, What do you think so far? You said there was no quid pro quo. Sondland said there was. Nunes glowered at me and said nothing.
Update: Shortly after I filed this story, Jordan walked past me in the committee room. Do you still think there was no quid pro quo? I asked. Without pause, he shot back: No quid pro quo. And he kept on walking.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 986 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (16)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
David Corn: Donald Trump's No-Quid-Pro-Quo Defense Is Crushed. The GOP Didn't Get the Memo. (Original Post)
babylonsister
Nov 2019
OP
Pay to Play is the phrase they should have used from the very begging - not
patricia92243
Nov 2019
#1
patricia92243
(12,591 posts)1. Pay to Play is the phrase they should have used from the very begging - not
the Latin mumbo jumbo.
Backseat Driver
(4,379 posts)2. Blame the Kool-Aid! n/t