7 Key Moments From Gordon Sondland’s Testimony on Day 4 of Public Impeachment Hearings

It was another bad day for the left-wingers.

Gordon Sondland's testimony didn't deliver as the left-wingers had hope for.

In fact, Soundland's testimony vindicated President Trump.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/11...mony-on-day-4-of-public-impeachment-hearings/

 

Those lefties watching the testimony today say otherwise. All they seem to be able to do is repeat the misleading dem clown show talking points..

 

Yeah, they seem to completely ignore testimony such as this...
https://twitter.com/SteveScalise/status/1197239750064783361?s=20

 

And nobody is saying anything about the witness intimidation being orchestrated by the Democrats.

https://hotair.com/archives/karen-t...-crossfire-blumenauer-faces-ethics-complaint/

 

Lmao wow that’s some spin!
He admitted the quid pro quo outright! Lol

 

My conclusions on the facts revealed by the hearings are listed below. Their legal/political import for the different stages of impeachment (from investigation/inquiry, to impeachment to removal), the applicable standard of proof for each, and whether to what extent these factual conclusions establish the legal predicate ("bribery, treason, high crimes and misdemeanors) for impeachment can be debated. Impeachment is ultimately a political, not legal proceeding, and there is no real 'legal answer' to any of those questions in any case.

But facts aren't supposed to be as 'political' as some might like to make them appear! My factual findings would be along the following lines:

1- There is overwhelming circumstantial evidence ("clear and convincing") that Trump made an oval office meeting between Ukraine's new president and himself conditioned on the Zelinsky agreeing to publicly commit to investigating the "Burismo" (and their hiring of Hunter Biden and any impact that had on Joe Biden's actions as VP) as well as looking into allegations of supposed Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election ("Investigations").

2- There is strong circumstantial evidence ("preponderance of the evidence") that Trump delayed aid to the Ukraine, at least in part, awaiting a public announcement by Ukraine to conduct these Investigations.

3- There is a reasonable suspicion ("probable cause to believe") that aid to Ukraine was also meant to be conditioned on the same Investigations.

4- There is overwhelming evidence (both direct and circumstantial) ("beyond reasonable doubt') that Trump abused his powers of the presidency to obstruct and impede legitimate investigation by the Congress into his actions relevant to the impeachment proceedings against him.

p.s.
My own view is that #4 is the ground that ultimately is most appropriate for removal of Trump from office.

 

Dailysignal, hotair, and the Steve scalise twitter feed.

Smdh.

Credit to @Iranian Monitor for raising the quality of citations in this thread by 10x through simply providing his own analysis.

 

LOL, I firmly believe 1 of 2 things. Either Trumpservatives didn't watch a minute of the hearings and are getting their talking points from their favorite safe space sources for rebuttal. Or 2, they simply dont care about the rule of law in order to worship at the altar of Trump.

I'm gonna say a bit of both. LOL

 

"Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif, the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee, brought up the complaints about irregular channels early in the hearing, suggesting that House Democrats would impeach George Washington.

“The Democrats fein outrage that President Trump used his own channel to communicate with Ukraine. I remind my friends on the other side of the aisle that our first president, George Washington, directed his own diplomatic channels to secure a treaty with Great Britain. If my Democratic colleagues had been around in 1794, they’d probably want to impeach him too.”

Yup. Washington also ignored a House subpoena.

 

Personally I think it was when he served Big Macs in the White House. That was a red line.

And hey, they can impeach on anything or nothing at all.

 

His "presumption" means diddly squat.

 

Tucker Carlson is all over this tonight.



Plus, the GOP has a new ad out...

 

Citations come with links.

 

If he didn't get fries with those Big Mac's, that's an impeachable offense.

 

It was priceless to watch them call a recess after Sondland's opening statement and rush our to declare that there was a Quid pro Quo (I guess the words bribery and extortion failed the daily focus group consensus) and then watch the air go out of the balloon for the next few hours. Sondland's presumption of a Quid pro Quo was nothing more than his assumption that a Ukrainian statement to investigate corruption in their nation was a condition for a White House meeting. Too funny.

Meanwhile the Clinton Foundation's contributions are down to 10% of what they were when Hillary was in office and a candidate.

 

Sondland's presumption of a Quid pro Quo was nothing more than his assumption that a Ukrainian statement to investigate corruption in their nation was a condition for a White House meeting. Too funny.

As is often the case in the MSM the headline has nothing to do with the reality.

 

In the end, still NO PROOF Trump forced or bribed anyone for information SPECIFICALLY to help him and ONLY him. The worst thing we saw was that they held up money we don’t technically owe anyone for a meeting. And dont know about you but if we’re handing over aid we can request their leaders talk with our leaders.

And Sondland admitted he truly doesn’t know for sure what Trump meant, but he sure as **** admitted what Trump told him. “I dont want anything.” Everything else is pure speculation and his opinions about what people were thinking, don’t mean ****. That’s not evidence.

 

Not corruption, democrats. No other cAses, just those that involve dems.

 

Additionally Cooper testified that the funding is for contracts and that the delay in funding would not result in any delays in the delivery schedule.

 

Yah and we can’t prove a bank robber wasn’t planning to donate most of it to charity lol

 

Democrats are responsible for all the corruption in Ukraine which is the most corrupt nation in Europe ??

 

Of course not, yet that’s all trump had questions about

 

First a person who is innocent until proven guilty must be given due process and convicted of robbing the bank.

 

He stated that the new Ukrainian President should investigate corruption in the Ukraine which he had committed to doing in his campaign.

 

Lol I am in the wrong line of business. I need to start up a **** website like daily signal that will attract conservative readers with idiotic articles that basically repeat the conservative echo chamber. I could make a killing. It’s easy to pretend to be a conservative blogger. I just have to turn my brain off and post nonsense.