"After a large meeting, I now recall speaking individually with Mr. Yermak, where I said that resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks. I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anticorruption statement..."
Emphasi mine.
The first takeaway is that presumptions are not evidence.
And the second is that this statement implies that he was never directed by the Trump administration to make this proposal.
Last edited by Mountain Man; 11-05-2019 at 03:50 PM.
Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
"After a large meeting, I now recall speaking individually with Mr. Yermak, where I said that resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks. I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anticorruption statement..."
Emphasi mine.
The first takeaway is that presumptions are not evidence.
And the second is that this statement implies that he was never directed by the Trump administration to make this proposal.
So, lemme get this straight --- he was adamant back then that there was no quid pro quo, and even texted back then that Trump was very angry and said "I want nothing - I want no quid pro quo", but now he "remembers" that he "presumed" there must have been....
Yes that's the one, noting especially where it says "Sondland's new testimony, which was included in the public release of his closed-door deposition transcript on Tuesday, adds to Democrats' evidence that the President connected the freezing of US security aid to Ukraine to investigations into Biden as well as the hacking of the Democratic National Committee's servers during the 2016 election, which cuts to the heart of their impeachment case against Trump". Namely where he acknowledges what everyone knows: "a quid pro quo with Ukraine".
Last edited by Tassman; 11-05-2019 at 10:52 PM.
“He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.
Other sketchy statements from Sondland's "corrections" (again, emphasis mine):
"I always believed that suspending aid to Ukraine was ill-advised, although I did not know (and still do not know) when, why, or by whom the aid was suspended. However, by the beginning of September 2019, and in the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid, I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement. As I said in my prepared testimony, security aid to Ukraine was in our vital national interest and should not have been delayed for any reason. [This is nothing but his opinion. -MM] And it would have been natural for me to have voiced what I had presumed to Ambassador Taylor, Senator Johnson, the Ukrainians, and Mr. Morrison."
An awful lot of presuming going on. He also says "it would have been natural" for him to voice his concerns to interested parties, but pay attention to sleight of hand: He never says that he actually voiced his concerns!
"Soon thereafter, I came to understand[Meaning he wasn't told. -MM] that, in fact, the public statement would need to come directly from President Zelensky himself. I do not specifically recall how I learned this[Again, the implication is that he wasn't told. -MM], but I believe that the information may have come either from Mr. Giuliani or from Ambassador Volkor, who may have discussed this with Mr. Giuliani."
Remember, any time a witness says "may have", you can substitute "may not have" without changing the meaning of the statement.
"In a later conversation with Ambassador Taylor, I told him that I had been mistaken about whether a public statement could come from the Prosecutor General; I had come to understand[The implication, again, is that this isn't something he was told. -MM] that the public statement would have to come from President Zelensky himself."
Now see if you can follow along with this one:
"Ambassador Taylor recalls that Mr. Morrison told Ambassador Taylor that I told Mr. Morrison that I had conveyed this message to Mr. Yermak..."
That's like something out of a Marx Bros. skit!
And on it goes. Taking apart testimony like this is like batting practice for defense attorneys.
Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
And on it goes. Taking apart testimony like this is like batting practice for defense attorneys.
When you have statements that were made at the time, texts, emails..... vs "oh, yeah, I just remembered".... and, as you point out, the current version is "presumed", not "knew" or "know".
When you have statements that were made at the time, texts, emails..... vs "oh, yeah, I just remembered".... and, as you point out, the current version is "presumed", not "knew" or "know".
And "I learned" and "I came to believe" as opposed to "I was told".
Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
Originally Posted by Mountain Man
RumTumTugger amen'd this post.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote