I don't have the time to follow the impeachment hearings. Work, dinner, pets, etc. I guess it's a good thing, it's confusing and bounces all over. A cluster!
I heard this morning Sondland had a torch, flamethrower or something like that. A quid pro quo. Then nothing, no quid pro quo from anyone, anywhere? Just an opinion?
What?
I hear ya. I have listened to or watched almost all of it.
I understand all the witnesses positions. I also understand how Sondland can say there was a quid pro quo under oath. And also say, "The President never directly told me to seek a quid pro quo or anything like it", under oath. It was clear all those doing the questioning also understood how he can have two truthful yet opposing statements, as none of them called him a liar or tried to twist him away from one statement or the other. Each side did however ask their questions in a way for it to be ammo for their respective news organizations.
Most of the witness testimony can get hard to follow when you watch or hear the whole thing. I'm sure it is harder to follow when competing narratives apparently show their side winning.
Since all the witnesses so far were long standing, men and women of honor. I will take their under oath words as truth. They all line up pretty well also.
What I gathered from all the testimony so far is that all the witnesses were doing their best for America. They also believed (prior to the 25th call) that aide and a Presidential meeting were on hold contingent upon investigations into the 2016 election and Burisma's corruption as it relates to Ukrainians. General Ukrainian corruption investigating, which there is a lot to investigate.
What has also become clear to me through all the testimony is that Rudy Guillinani has some 'splainin' to do. By all accounts, he is the one that was pushing the 2016 election, Burisma with Biden's investigations as the condition for release of aide and a Presidential meeting. Volker said he gave Rudy a direct number to one of the Ukranian Presidents people. Fiona Hill, according to Morrison, warned him of Rudy's back door dealings when he replaced her. Morrison, Volker and Sondland said Rudy is the only one they heard pushing 2016 election and Burisma investigations as a condition for aide release and presidential meeting. They thought it was a Presidential directive from President Trump because Trump had told Volker and Sondland to, "talk to Rudy". An investigation into the "Burisma, the Bidens" was mentioned by Trump in a call on record, and all three(Morrison, Volker and Sondland) testified that that was the first time they realized that "Burisma meant Biden's". They all claim that before the call transcript they thought it was a request to investigate a company that has been investigated several times for corruption.
If Rudy acted outside of Trumps directive, why isn't Trump blasting Rudy on Twitter for putting him in this position? Also, why did Trump himself mention a Biden investigation in the call if there was no quid pro quo with a Biden investigation involved?
