Sunday, December 8, 2019

Ambassador Sondland confirms quid pro quo in house testimony




In a crucial testimony for house democrats, Gordon Sondland gave new key points to aid the impeachment hearings. With a somewhat confusing account of Trump's actions, Sondland was able to confirm that military aid was withheld from Ukraine in order to find more information on the Bidens.
While Trump had told Sondland that he wanted "no quid pro quo," Sondland's response to when asked about it was "yes," there was quid pro quo.

Sondland continued to touch up on the points the president made in their phone calls, where Trump was attempting to dodge conversations about aid. Sondland also cleared up that when he was first aware of the events that had occurred, he lobbied for a better explanation of the delay.

Arguably the most crucial statement made by Sondland came when he said that "everyone was in the loop" and "it was no secret." Sondland's statement helps highlight the corruption in the Trump organization and White House. Schiff and other house democrats will use Sondland's testimony to help push impeachment and conviction hearings. 

Image result for sondland"

1. Even if Trump is impeached, what further information is needed to convict him in the Republican Senate?

2. What impact will Sondland's statement that "everyone [was] in the loop" on Trump's associates if he is convicted?

3. Most of the time Trump attacks those who give testimony against him, however in this case he told reporters that he "[didn't] know him very well," does that give any validity to Sondland's statements?

15 comments:

  1. Because the Senate is majority Republican, and it is close to an election year, Republican senators will be reluctant to convict Trump because they will want to appear faithful to the Republican party. In order to convict Trump in the Republican Senate, there would have to be strong evidence that the public wants Trump to be impeached because Senators would not be as likely to consider the safety of their own reelection in their decision. Trump was charged of two articles of impeachment. The idea that there was quid pro quo helps prove the first article, which said that Trump abused power. Zelensky claimed that he felt no pressure from the Trump administration, which is part of the Republican defense. If Zelensky claimed that he did feel pressure, then there would be clear evidence that Trump abused power. Also, in order to make Trump’s conviction more likely, there would have to be more evidence for Trump’s second article of impeachment, which is that he obstructed Congress.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 1. Although Trump will likely be impeached by the House, it is very unlikely that he is convicted by the Senate. Because the Senate is majority Republican, the chances that enough of them to vote against Trump in order to reach the 2/3 supermajority is slim. More clear evidence that Trump directly abused his power would need to surface before the supermajority is possible.

    2. This statement by Sondland ensures that everyone within Trump's inner circle is brought into the legal punishment of their actions or knowledge. The fact that everyone knew, yet no one did anything to stop Trump or turn him in makes them all responsible for what happened.

    3. By saying this, Trump is trying to distance himself from Sondland. Where he might usually retaliate with a verbal attack, Trump decided that it would be wisest to separate himself from Sondland and his claims altogether rather than be forced to directly acknowledge Sondland's accusations.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 1. Although Trump is impeached by the House of Representatives, I think that the probability of him being convicted and removed from office is very low. Republicans occupy 53 seats in the Senate, and most of them will likely veto the articles of impeachment. As a result, Democrats will not be able to get the supermajority needed to convict Trump.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 3) Trump is just trying to seem completely unassociated with Sondland, as it makes him seem like he is the in control of the situation, and not replying to Sondland's claims

    ReplyDelete
  6. 1) In order for Trump to get impeached by the senate he will need to get exposed for a lot more egregious of actions. I believe a lot more information has not been brought to the surface. The senate is going to try to prevent impeachment at all costs, but if more information comes out against Trump I believe the only thing they can do is impeach Trump.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 1. No amount of further information will cause the senate to convict Trump. The senate is controlled by Republicans, most of whom would not risk their reelection by convicting a Republican president with a decent approval rating. Major information, like Ukraine coming out and saying they were pressured, would be the only possibility in which Trump could be convicted.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 1. Even if Trump is impeached, what further information is needed to convict him in the Republican Senate?
    Their is really no more evidence that would lead the Senate to convict Trump, because they are in the same party, and because it is close to the election they want to appear more faithful. In addition they already struck it so why not go threw the end. Although, the more they stick with Trump the more their image is ruined, but for the is to not give in to the Democrats because it would look bad. In addition a good part of America still supports the President. Even if it is not more than fifty percent of the support for Trump it is still a big group of people that don’t want the senate to not convict Trump.
    2. What impact will Sondland's statement that "everyone [was] in the loop" on Trump's associates if he is convicted?
    It would demonstrate that his administration was corrupt and that they favored their jobs more than the public safety.

    3. Most of the time Trump attacks those who give testimony against him, however in this case he told reporters that he "[didn't] know him very well," does that give any validity to Sondland's statements? It would in a sense that Trump doesn’t want to associate with this news of his testimony and try to de validate him by not knowing of his existence. At the same time it can just not do anything with validating his statement, due to other republicans official trying to evaluate Sondland’s statements.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 1. The only reason Republicans would convict Trump is if he committed an incredibly obvious, undeniable crime. As it stands right now, the Republican talking points are difficult to completely refute due to their reliance on testimonies that can't really be explicitly proven as true or false. As a result, Trump is likely to stay in office for the remainder of his term.

    ReplyDelete
  10. ) Considering the republican majority senate it is very unlikely that the senate would convict Trump even if the House of Representatives voted for impeachment. The only way for the republican majority senate to vote ⅔ for impeachment is if there was information regarding directly from Ukraine possibly however based on senate majority leader Mitch McConell there is “no chance” for Trump to be impeached.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 2. Sondland's statement that Trump's associates were all "in the loop" does not bode well for the Trump administration if Trump is convicted. Although unlikely, having Trump be convicted means that a Republican majority agrees that Trump committed impeachable offenses, which means that the President's own political party is no longer on his side. For this reason, if his associates all truly were in the loop, then they would also be in trouble for helping Trump break the law and use foreign help to influence politics in the US.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Since Trump has been impeached in the House, it is up to the senate, which is majority Republican, to convict him. There is not much evidence that could possibly change the outcome of the Senate's vote. Since the House already went through that process, many of Trump's actions that has gotten him in this position has already been exposed.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Trump's impeachment from the House is not the final step to fully removing him as president, he still needs to get impeached by the Senate as well. Since the senate is a majority Republican, it is highly unlikely that Trump will be convicted. Senators would like to appear as loyal, in case of reelection. The type of evidence needed will be hard to deny, lucrative actions to be fully exposed. Ukraine for example would be hard evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  14. No further evidence is enough to impeach Trump in the Republican controlled Senate, especially since it needs to a 2/3 majority to convict him. All evidence has been brought forward, and no evidence for this case in particular would lead to conviction in the senate. His claim that everyone was "in the loop", that could harm Trump's associates if they were in the loop. If they are the white house staff or in government positions themselves, this could hurt their career and possibly caused them to get impeached or arrested.

    ReplyDelete