General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSondland lied again!!
Multiple tweet thread
Link to tweet
@TheViewFromLL2
I just realized that, for whatever reason, Sondland got his testimony about his "no quid pro quo" call with President Trump wrong. He testified that the call took place on September 9th, but that can't possibly be true
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
FM123
(10,054 posts)malaise
(269,187 posts)RFN!
global1
(25,272 posts)Does Schiff recall Morrison and Sondland to correct the record? Do they charge Sondland with perjury?
They can't let this lie stand. The record needs to be corrected.
Will Trump have to make new notes? (sarcasm)
2naSalit
(86,802 posts)They might have been written in sharpie but that's not his handwriting. So that's his script, as he demonstrated. When all speak the identical phrases and their memory is most clear with those exact words and murky on what should be more memorable things... doesn't work out when details are checked.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)2naSalit
(86,802 posts)UpInArms
(51,284 posts)One state department employee testified that all records were available... Sondland testified that he could not access his records ..
Who to believe?
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)And if somehow they just made his in and out box restricted.
So if a witness has 10 emails HE can pick which, if any, to show at the hearing.
What's restricted is the the committee can't get the whole 10, right?
Have to say, pretty damn savvy move on their part.
spanone
(135,885 posts)thanks to trump
mopinko
(70,239 posts)at this point, sondland's lies are assumed.
MartyTheGreek
(567 posts)to get picked up on a private line in Ukraine knowing that the call would do just that, there would be several witnesses and who knows, maybe even a microphone under the table. It would get Sondland off the hook because he was just following orders and Trump would get to say no QPQ, but allow him to mention the investigations as though it were a thing. The Russ-Ukra-Trump theory that it was Ukraine that attacked the 2016 elections, DNC, etc.
#AlibiCall
Pepsidog
(6,254 posts)gab13by13
(21,408 posts)but I'm not so sure about him.
Cosmocat
(14,574 posts)nm
MontanaMama
(23,337 posts)Maybe its time for Gordon to go through some things...
SCantiGOP
(13,874 posts)A quick search doesnt show a lot about her except she is desperate for an audience.
Moosepoop
(1,922 posts)About Me
LL2 is short for Lower Level 2, or the second sub-basement of the George Washington University Law Library. LL2 has no windows, and no view to speak of, but it does have the librarys collection of books on international law. Susan spent too much time there during law school.
Susan Simpson graduated from the George Washington University Law School. As an associate with the Volkov Law Group, she focuses primarily on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and white collar defense, as well as related civil proceedings. Her previous legal experience includes civil litigation and criminal appeals. She is a producer of the Undisclosed podcast, along with Colin Miller and Rabia Chaudry.
As a blogger at LL2, she will, on rare occasions, write about things other than jurisdictional issues, in which case she will most likely write about standards of review and/or Battlestar Galactica. Her interests include international tribunal procedure, law of the sea, conflicting sovereignty regimes, and craft projects involving obscure tetrapods and repurposed armor. She can beat you in Halo.
[email: susan.simpson@gmail.com]
OhNo-Really
(3,985 posts)But since you asked
Susan Simpson graduated from the George Washington University Law School. As an associate with the Volkov Law Group, she focuses primarily on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and white collar defense, as well as related civil proceedings. Her previous legal experience includes civil litigation and criminal appeals. She is a producer of the Undisclosed podcast, along with Colin Miller and Rabia Chaudry.
About Me
Hi, I'm Susan. I'm a lawyer in Washington, D.C., and The View From LL2 is my place to talk about things that I am interested in.
To find out more about LL2, go here.
https://viewfromll2.com/about/
DallasNE
(7,403 posts)My immediate reaction was that Sondland was backtracking, then I said that Trump will run with that. But I couldn't put my finger on exactly why that was so, not realizing it was a timeline issue. But when Trump ran with it so fiercely it was pretty clear Sondland was at that moment speaking to an audience of one. And when you look at how he prefaced the comments he was about to make it is lawyerly and intended to give cover to any possible perjury. So Simpson does a really great job here and nails it down precisely.
uponit7771
(90,364 posts)CaptainTruth
(6,602 posts)global1
(25,272 posts)News channels?
It would seem that this information from Susan Simpson is significant to this whole impeachment inquiry. How come we aren't hearing anything about this on the news? This should be a big story.
What's going on?
wnylib
(21,618 posts)he testified at all -- supposedly in defiance of Trump so that he was denied access to his own material for reference. Or is that an excuse for being vague on specifics and for previous lies and omissions?
He sounded like he was actually defending Trump while claiming to provide as much info as possible on QPQ. But he insisted that he could only "surmise" that QPQ included security system. He confined QPQ to what was already known from phone call -- Velensky visit to WH. So no new info on that from Sondland.
Did not know that.Burisma meant Biden? Not credible claim. Just CYA BS to dissociate himself from obvious Biden reference in phone call.
Then gives Trump something to use with claim of no QPQ statement from Trump in phone call -- which now is under question due to timeline.
Even the "bombshell" claim of no inner vs outer loop that names administration people says it was all open and above board, allowing Trump to claim it was legitimate tactic in fighting corruption. Fiona Hill made it clear that there was a division of inner and outer. Trump and pals vs career professional diplomats.
Only 2 useful points from Sondland. 1. That Trump wanted only a televised statement of investigation, which means it was politicsl fodder for campaign. But Trump can say he knew the investigation would take time and only wanted a public commitment to prove intent to fight corruption.
2. More useful, IMO, is the claim by Sondland that he was denied access to his own records for reference. That is something to add to the obstruction charges. Then Trump has to ignore the charge and let it stand, or produce the records which would provide specifics and eliminate what I believe was deliberate vagueness from Sondland.
H2O Man
(73,623 posts)Thank you for this. It is very important.
Recommended.