the democrats original case was there was a this for that quid pro quo. a request for information on burisma and investigations in exchange for aid. we now know that is not true. the aid arrived and there are no investigations. then it morphed into, well, it will be a white house meeting for aid. now we find out the white house meeting was offered without conditions and no meeting happened. that morphed into, well, we need a statement from zelensky in exchange for aid. no statement was given, the aid arrived. this case is nonsensical and by the way, now an attempted quid pro quo and the only on the record statement we have about a quid pro quo is the president of the united states and, i want to be crystal clear, no quid pro quo. this is really open and shut. laura: at one point, ambassador sondland seemed to kind of cast down its own reliability as a witness. watch. i ve had hundreds of meetings and calls with individuals. but i m not a notetaker or a
with mr. yermak. when i reached mr. yermak s office ambassador sondland had already gone into the meeting. i explained to mr. yermak s assistant i was supposed to join the meeting and strongly urged her to let me in. she told me ambassador sondland and mr. yermak insisted the meeting with one-on-one with no note taker. i waited in the ante room until the meeting ended. when the meeting ended, the two staffers and i accompanied ambassador sondland out of the presidential administration building. ambassador sondland said he wanted to go to lunch. i told him i would be happy to join him and the two staffers for lunch if he wanted to brief me on the meeting or discuss other issues. sondland said i should join. the four of us went to a nearby restaurant and sat on an outdoor terrace. i sat directly across from ambassador sondland and the two staffers sat off to our sides. at first the lunch was largely
even more ominously, he asked zelensky to look into the biden. neither request had been prepared in the talking points, but both in donald trump s perm intere personal interests and the interests of 2020 campaign. and they knew about the efforts to make them aware of demands. the next day, holmes served as a note taker in a meeting between acting ambassador and senior officials. th the president said he had three times raised very sensitive issues that he would have to t follow up on those issues when they met in person.
io had not expected to join th meeting and was a flight of stairs behind ambassador sondland. when i reached mr. yermak s office, ambassador sondland had already gone in to the meeting. i explained to mr. yermak s assistant i was supposed to join as the embassy s representative and urged her to let me in but told me ambassador sondland b a yermak insisted the meeting be one on be one with no note taker. i waited in the room until the meetingom ended with a mesh of ambassador sondland s staff and the u.s. embassy kyiv staff. when the meeting ended the two staffers and i accompanied ambassador sondland out of the presidentialon administration building. ambassador sondland wanted to go toat lunch and i told ambassado sondland i would be i happy to join him and the two staffers for lunch if he wanted to brief me on his meeting with mr. yermak or discuss other issues. ambassador sondland said i should join. the four went to a nearby restaurant and sat on an outdoor terrace. i sat across fro
the thing that allows senate republicans to return to defending the president, and will spare them here. it is always interesting, danny, to see how the different sides go after whoever is testifying, whether you tri to question their credibility, whether their own recollection. i think what we saw yesterday from republicans and the republican council is they tried to go after gordon sondland over his memory, over his recollection, that he was not a note taker, that he was kind of very informal with the way he had these conversations. is that a line of defense that can actually hold up? or does gordon sondland, has he demonstrated at least with the exchange with mike pompeo, there is a documented track record of some of these exchanges that the state department will simply not hand over? the republicans have a point. in terms of witnesses, gordon sondland does have some credibility issues. not that he s lying so much, but that his memory has changed on the record several times. and