What Went Down During Gordon Sondland’s Testimony

That was quite the opening statement from Sondland. He made it clear that there was a quid pro quo and it was his “personal belief” that the military aid was contingent on investigations. Yet Sondland was careful to caveat multiple times that he “never heard it from the president directly.” As Chad noted earlier, it’s something Fox News has picked up on and I think conservative lawmakers will too when questioning resumes. Sondland’s testimony was pivotal in that he is the only person the Democrats have called who has directly spoken with Trump about Ukraine, but his testimony also has severe limitations in what it does to connect Trump directly to the heart of this.

Up until now, we’ve been eager to hear from Sondland because he spoke directly to Trump. Sondland has said that a lot of his understanding came from speaking with Giuliani, although of course he did speak to Trump, who made it clear to him that he wanted investigations into Burisma and the 2016 election. I think the question now becomes: will the press/Democrats/Republicans turn to Giuliani, or will this satisfy everyone’s questions about what the president wanted and what conditions he put on a White House meeting and aid?

Sondland, a direct participant in the Ukraine policy, has basically confirmed the outlines of the narrative we knew from press accounts and other witnesses: the president’s personal lawyer was directing government officials, at the president’s behest, to tie U.S. policy that might benefit Ukraine to Ukraine announcing investigations that would damage Biden.