November 28, 2019

"These untrue claims of unwanted touching and kissing are concocted and, I believe, coordinated for political purposes. They have no basis in fact, and I categorically deny them."

Said Gordon Sondland, quoted in "Multiple Women Recall Sexual Misconduct and Retaliation by Gordon Sondland/Three women recall Sondland made unwanted sexual contact in business settings. One says he exposed himself. All recall professional retaliation after they rejected him. Sondland denies the allegations" (ProPublica).

Why are these stories coming out now rather than earlier, when Sondland first appeared on the scene and seemed to be offering important anti-Trump testimony? If this is not a "concocted" or at least "coordinated" attack done for "political purposes," then why were these complaints withheld until after it appeared that Sondland helped Trump?

Trying to tear Sondland down this way — at this time — has the effect of bolstering the pro-Trump aspects of his testimony. It makes one think that Sondland's testimony was very damaging to the case for impeachment (that's why there's scrambling to discredit him and to warn others away from helping Trump). Moreover, it might — for some observers — reinforce the belief that the impeachment drive has been unfair — procedurally irregular and aggressive, a witch hunt.

I have no opinion on whether what the women are saying is true. I'm just talking about the timing and the politicalization of accusations of sexual misconduct.

277 comments:

1 – 200 of 277   Newer›   Newest»
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

The idea that Sondland 'helped' Trump will be news to many.

Wilbur said...

The timing and the politicalization of accusations of sexual misconduct is just part of the Left's playbook, SOP. It's surprising now whenever it doesn't happen.

Wilbur said...

I never heard of Sondland and don't know what he might have said. I have no need to pay attention to the nonsense going on in these "hearings".

Wilbur said...

And a happy Thanksgiving to AA and Meade, and to all of the readers and commenters.

Shouting Thomas said...

Haven't watched a moment of these fake hearings.

Fortunately, I've got Christmas concerts and services to prepare for.

Trump is doing a great job as president, which is getting buried under all this bullshit.

Which is the point, right?

AllenS said...

"It makes one think that Sondland's testimony was very damaging to the case for impeachment (that's why there's scrambling to discredit him and to warn others away from helping Trump)." -- AA

I'll agree with that.

Birches said...

Fusion GPS.

Same thing as Jim Jordan. Same thing as Devin Nunes.

Shouting Thomas said...

You do know that the ladies, who love changes in fashion, will rebel against the current horrified shrieking about touching and kissing at some point in the future, don't you?

A future generation will have to replay the 60s rebellion against the shrews.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

AllenS said...
I'll agree with that.


Could you explain how Sondland's testimony 'helped' Trump?

AllenS said...

It helped Trump, ARM, because it didn't hurt Trump.

Leland said...

Bonus, the compliant media will spin this as Trump attacking Sondland for saying he perceived a Quid Pro Quo, which folks like ARM will eat up like soybeans.

AllenS said...

Do you really think that Sondland's testimony will impeach Trump, ARM?

RMc said...

Didn't the news media portray Sondland's testimony as "devastating" and "shattering", et. al.? Indeed, wasn't everybody's testimony devastating and shattering to Trump? Surely, the walls must be closing in by now...?

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

There is a vast gap between 'helped' and testimony so damaging that it could change the minds of hardened partisans.

If Althouse had argued that Sondland was no longer useful to the left, after having dropped his load on Trump, that would have been somewhat more plausible, but in her desperation to apologize for Trump she took a step too far.

Lyle Smith said...

Greatest witch hunt in US history! They’ll call anybody a witch.

alanc709 said...

This is no different than Blumenhauer D-Or organizing a boycott of Sondland wife's hotels. That why the Dems cry about witness intimidation for Trump tweeting was so laughable.
https://www.kgw.com/article/news/politics/blumenauer-calls-for-boycott-of-gordon-sondlands-provenance-hotels/283-245522b1-eecb-4b2d-b6d2-28e6c6a7e1a9

AllenS said...

On September 1, Vice President Mike Pence met with Zelensky in Warsaw. Shortly after that meeting, Sondland now admits, he told Yermak that the military aid likely depended on whether the Ukrainians announced the investigations Trump wanted.

But why did Sondland do this? His latest testimony is that he simply “presumed,” on his own, that there was a linkage. That no one else, and certainly not President Trump, ever told him any such thing. (“I don’t recall President Trump ever talking to me about any security assistance. Ever,” Sondland testified.)
-- Vox

Rusty said...

The prevailing opinion of the progressives in my circle when Trump comes up is; "I just know" he did-take your pick-money laundering, some sort of unnamed corruption,something shady to do with taxes, the list goes on. They just know. How can you argue with that? The progressive cult of 'I just know'.

gspencer said...

"then why were these complaints withheld until after it appeared that Sondland helped Trump?"

To poise the question is to answer it.

The attacks are unrelenting, withering, outlandish. Fortunately, one of Trump's strengths is his strong mental health. Perhaps that's a natural accompanying his ego and sense of self. Regardless, a person not possessing his outlook would have crumpled under this unfair, mean-spirited campaign to do Trump in.

Seeing Red said...

His load?

This impeachment BS is a load. So was the Russian collusion.

AllenS said...

And as another reminder: Sondland testified that he doesn’t recall “President Trump ever talking to me about any security assistance.” His testimony is that even when, after the news of the aid holdup had leaked and the Ukrainians were desperate to get it lifted, the topic never even came up between him and Trump. -- Vox

Big Mike said...

If this is not a "concocted" or at least "coordinated" attack done for "political purposes," then why were these complaints withheld until after it appeared that Sondland helped Trump?

Trying to tear Sondland down this way — at this time — has the effect of bolstering the pro-Trump aspects of his testimony
.

You're using your head, ma'am. I wasn't aware that was allowed in Dane County.

I have no opinion on whether what the women are saying is true.

Well I do. Women lie. They do it all the time. Only the most gullible of the gullible believe a woman's unsupported word.

Crazy Jane said...

My guess is the reporting -- not the publishing -- started before Sondland "helped" Trump. He was getting a lot of grief in Portland for being a rich-guy Republican ambassador.

(All presidents seem to award ambassadorships to favored donors. New Jersey's current governor, a former Goldman Sachs grandee, was made ambassador to Germany in 2009.)

The named Oregon congressman who urged a boycott of Sondland's hotels later changed his mind after the guy's "helpful" testimony. Then the congressman tweeted of him: "Welcome to the resistance."

Except for the women's complaints, which sound credible, It's hard to take any of the rest of this seriously.

iowan2 said...

Much like Kavanaugh, Democrats calculated the raising of the smear, is enough to accomplish the goal. Actual evidence is not required. The victims of smears like this should demand immediate court dates with the accuser present and identified.

Also, Democrats only have to provide the smear, CNN, NYT,WAPO, etal are perfectly happy to publicize this crap. The corrupt media is central to the Democrat corrupt accusations.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

From the same article:

[Sondland] confirmed the first quid pro quo (investigations for a White House meeting). He said he believed himself to be carrying out the president’s orders. And he gave new details implicating other top administration officials, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence.

This doesn't sound very 'helpful'. Again, Althouse could have argued that Sondland was not as damaging as he could have been, if he had told the unvarnished truth, but instead she chose to attempt to turn a pig's ear into a silk purse.

Sondland did the minimum necessary to avoid a perjury charge. The idea that this is ''helpful' to Trump seem odd. Rather, it would seem to reinforce the idea that Trump surrounds himself with sleaze-bags in his own mold.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

Sondland should just say he has some memory lapses due to excessive drinking and he has no recollection if these allegations are true or not.

It would be unseemly if he called these poor abused women liars.

tim in vermont said...

It explains why his opening statement appeared to condemn Trump, which is where all of those stories that Trump was finally pegged on the “quid pro quo" came from, that were totally blown away by close questioning in the afternoon. When asked why he didn’t just say that Trump explicitly said “no quid pro quo, just do the right thing” in the opening statement, he said he “had no room” for a direct quote from POTUS in his 23 pages.

His opening statement contradicted his deposition. It sure seems like he caved to pressure in writing the opening statement, then backed out of it during testimony under oath.

And remember, Epstein killed himself in a million to one string of unfortunate circumstances!

AllenS said...

From your quote, ARM:

He said he believed himself [Sondland] to be carrying out the president’s orders.

Bold added by me. "believed", pure conjecture by Sondland. Heavy emphasis on conjecture.

America’s Politico said...

All:

Impeachment is the plan B for 2020. I know this as I started it in my political conferences with candidates.

What is plan A then? Simple: Warren is the next POTUS. No one can stop her. Nothing can stop her.

Bring it on.

Cheers,
Raj

narciso said...

That was earl 'death panel'blumenauer.

BUMBLE BEE said...

False flag???? "By any means necessary" opens Pandora's box. Just ask Kavanaugh.

tim in vermont said...

"Althouse could have argued that Sondland was not as damaging as he could have been, if he had told the unvarnished truth”

Ha ha ha! Yes, the truth is always out there, just beyond the horizon, if we only had more coercive power, we promise we will prove to you that Orange Man Bad!


This is the guy, ARM, who seems to firmly believe that circumstantial evidence of a purported “crime” that we have only hearsay evidence even occurred is steel trap type proof.

Meanwhile, Biden is still the kleptocrat that must be protected by Democrats, just like Bill Clinton, no matter how transparently ridiculous the claims! The impeachment is the coverup. It isn’t going to work. Only true believers in the Democrat Party are going to not care in the general that he got is brother a billion dollar plus contract for building housing in Iraq when he had zero experience.

narciso said...

Obamas ambassador to germany was the producer for the young and the restless. Victor neumann.

tim in vermont said...

Bring it on.

Cheers,
Raj


If only Mick would come back, we could have a rematch. I see the Bills are playing Dallas today too.

Angle-Dyne, Servant of Ugliness said...

BCARM: There is a vast gap between 'helped' and testimony so damaging that it could change the minds of hardened partisans.

Not when yet another testimony hyped to be a kill shot turns out yet again to be an airy nothing.

Under such conditions the yet-another-killshot does, as a matter of fact, help the intended target in the eyes of reasonable people.

If Althouse had argued that Sondland was no longer useful to the left, after having dropped his load on Trump, that would have been somewhat more plausible, but in her desperation to apologize for Trump she took a step too far.

The charitable still think you're trolling, ARM, but frankly I've come to the conclusion that you really are as dumb and lost as your alleged troll-persona makes you out to be.

Big Mike said...

The idea that Sondland 'helped' Trump will be news to many.

Lots of things are "news" to ARM.

Birkel said...

ARM advertises the ignorance of his own side.
You'd think Xe would be upset that his media choices keep Xim and axis side pig ignorant.

narciso said...

That was the credential, but 300 k, sondlands predecessor ted malloch was given the 3rd degree by mueller.

narciso said...

Does one forget howard gutman whowas enabling dirty deeds from the embassy in brussels.

tim in vermont said...

"There is a vast gap between 'helped' and testimony so damaging that it could change the minds of hardened partisans.”

Right, ARM, and you being a “hardened partisan” it didn’t change your mind even a little. I don’t think that the president did anything wrong even if the allegations of a “quid pro quo” are true because he had a legitimate reason to be looking into Ukraine regarding 2016 and the CIA, FBI, NSA, and State were clearly out to get him.

narciso said...

In other news


https://spectator.us/farce-anonymous-trump-official/

tim in vermont said...

"ARM, but frankly I've come to the conclusion that you really are as dumb and lost as your alleged troll-persona makes you out to be.”

He’s a neocon. Why else would he be constantly posting clips from butt hurt neocons who have the sads because their warmongering bloody red queen lost the election?

narciso said...

Who apparently is a lefty speech writer for mattis, just like the fake emails attributed to stephen miller.

narciso said...

The overnight link was that sandy and the others resignation wasnt related to the ukraine matter.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The left are going full Antifa Nazi mob after this guy. and his wife.

narciso said...

Then theres the kangaroo court against sen chief gallagher

rehajm said...

I don’t know who these people are either, in the same way I don’t know the characters in other fictional dramas, like the telenovelas on the Spanish station.

tim in vermont said...

"We have always been at war with Oceana and we have always trusted the CIA” - Democrats

narciso said...

Script from a discarded episode of scandal.

Sydney said...

Haven’t been paying attention to the impeachment at all. Until I see Democrat’s being held to the same standard, I am assuming it is all lies and political theater. I no longer believe accusations of sexual misconduct, either. It is too easy to destroy a person’s career and life without proof, only accusation. I assume that people of ill will realize this and use it as an easy weapon.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

That expectations for Trump could have fallen so low that someone could find Sondland's testimony 'helpful' is a remarkable thing in itself, but maybe it is the only somewhat rational position left for his supporters.

Sondland's testimony reinforced the claim that Trump used the powers of the presidency to induce a foreign government to dig for political dirt on a domestic political rival. Once upon a time this would have almost universally been perceived as unacceptable. Now it is perceived as unacceptable by a modest majority.

narciso said...

Remember fiona hill made it a point of pride she didnt recommend sending heavy weapons to ukraine, shirley.

tim in vermont said...

"ondland's testimony reinforced the claim that Trump used the powers of the presidency to induce a foreign government to dig for political dirt on a domestic political rival”

A. Ukraine interfered in 2016. You can say it was true, but so was Wikileaks and that didn’t seem to matter to you.
B. Biden is the one who had the clear conflict of interest and has been projecting an image of corruption, by actually being corrupt, around the world. Biden is the one who abused his power. C*aramella was in the meetings where this abuse of power was discussed.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

When I say Antifa-Nazi-Mob - I mean the Adam Schitt-Brennan anti-Constitution corruption from on high, brigade.

whitney said...

It's incredibly blatant what they're doing. But it still pales in comparison to Epstein's blatantly false jail house suicide. Rule of law does not exist anymore. The law is only a weapon you use against your enemies. Anyone pretending or just deluding themselves otherwise is a chump

Angle-Dyne, Servant of Ugliness said...

Skylark: He’s a neocon. Why else would he be constantly posting clips from butt hurt neocons who have the sads because their warmongering bloody red queen lost the election?

Nah, lots of dumb lefties who aren't neo-cons themselves still haven't figured out that nobody but themselves take Conservatard, Inc. hustlers seriously.

Gospace said...

I have an opinion on the accusers. They're lying liars who are lying. Just like Kavanaugh's accusers were lying liars who were lying.

In this day and age any accusation of sexual harassment More than 24 hours ago should be presumed a lie unless there's incontrovertible proof it occurred. Every school, every business, every organization of every kind trains people as to what it is and to report it. No excuse, none whatsoever, to delay even a single day. If theria delay, the complaint is payback of some kind of totally bogus.

tim in vermont said...

Ukraine members of parliament were denouncing Trump during the election campaign and trying their best to help Hillary. Just because you guys are ignoring these stories and Schiff ruled them as irrelevant to convicting Trump doesn’t make them less true.

But just keep repeating your talking points no matter thoroughly they are discredited. I think it was Aristotle who first delineated the syllogism that states that the more times you repeat something and ignore counter arguments, the “truer” it becomes. It was his largest contribution to the intellectual patrimony of the West.

Fernandistein said...

"Multiple Women Recall Sexual Misconduct"

Does each one weigh the same as a duck or is it their total weight?

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Blogger whitney said...
It's incredibly blatant what they're doing. But it still pales in comparison to Epstein's blatantly false jail house suicide.


I read on the internet, just the other day, that Trump's mafia buddies offed Epstein and then Trump's attorney general personally supervised the coverup.

Curious George said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
daskol said...

By proceeding with the public destruction of Sondland, pour encourager les autres, our betters demonstrate the low opinion they hold of those they presume to govern or at least manipulate. And these betters aren’t wrong. What a fucking snakepit.

Curious George said...

ARM: "Could you explain how Sondland's testimony 'helped' Trump?"

Rep. Michael Turner (R.-Ohio): “So, you really have no testimony that ties President Trump to a scheme to withhold aid from Ukraine in exchange for these investigations?” Turner asked Sondland at one point during his questioning.

Sondland replied: “Other than my own PRESUMPTION.”

“Which is nothing,” Turner responded.

“Giuliani didn’t tell you? Mulvaney didn’t tell you? Nobody?” said Turner. “Pompeo didn’t tell you? Nobody else on this planet told you that Donald Trump was tying aid to these investigations? Is that correct?”

“I think I already testified to that,” said Sondland.

“No answer the question: Is it correct?” said Turner. “No one on this planet told you that Donald Trump was tying this aid to the investigation?” Turner persisted. “Because if your answer is ‘yes’ then the chairman’s wrong and the headline on CNN is wrong. No one on this planet told you that President Trump was tying aid to investigations? Yes or no?”

“Yes,” said Sondland.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Peggy Noonan said ...
On Wednesday Gordan Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union, was both weirdly jolly and enormously effective in doing Mr. Trump damage. He followed the president’s orders; there was a quid pro quo; “everyone was in the loop, it was no secret“; Rudy Giuliani was the point man, with whom Mr. Sondland worked “at the express direction of the president.”


tim in vermont said...

"Trump's mafia buddies...”

Pretty funny that the leaked ABC tape about the spiked Epstein story name checks Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew, but not Donald Trump.

tim in vermont said...

Peggy Noonan. Now I am beginning to think you are a parody account.

tim in vermont said...

Noonan ignores everything that happened after the break when Republicans began their questioning. So does ARM. Besides, Trump has already stated that he wanted to get to the bottom of what happened in 2016, it’s you guys covering for Biden that keep conflating the two. Biden’s corruption which was apparently an open secret in the Obama Administration and the State Department, came to light as part of that.

The impeachment is a ham handed attempt to cover for Biden. Good luck with that.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Sondland, who isn't even a major witness and Trump hardly knows the guy - had to admit that Trump never wanted anything from the Ukrainians. Sondlan admitted as much at the end of his testimony. Thus placing it all in the trash can. The mob-left must destroy him now.

Normal Americans don't care anyway. If the old Obama-Biden era corrupt Ukrainian regime schemed to help Hillary and Hurt Trump - Why can't we know about it? or right - that's illegal. Only hurting Trump is extra-legal. However, merely saying the words "Biden" or "Hillary" is super=duper-illegal.

Politico - not exactly a bastion of right-wing - knew about it.

The left cannot be honest about what Sondland said, but Sondland must be destroyed by the corrupt leftwing mob.

Jeff Brokaw said...

My major problem with ALL allegations like this is always about timing and who is obviously pulling the strings behind the scenes on the story. Suddenly three women pop up at the same time? Really?!

How are we to tell the difference between a) manufactured b.s. cooked up from unverifiable “he said she said” purely for political advantage, and b) actual facts about a real predator?

They look nearly identical from where we sit. It’s messy even when it’s true because by definition these things rely on people’s memory (unreliable) and occur in private.

A “cynical realism” take on all this is that because it’s unverifiable but still highly embarrassing that both implies (b) above and tells us exactly why they use it.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Not a neocon said ....
US Attorney General Barr adds to coverup in death of Jeffrey Epstein

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Noonan ignores everything that happened after the break when Republicans began their questioning.

Bingo.

Wince said...

Whether Sundland did or did not engage in the underlying conduct in the past, it does look like witness tampering.

[Claimant] Vogel says she has no relationship with the congressman. [Congressman Earl] Blumenauer did occasionally contribute to the magazine, which is cited on one of Vogel’s pages on the website. The ethics complaint was filed by Provenance [against Blumenauer] in response to Blumenauer calling for a boycott of Sondland’s company. The congressman did this after Sondland initially declined to testify in the impeachment inquiry. When Sondland did ultimately testify publicly, undercutting the president’s defense, Blumenauer praised him.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The democrat party is the mob. Schitt and Brennan lead the way. Antifas and various hivemind apparatchiks don't even need orders. They know what to do.

Sondland says his family, businesses receiving threats over role in Trump impeachment inquiry

Curious George said...

I see ARM has chosen to ignore Sondlund's testimony and has instead put up some stupid troll posts.

tim in vermont said...

Obviously losing, ARM changes the subject. Remember people Never. Question. Authority!

Always trust content from the CIA!

Ray - SoCal said...

Kavanaugh’s accusers did so much damage to me too accusations.

I hope somebody gets fake political me too accused and goes scorched earth legal in reply.

Until there is a cost, these political, one sided hit jobs will continue.

Contrast with how Ted Kennedy is treated.

Much less Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Birkel said...

ARM: It's cool that the CIA, FBI, State Department, IRS, FISC, DOD, (insert appropriate alphabet agencies here) contrived operations against an opposing party's presidential candidate and eventual president.

Also ARM: It is nearly universally perceived as unacceptable to ask for dirt on a guy who is running for president.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The entire impeachment BS hangs on the notion that Trump was extorting Ukraine. LOL. By withholding OUR money. LOL. Asking for information on the 2016 election - the very election the corrupt left cannot accept.

All while there is ACTUAL FOOTAGE of JOE BIDEN extorting and bribing the old corrupt Ukrainian Regime to fire a prosecutor who was digging into Barisma- the corrupt energy company who was paying Joe's son millions of dollars.

Our corrupt media give JOE a total pass. The media trial on old JOE - "Not guilty, because we say so!"

What a freaking joke.

rhhardin said...

Delayed sexual allegations are about what the mob will go along with.

The mob can be misjudged. Those may become turning points.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Sondland said ...
“Secretary Perry, Ambassador Volker and I worked with Mr. Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine matters at the express direction of the President of the United States. We did not want to work with Mr. Giuliani. Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr. Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine. So we followed the President's orders.”

"if I had known of all of Mr. Giuliani's dealings or of his associations with individuals now under criminal indictment, I would not have acquiesced to his participation."

"Mr. Giuliani's requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky. Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations of the 2016 election/DNC server and Burisma. Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President."

"we learned that the White House had also suspended security aid to Ukraine. I was adamantly opposed to any suspension of aid, as the Ukrainians needed those funds to fight against Russian aggression. I tried diligently to ask why the aid was suspended, but I never received a clear answer. In the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid, I later came to believe that the resumption of security aid would not occur until there was a public statement from Ukraine committing to the investigations of the 2016 election and Burisma, as Mr. Giuliani had demanded."

"In response to our persistent efforts to change his views, President Trump directed us to "talk with Rudy." We understood that "talk with Rudy" meant talk with Mr. Rudy Giuliani, the President's personal lawyer."

"Mr. Giuliani emphasized that the President wanted a public statement from President Zelensky committing Ukraine to look into corruption issues. Mr. Giuliani specifically mentioned the 2016 election (including the DNC server) and Burisma as two topics of importance to the President."

narciso said...


Speaking of mobs

https://www.navytimes.com/opinion/2019/11/27/op-ed-navy-corruption-and-the-gallagher-case/

mockturtle said...

In the future, NO women will be believed. Nice going, bitches.

rhhardin said...

Trump is supposed to get to the bottom of the coup, which appears to have been what he was doing. The other side wants to attribute a single motive to it. That's what Obama had, a single motive - Obama wasn't trying to get to the bottom of anything, just using the power of government to screw opponents.

That's what has to be investigated. The bad actors are still around.

Beasts of England said...

ARM’s gonna be so unhinged by turkey time that he’ll be slicing up that white meat like OJ Simpson...

rhhardin said...

Women are believed if they report quickly. If not, they changed their minds or it didn't happen. Women have a rich fantasy life.

tim in vermont said...

ARM keeps quoting from before cross examination.

Bob Boyd said...

Did Sondland ask the women to reiease his 2nd Chakra?

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

On no! ARM gives us the goods. It's illegal to look into democratic corruption!

tim in vermont said...

The Democrats are doing this because Sondlan crumbled on cross.

Iman said...

These allegations might be worth considering if the Left didn’t try to pull this sort of crap every goddam time.

Happy Thanksgiving all!

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

It's illegal to talk to Russians. Unless you're Hillary and her re-set button or Obama saying "I'll have more flexibility after the election"...... to a Russian! an actual Russian!
*Crime*

MikeR said...

Kavanaugh was important. This stuff - you've got to be crazy if you think I care at all about Sondland, who I never heard of before a week ago and will never hear of again.

Inga said...

“The idea that Sondland 'helped' Trump will be news to many.”

Right. Sondland’s testimony was devastating to Trump. In light of that, those who are accusing him of any wrongdoing are probably Trump supporters.

Birkel said...

Inga comes in with Crazy, Part Deux.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

If Trump's personal lawyer repeatedly misrepresented Trump then it should have led to the immediate firing of Giuliani by Trump. Since this did not happen, it is reasonable to assume that Giuliani was in fact speaking for Trump.

Angle-Dyne, Servant of Ugliness said...

Skylark: Peggy Noonan. Now I am beginning to think you are a parody account.

In his defense, perhaps he feels duty-bound to occupy the comment-section ecological niche left vacant by Inga and Chuck's extended moderation-chastisement. If they manage to re-establish themselves perhaps he'll withdraw from neocon-and-senile-Manhattanite copypasta territory.

Michael K said...

Those torpedoes aimed at Trump keep circling.

It is useless to argue with ARM. He is immune to reason.

"It is useless to try to reason a man out of an opinion that he was not reasoned into "

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Oh no! Guiliani is illegal. His mere existence is illegal. How dare he even take in oxygen. or speak!
Guards, seize him!

Gahrie said...

I have no opinion on whether what the women are saying is true.

Sure you do. Just one you're unwilling to share because you don't want to have to try and defend it.

I'm just talking about the timing and the politicalization of accusations of sexual misconduct.

You mean like what happened to Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh? Or what happened to George Bush? Perhaps the attacks on President Trump? Apparently you have just recently discovered this Democratic tactic? Will you punish the Democrats for this behavior? Or continue to enable their behavior?

narciso said...

An enemy of the people like rutherford and aaronson, not an unperson like corporal ogilvy.

Bruce Hayden said...

I am going off in a different direction. The Lesbians running the gender studies departments in the universities across the country have elevated unwanted male aggression to a High Crime. And I think that a lot of that is that they don’t understand its place, with male sexual attention being mostly unappreciated for them.

The basic problem is that at least for most mammalian species, in sexual mating, the male is the aggressor, and the female is the selective one. And that is most true for species like ours, where the females typically have one offspring at a time, and gestation is lengthy. Still, you see male domination and female acceptance even in herd species, where herds are built primarily inter male competition, and the the sex act is very commonly initiated by the males physically, or at least tokenly, forcing the females to submit.

There is a saying that the guy chases the girl until she catches him. She is exerting her ultimate power by bringing him to the marriage alter. Throughout our history, at least as long as women had some say in whom they bedded and married, guys push a lot of gals to date, for sex, to marry, etc, and the gals refuse the overtures of some, to many, of their pursuers , depending on frequency, and their other choices. (My partner, a 12 on a 10 scale when she married at 21, is at one end of this scale, while most of my GFs over the years have had many fewer choices). Those like my partner refuse almost all of their overtures - probably 90% when it came to dating, 95% for marriage, and nearing 100% when it came to sex. Because she had the choices. I still cannot comprehend popping a ring on a woman I didn’t know pretty well over a period of time. She has had dozens.

The reality is that most women probably have significantly more offers than they can accept (remember - long gestation and dependency, single births, etc). Some of the refused offers are compliments, while others are insulting. Much of it depends on their comparative values in the mating market, as well as their respective availabilities. One problem is that the line between complimentary and insulting varies significantly between different women. The thing to keep in mind with powerful men violating #MeToo norms is that their actions have probably succeeded decently often in the past. The things that a Trump or a Weinstein could get away with (remember Trump’s comment during the election about women eagerly allowing him to grab them inappropriately?), would be summarily rejected if coming from a much lower status male. For a Weinstein, I think that it was probably quite common for him to invite aspiring actresses up to his room, and most quite happily traded sex for potential advantage. Finding his advances insulting, or worse, was probably a rarity.

In any case, one problem that I see with the modern sexual morality is that it changes the traditional human morality of one man and one woman. Instead, with women now often having to pursue the men, they have lost much of their natural advantage. Alpha (and fake alpha) males get a lot more sex than the betas, which means that a lot of the guys who aren’t scoring, end up dropping out of the mating market. That often means dropping out of life in general, pursuing sports or hobbies, instead of a career. And with fewer men mating with more women, many of those women cannot marry the guy that they are mating with. That either means delaying childbearing indefinitely, or fatherless childbearing. Neither good.

All because men are being pushed to not be the sexual aggressors, while women are being pushed to be the sexual aggressors, by the Lesbians running gender studies programs.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

NO - Sondland's testimony was not devastating. For F's sake - This is the very reason the left are out to destroy Sondland and his family. Under cross examination, Sondland admitted that Trump didn't want anything from Ukraine.

Comprehend?
Watch the hack-press praise Sondland one minute, then, after the day was over, the same hack press reverses course and reports to all that Sondland is a big fat nothing.

This fact missed by all hive-minders. Willful ignorance is strong with the leftwing hivemind.

Gahrie said...

Just for the record...not only is CBF cashing in because she lied about Kavanaugh, Hill is still cashing in after lying about Thomas.

Inga said...

Trump didn’t/doesn’t give a fig for corruption. He wanted a public announcement of an investigation to hurt Biden, which is election interference and worse, getting a foreign government to do it for you by withholding military funding.

SCHIFF: And in order to perform that official act [a meeting in the Oval Office], Donald Trump wanted these two investigations that would help his reelection campaign, correct?

SONDLAND: I can’t characterize why he wanted them. All I can tell you is this is what we heard from Mr. Giuliani.

SCHIFF: But he had to get those two investigations if that official act was going to take place, correct?

SONDLAND: He had to announce the investigations. He didn’t actually have to do them, as I understood it.

GOLDMAN: Giuliani and President Trump didn’t actually care if they did them, right?

SONDLAND: I never heard, Mr. Goldman, anyone say that the investigations had to start or be completed. The only thing I heard from Mr. Giuliani or otherwise was that they had to be announced. ... President Trump presumably, communicated through Mr. Giuliani, wanted the Ukrainians on-record publicly that they were going to do those investigations.

GOLDMAN: You never heard anyone say that they really wanted them to do the investigations.

SONDLAND: I didn’t hear either way.

Qwinn said...

Funny how a thousand announcements of investigations of Trump never, ever, ever count as "election interference", even when based on made up dossiers provided by foreigners and paid for by his political opponent.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...
In his defense


Your faith in my ultimate redemption is genuinely touching. I truly hope that one day I will live to fulfill your expectations, redeeming myself from my fallen state and ascending into the heaven of right-think acceptance by the Althouse commentariat.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The Hill:

This is before Sondland stated that Trump didn't want anything.

“Ambassador Sondland squarely states that he ‘did not know, (and still does not know) when, why or by whom the aid was suspended.’ He also said he ‘presumed’ there was a link to the aid—but cannot identify any solid source for that assumption,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement on Tuesday.

Republicans in the Capitol also rushed to Trump’s defense, saying Sondland’s suggestion of a quid pro quo was based merely on his assumptions about the president’s intentions, not the administration’s true foreign policy. GOP leaders have repeatedly noted that the military aid was ultimately delivered to Ukraine — even without Zelensky launching the requested investigations.


...

Sondland, when asked whether it would be illegal to investigate Burisma to harm the Bidens, underscored the gravity of such an ask when he replied: “I’m not a lawyer, but I assume so.”

See- It's illegal to look into Biden corruption and international pay to play. Same with Clintons.

You loyal leftists are all cool with that. Sad.

Inga said...

“First, Secretary Perry, Ambassador Volker and I worked with Mr. Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine matters at the express direction of the President of the United States. We did not want to work with Mr. Giuliani. Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr. Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine. So we followed the President’s orders.”

Sondland testimony

Yancey Ward said...

I don't doubt for a second that these stories were already written several weeks ago, but they were held from publication because it was believed that Sondland would provide the smoking gun for the impeachment investigation. As it turned out, Sondland had no smoking gun, as Sondland himself was forced to admit under cross examination (read the fucking transcripts, ARM, Sondland's testimony was a big fat zero for impeachment). What was interesting to me was how subtly Sondland's public testimony changed versus the private deposition he gave a few weeks prior- the opening statement he gave at the public hearing was damaging to Trump and a bit at odds with the deposition, but then under cross examination, Sondland was forced to clarify that opening statement, though he tried mightily to evade giving answers to the Republican members.

I am guessing Sondland knew about these new allegations against him, and was under some coercion to shape his testimony to be favorable to the Democrats, but, in the end, Sondland wasn't willing to commit explicit perjury, and probably because he never spoke to Trump without someone else being in the room or on the call.

I think Althouse is correct- if Sondland's testimony had damaged Trump, these stories would have been quietly buried by the journolists.

Kevin said...

Sondland’s initial testimony: Trump told me personally, “I want nothing.”

Sondland’s revised testimony: Despite that, I presume there was a quid pro quo.

And now a bunch of women come out making allegations against him.

I have a presumption. I presume he was informed about them before his revised testimony.

Yancey Ward said...

And, Inga, what is the impeachable offense in that testimony?

Inga said...

"I know that members of this committee frequently frame these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: Was there a quid pro quo? As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and the White House meeting, the answer is yes. Everyone was in the loop. It was no secret."

Sondland’s testimony

Sebastian said...

"I have no opinion on whether what the women are saying is true"

As opposed to your credulity about CBF. Progress.

Inga said...


“And, Inga, what is the impeachable offense in that testimony?”

Abuse of executive authority
Enlisting a foreign government to give you dirt on your political opponent in an Election. There are election laws and Trump isn’t above the law. As a judge recently said something to the effect of, “We have no Kings”.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Again, if Trump's personal lawyer was not speaking for Trump then it is reasonable to expect that Trump would have fired him, given the gravity of the allegations. Since this did not happen then there is only one reasonable understanding of what went down here. Whether or not this is impeachable is debatable, but Trump's actual intentions are not open to debate. He is a dumbass, who put his presidency at jeopardy over a ridiculous conspiracy theory and the fear of an almost equally clueless rival.

Inga said...

"I told Pence I had concerns that the delay in (military) aid had become tied to the issue of investigations"

Sondland testimony

Yancey Ward said...

Here is probably the timeline:

(1) Sondland gives private deposition to House Select Committee- testimony isn't a smoking gun of any kind.

(2) Sondland asked for comments about sexual harrassment allegations.

(3) Sondland testifies publicly, and in opening statement claims there was a quid pro quo.

(4) Under cross examination, Sondland forced to admit he had nothing more than opinion that there was a quid pro quo, and worse for the Democrats, was forced to admit that Trump told him explicitly that there was no quid pro quo.

(5) As polls show impeachment effort failing, then Sondland sexual harassment allegations are published.

The one thing I disagree with Ms. Althouse on, though, is this- I don't think the allegations that have been published this morning help impeachment- how could they? Since they look like payback from the Left, logically it undercuts whatever testimony he did give that was favorable to the Democrats. I think the publishers were trying to weigh whether or not the payback was worth this price, and decided it was since the polls haven't moved in a favorable direction.

Josephbleau said...

When I read the title to this post I thought it was about Biden.

Inga said...

"With 20/20 hindsight, now that we have the transcript of the call, the Bidens were clearly mentioned on the call,"

Sondland testimony

Qwinn said...

It *is* amazing how Inga and ARM continue to ignore the fact that Sondland's testimony under cross examination completely undermined the statements they are now quoting. The most generous interpretation would be that the media they listen to avoided reporting on the cross (which is true) so they initially simply never heard about it. But they have heard about it now, from us. And they simply continue quoting the pre cross testimony as if the cross examination, where he admits everything they are still quoting was pure speculation on his part, never happened. This is how you know that they aren't just misguided. They are complicit in the gaslighting.

Inga said...

“The one thing I disagree with Ms. Althouse on, though, is this- I don't think the allegations that have been published this morning help impeachment- how could they? Since they look like payback from the Left, logically it undercuts whatever testimony he did give that was favorable to the Democrats.”

True. It’s a ploy to make it look like Sondland’s testimony hurt the left somehow. It didn’t.

Drago said...

Inga and ARM!!

LOLOLOL

The only missing pieces from the Lefty Moron Quartet are LLR Chuck and readering!!

Inga said...

“It *is* amazing how Inga and ARM continue to ignore the fact that Sondland's testimony under cross examination completely undermined the statements they are now quoting.”

Not true. Provide testimony to back up your assertions. Or you’re just blowing hot air.

Char Char Binks said...

I saw Gordon Sondland with the Devil!

Drago said...

Remember, Inga and ARM both still believe the Hoax Dossier was true, Trump colluded with Russia AND they STILL believe Brett Kavanaugh gang raped 5,000 women.

LOL

narciso said...


this isn't happening

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/arkansas-woman-impregnated-by-hunter-biden-was-washington-dc-stripper-called-dallas

Drago said...

Inga: "Not true. Provide testimony to back up your assertions. Or you’re just blowing hot air."

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

It was already provided upthread!

I cant wait for Schiff-ty to be questioned under oath along with his staff members by the Republican Senators and White House Counsel.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Qwinn said...
cross examination completely undermined the statements they are now quoting.


This only makes limited sense if one ignores the role of Giuliani, Trump's personal lawyer. It is reasonable to assume to assume that Giuliani spoke for Trump, as most players in this farce did in fact assume. Trump is free to disabuse us all from this assumption. His complete failure to do so is definitive.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Yancey Ward said...

Inga wrote:

"True. It’s a ploy to make it look like Sondland’s testimony hurt the left somehow."

Now that is some funny shit, Inga, considering who wrote the stories and where they were published. Let me clue you in- the writers and the publications themselves are well left of center. Do some fucking homework before writing a comment.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

@ Yancy

Here is probably the timeline:

(1) Sondland gives private deposition to House Select Committee- testimony isn't a smoking gun of any kind.

(2) Sondland asked for comments about sexual harrassment allegations.

(3) Sondland testifies publicly, and in opening statement claims there was a quid pro quo.

(4) Under cross examination, Sondland forced to admit he had nothing more than opinion that there was a quid pro quo, and worse for the Democrats, was forced to admit that Trump told him explicitly that there was no quid pro quo.

(5) As polls show impeachment effort failing, then Sondland sexual harassment allegations are published.


11/28/19, 9:14 AM - Yancey Ward.
Worth a nice hearty bold.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Sorry - Sondland's testimony wasn't devastating. It was a mush of contradictions and "impressions" - and he had to walk much of it back.
This is why the left want to destroy him. Sondland was supposed to follow Shcitt's orders.

Bruce Hayden said...

As a guy, have you ever been frustrated with the decision making process in a female dominated group? Everyone needs to be heard, and no decision can be made until a consensus can be reached. Drives a lot of guys crazy.

Except that the consensus rarely actually arises organically, but is mostly typically subtly engineered. Some women are very good at manufacturing the consensus they want. My mother was a master at it. Every time I hear about the consensus of concerned scientists believe in global warming etc, I know that the argument is aimed at mostly scientifically illiterate women. Ever wonder why the MSM every night is so lockstep in their narrative, going so far as all repeating the word or phrase of the day(like the day recently when they all simultaneously announced that there had been a “bombshell” in Shifty’s hearings)? The answer of all that repetition is to build a false consensus. The testimony was, of course, far from being a bombshell, but was, if anything, exonerating of Trump. But the manufactured consensus was to the contrary.

The relevance here is that the #MeToo is another manufactured consensus. By its very name, it is a plea for consensus and gender solidarity. It is a bald faced attempt to take advantage of the natural inclination of many women to bond by sharing experiences. Esp negative experiences. I first noticed this almost 20 years ago, watching three 8-10 year old girls bond for the first time by sharing experiences about peeing themselves. Not something guys would do.

The funny thing about the #MeToo movement is that it was designed by the left to destroy Republicans for typically male behavior, but inevitably the worst offenders are most typically Democrats. Bill Clinton, the Joe Kennedy and his male descendants, Weinstein, Epstein, etc. All Democrats. Mostly given a pass because they support abortion. It is apparently just fine for them to rape women, as long as the rapists make sure that women have easy access to abortions in order to eliminate the results of their rapes by the powerful men.

Sondland is just another example of an engineered consensus by the Dems and their MSM auxiliary to advance a consensus against someone who didn’t properly accept and advance the #Resistance.

narciso said...

he was following politico, which was using a feedback loop from vindman to ciaramella, probably another Schiff staffer back from the Ukraine,

Yancey Ward said...

"This only makes limited sense if one ignores the role of Giuliani, Trump's personal lawyer."

We aren't ignoring it, ARM. So, please tell us what Sondland told the committee about Giuliani's instructions to Sondland and others. I will await your answer.

rcocean said...

If a woman says it, it must be true. Especially, when it was a long time ago, and she never said anything before. And specific dates, places and times are irrelevant.

I thought we proved that with kavanaugh and Roy moore.

Drago said...

I sure hope there is enough coke and meth in DC to help Hunter Biden get thru his interrogation!!

I suspect we will be hearing more of his and Slow Joes activities in China and Romania as well.

Lets see now....yep.

All of Hunters cool deals in Ukraine came about after obama gave Joe control over Ukraine policy.

Hmmmmmm

And Hunters astonishing $1.5 Billion deal in China and the Chinese govt came about after obama put Slow Joe in charge of China policy.

Gee, what an interesting pattern!

Hey, you know who else had children involved with Ukrain energy companies?

Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry.

Now it gets even more interesting!

Remember lefty dummies, the Senate phase of this will include discovery of all the corruption in Ukrain and will include the already documented Ukrainian interference in the US election in 2016 to help Hillary.

And The Turtle and Graham and Grassley are going to make sure we take our time with it all the way thru the fratricidal dem primaries!!

Poor Inga and ARM and LLR Chuck!! No Mueller-mas for you!

LOLOLOLOL

Inga said...

"True. It’s a ploy to make it look like Sondland’s testimony hurt the left somehow."

“Now that is some funny shit, Inga, considering who wrote the stories and where they were published. Let me clue you in- the writers and the publications themselves are well left of center. Do some fucking homework before writing a comment.”

The ploy I speak of is Althouse’s attempt to make Sondland’s testimony look like it was damaging to the impeachment effort.

Qwinn said...

Inga: Curious George, 8:00 am. Or you could search this page for "no one on this planet". Or "Other than my own presumption".

John henry said...

Sondlan got his ambassadorship the old fashioned way.

He bought it with a million dollars in bundled contributions to the trump campaign.

OTOH, was he any worse an ambassador than these folks that get degrees in govt service and become career diplomats?

BTW:time to buy popcorn futures. The cat is on the roof. Replacing The Notorious RBG is going to be EPIC! The stuff legends are made of.

John Henry

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Sondland said ...
“Secretary Perry, Ambassador Volker and I worked with Mr. Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine matters at the express direction of the President of the United States. We did not want to work with Mr. Giuliani. Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr. Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine. So we followed the President's orders.”

"if I had known of all of Mr. Giuliani's dealings or of his associations with individuals now under criminal indictment, I would not have acquiesced to his participation."

"Mr. Giuliani's requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky. Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations of the 2016 election/DNC server and Burisma. Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President."

"we learned that the White House had also suspended security aid to Ukraine. I was adamantly opposed to any suspension of aid, as the Ukrainians needed those funds to fight against Russian aggression. I tried diligently to ask why the aid was suspended, but I never received a clear answer. In the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid, I later came to believe that the resumption of security aid would not occur until there was a public statement from Ukraine committing to the investigations of the 2016 election and Burisma, as Mr. Giuliani had demanded."

"In response to our persistent efforts to change his views, President Trump directed us to "talk with Rudy." We understood that "talk with Rudy" meant talk with Mr. Rudy Giuliani, the President's personal lawyer."

"Mr. Giuliani emphasized that the President wanted a public statement from President Zelensky committing Ukraine to look into corruption issues. Mr. Giuliani specifically mentioned the 2016 election (including the DNC server) and Burisma as two topics of importance to the President."


rcocean said...

To this male mind, its weird how woman all jump on bandwagon. Its only after ONE woman musters the courage to go public, that all the rest of them "remember" they too were molested or abused - and come out.

A cynic would say that publicity and money are the motivators, but I prefer to see it as their public spirit.

rcocean said...

I see the bores have showed up. Time for some Football. Adios.

Beasts of England said...

’Trump is free to disabuse us all from this assumption. His complete failure to do so is definitive.’

I’m sure you think that makes sense, OJ.

Char Char Binks said...

For those too stupid to get it: Sondland’s testimony that Trump committed high crimes hurt Trump; his admission under questioning that that testimony was based entirely on his own presumption helped Trump.

DUH!

narciso said...

he has not drowned, so clearly a warlock, like cpo Gallagher,

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

"Mr. Giuliani emphasized that the President wanted a public statement from President Zelensky committing Ukraine to look into corruption issues. Mr. Giuliani specifically mentioned the 2016 election (including the DNC server) and Burisma as two topics of importance to the President."


So? So? So? Oh riiiiight. It's illegal to look into any corruption pertaining to any democrat. ever.

Got it.

Drago said...

Inga: "The ploy I speak of is Althouse’s attempt to make Sondland’s testimony look like it was damaging to the impeachment effort."

Ah yes! An Althouse "ploy"!!

Again, the question must be asked:

Is it a strategic advantage for the dems that their base is largely comprised of mindless drones or, in the long run, is it a disadvantage?

Having the Ingas and ARMs and LLR Chucks ready to bleat the daily lefty talking points certainly provides a daily narrative boost for messaging purposes and once those narratives are obliterated its helpful these sheep are always happy to bleat the next round of contradictory nonsense.

However, my position is that in the long run having ones ideas aggressively tested at every turn sharpens the messenger and the message and forces one to marshall real and convincing arguments for the majority of Americans.

This is why the Lefty/LLR-lefty Ukraine ploy has failed, just like the hoax dossier and hoax collusion and hoax gang rape accusations and hoax emoluments accusations and hoax white supremacy lies have all failed.

But the bleating goes on.....while the caravan moves on.....

Gee, the battleground states are sure looking good from a republican view, arent they?

Inga said...

“Sondland said he, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and special envoy Kurt Volker were working with Giuliani on Ukraine matters “at the express direction of the president of the United States.””

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

So resident hive-minders. Why are leftwing mobsters attempting to destroy Sondland with false accusations of sexual assault?

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Again - the left presume that it's illegal for Trump to act as... president. How dare he!
Vindman is the real president. He's wearing a fancy outfit.

John henry said...

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...


Sondland's testimony reinforced the claim that Trump used the powers of the presidency to induce a foreign government to dig for political dirt on a domestic political rival.


What "political rival" might that be, ARM?

John Henry

Drago said...

Inga: "“Sondland said he, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and special envoy Kurt Volker were working with Giuliani on Ukraine matters “at the express direction of the president of the United States.””

LOL

And................?

Listen up dummy, the President's attorney is allowed to research and obtain evidence of 2016 Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election at the behest of the FusionGPS/Dems/Hillary/Obama corruptocrats as well as the underlying democrat financial corruption.

The Senate investigation will be lit!!

John henry said...

I'd love to find an explanation for why we should even be members of Nato much less funding it.

I'd love to hear an explanation for why we should be giving money to Ukraine (or 180 other countries)

John Henry

Qwinn said...

Apparently Inga thinks it's a crime that the President of the US sets foreign policy, and thinks he isn't allowed to ask anyone he wants to work on it. Because at least two of her quotes so far in this thread are utterly innocuous unless one assumes Trump isn't allowed to do one of those things.

narciso said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Drago said...

Please please please dems: vote for impeachment!

And make sure every single democrat votes for it! Every single one. No exceptions.

Especially those very special handpicked dems who won in those 31 Trump districts by saying they were coming to DC to do the peoples business and not to impeach....

Please vote for impeachment. Please.

Francisco D said...

Could you explain how Sondland's testimony 'helped' Trump?

ARM,

I watched Sondland's testimony.

Sondland clearly stated that he presumed a quid pro quo, but when he asked Trump what he wanted from Zelensky, Trump said he wanted nothing, no quid pro quo, tell Zelensky to do the right thing.

That seems pretty clear. You are confused because you depend on propaganda newscasters to think for you.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Original Mike said...

"Why are these stories coming out now rather than earlier, when Sondland first appeared on the scene and seemed to be offering important anti-Trump testimony? If this is not a "concocted" or at least "coordinated" attack done for "political purposes," then why were these complaints withheld until after it appeared that Sondland helped Trump?

Trying to tear Sondland down this way — at this time — has the effect of bolstering the pro-Trump aspects of his testimony."


Because there is no brain behind these smear campaigns, only knee-jerk reaction.

Francisco D said...

I worry about the lefties who live in their own reality. They are starting to scare me.

Watch Sondland's testimony on YouTube.

If you still believe the Media propaganda bullshit, then you are nuts. Absolutely frickin nuts.

Inga said...


“The Senate investigation will be lit!!’

Looking forward to it. Hey how devastating will the IG report be? I heard rumblings that isn’t going to be all that ( for you Trump supporters anyway).

chickelit said...

These pile-on tropes foisted by Democrat Party women have worked well against Republicans in the past, except lately against Kavanaugh. This is because Trump inspires men to remain hard and firm against such harpies.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Gk1 said...

I'm with Drago. I will be hugely disappointed if even one democrat doesn't vote for impeachment so the voters in the red states can throw them out on their asses next year. And please, Democratic senators running next year, go on record about how you will vote to convict. Please! I'll wait right here.

Drago said...

Francisco: "That seems pretty clear. You are confused because you depend on propaganda newscasters to think for you."

Not true. ARM knows he is lying, like a Schiff-ty Junior.

Inga is the dumb one who actually believes the nonsense she vomits up.

LLR Chuck is the FakeCon attempting to sow dissension in the conservative ranks.

Think of them all as rather a pathetic Team Avenatti lineup.

Happy Thanksgiving!!! (but not Mueller-mas)

narciso said...

The shokin investigation would have revealed collusion in the looting by the country team, jarecka kent vindman et

narciso said...

Schiffmas

Inga said...

And Drago is the Trump Turkey.

Drago said...

Inga: "Looking forward to it."

LOL

No you're not.

Just like you really weren't ready for Nov 2016, or the collapse of your collusion fever dreams or the collapse of your 25th amendment fever dreams or the collapse of your emoluments dreams or the collapse of your Kavanaugh lies.

Meanwhile, America is stronger and better positioned economically than it has been in 50 years.

Looks like Team Dem Dummies have also given up on their Recession fever dreams as well.

Cue Sad Trombone.

Michael said...

Pour ecouragere le autres. It's a demonstration to future witnesses that anyone insufficiently "helpful" to the Dems and the media will be destroyed.

chickelit said...

And please, Democratic senators running next year, go on record about how you will vote to convict. Please! I'll wait right here.

Especially the sitting Senators vying for Trump's job. I want them to stand up and say "Trump is guilty" the loudest. I want them to do this in the spirit of stupidity and cluelessness. Senator Harris will lead them -- that is if she is still a candidate.

Curious George said...

"Blogger Qwinn said...
Apparently Inga thinks..."

STOP!...there's your problem Qwinn. Inga doesn't think. Our resident dullard and cut n paster can do nothing more than regurgitate lefty talking points. Which is why she ignores the cross examination testimony of Sondland.

Angle-Dyne, Servant of Ugliness said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Yancey Ward said...

I see I misread Ms. Althouse on one section. The antis and pros when connected to Trump sometimes mix together when I am reading.

In short, Althouse was correct on all points, in my opinion.

Angle-Dyne, Servant of Ugliness said...

Right. Sondland’s testimony was devastating to Trump. In light of that, those who are accusing him of any wrongdoing are probably Trump supporters.

Forgive me Meadehouse, I know I shouldn't respond to Those Who Have Been Banned, but I stand in awe at this.

Absolutely in awe. This is a level of batshit true-believin' rationalizing that shouldn't even be possible. It's like, dividing by zero or something.

Kevin said...

The ploy I speak of is Althouse’s attempt to make Sondland’s testimony look like it was damaging to the impeachment effort.

Inga lives in a world where the impeachment effort goes forward unless the evidence is sufficient to undermine it.

Drago said...

Can you imagine the angry cursing Inga will launch at Althouse when this latest lefty/LLR-lefty ploy against Trump fails as it must?

LOL

hombre said...

Since his sexual proclivities have no bearing on his testimony one way or the other, all this, if true, rates only a big “so what.” Have any of these hysterical, unreported, historical allegations against Republican men reached the level of Democrat rape and child molestation.

Oh, and Epstein didn’t kill himself.

Francisco D said...

Not true. ARM knows he is lying, like a Schiff-ty Junior. Inga is the dumb one

You are probably right about that, Drago.

Several months ago, ARM left the blog after I called him out on some really blatant lies. They were the type of schoolboy lies (not opinions but lies) that are easily proved. Now he is back to tell us more lies. He is a DNC/MSM operative who feeds the dummies who desperately want to believe their own nonsense.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

rancisco D said...
left the blog after I called him out.


Breathtaking solipsism.

Yancey Ward said...

Here is what Sondland actually testified to, summarized.

(1) He was told by Trump directly to work with Giuliani in Ukraine matters on May 23rd 2019. Sondland testified that he didn't want to do this. In fact, Sondland never once communicated with Giuliani until August 1st 2019. Sondland claims that Giuliani told him that a meeting with Trump was conditioned on a public announcement of investigations into the 2016 election interference and Burisma. Volker, who was the actual emissary chosen by Trump that working with the new Ukrainian government (Sondland is the US ambassador to the EU) contradicted almost all of Sondland's testimony. Giuliani, Perry, Pompeo, and others have all issued public statements contradicting Sondland's testimony, and will almost certainly repeat these denials in a Senate trial. Given that there were no public announcements of investigations and Trump and Zelensky did meet, it is difficult to believe Sondland's testimony in this one particular regard.

(2) Sondland testified that he had no evidence whatsoever that release of the aid was conditioned on investigations or public announcements of such. He clearly didn't want to have to say this- he hemmed and hawed when questioned directly about this- but eventually had to agree that he had no such evidence- not even hearsay testimony. The only hearsay he had in this regard was Trump himself saying that he wanted nothing from the Ukrainians.

Birkel said...

ARM thinks using big words makes him less of a charlatan.
He's wrong, of course.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Inga voted for Jill Stein. A RUSSIAN ASSET!

I heard Hillary say that by extension that means anyone who voted for Jill Stein is also a Russian Asset.

Turn yourselves in.

Slave to the rhythm

btw- Adam Schitt promised, over and over,to his butt-sniffing leftist media, that he would let the whistle-blower testify. Where is that promise?

Drago said...

I will give ARM credit for attempting to draw early attention to the Great Awakening of blacks and hispanics to the benefits of voting republican which we niw see solidly reflected in the polls.

This Great Awakening on the part of minorities to how the democrats abuse them and condescend to them and take them for granted is leading us to a 2020 dem nightmare scenario of minorities in large numbers voting for their only real choice to improve their lives: Donald Trump.

Trust me, once this Ukraine delusion plays out and consumes the Biden campaign I predict the democrats will be forced to take radical and reactive and ultimately self-defeating steps to staunch the outflow of minority voters from their party.

Its also important for republicans to understand that many dems are already hinting at multiple impeachments since they know this latest lame ploy will fail.

I truly believe these nutjob dems will sacrifice the swing district reps to satisfy their far left mobs.

Summary: Its all good!

Yancey Ward said...

Now, if Democrats want to hang their hat on the idea that withholding a meeting with someone is an illegal quid pro quo, well then they all have to resign first since no politician doesn't give priority to campaign donors for meetings. In addition, I will just put this unanimous Supreme Court decision right here, which states:

"McDonnell's conviction was vacated on the grounds that the meaning of "official act" does not include merely setting up a meeting, calling another public official, or hosting an event."

Francisco D said...

ARM took some time off and then added "Beloved" to his screen name after I caught him in a blatant lie.

The only reason to respond to his posts is to discredit his obvious lies. There is no reason to actually engage him in a discussion because his purpose is to spread DNC/MSM propaganda.

ARM is a DNC operative not a commenter, not reasonable and certainly not beloved.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Why does Adam Schitt get to get away with his lying about his interactions with the whistle-blower?

tim in vermont said...

“I read on the internet...” - ARM

But “The CIA told me” is gospel truth.

pacwest said...

Viewing Sondland's testimony through a purely political lens I think it was somewhat hurtful to Trump. "It was a quid pro quo." Legally "I presume" helps. This inquiry is purely political. I don't understand the 'coincidental' timing or target here. The accusations are Democrat's modus operandi, that much is known. Why this target? A warning?

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Volker said ..
"The problem was that despite the unanimous, positive assessment and recommendations of those of us who were part of the U.S. presidential delegation that attended the inauguration of President Zelensky, President Trump was receiving a different, negative narrative about Ukraine and President Zelensky. That negative narrative was fueled by accusations from Ukraine’s then-prosecutor general and conveyed to the president by former Mayor Rudy Giuliani."

"[Trump] said [Ukraine] “tried to take me down.” In the course of that conversation, he referenced conversations with Mayor Giuliani. It was clear to me that despite the positive news and recommendations being conveyed by this official delegation about the new president, President Trump had a deeply rooted negative view on Ukraine rooted in the past. He was clearly receiving other information from other sources, including Mayor Giuliani, that was more negative, causing him to retain this negative view."

"I decided to tell President Zelensky that we had a problem with the information reaching President Trump from Mayor Giuliani. I did so ... on July 2, 2019."

"I also said that it is not credible to me that former Vice President Biden would have been influenced in any way by financial or personal motives in carrying out his duties as vice president."

"the accusation that Vice President Biden acted inappropriately did not seem at all credible to me."

"On Aug. 16, Mr. Yermak shared a draft with me, which I thought looked perfectly reasonable. It did not mention Burisma or 2016 elections, but was generic. Ambassador Sondland and I had a further conversation with Mr. Giuliani, who said that in his view, in order to be convincing that this government represented real change in Ukraine, the statement should include specific reference to “Burisma” and “2016.” "

"In hindsight, I now understand that others saw the idea of investigating possible corruption involving the Ukrainian company, Burisma, as equivalent to investigating former Vice President Biden. I saw them as very different — the former being appropriate and unremarkable, the latter being unacceptable. In retrospect, I should have seen that connection differently, and had I done so, I would have raised my own objections."


BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The loyal hiveminders buy it wholesale when the media declare in lockstep:

THE WALLS ARE CLOSING IN!

DEVASTATING TESTIMONY!


Except after cross-examination - Sondland didn't provide anything the left could use, and he contradicted his own testimony.
This is why he and his family must be destroyed. Sondland didn't behave as Schitt's stooge, as planned.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

"In hindsight, I now understand that others saw the idea of investigating possible corruption involving the Ukrainian company, Burisma, as equivalent to investigating former Vice President Biden. I saw them as very different — the former being appropriate and unremarkable, the latter being unacceptable. In retrospect, I should have seen that connection differently, and had I done so, I would have raised my own objections."

LOL.

In hindsight - HE should have know that you NEVER GO AFTER A DEMOCRATIC. NAMED BIDEN. WHO WAS OBAMA'S VP.

Birkel said...

pacwest,
The polling disagrees that it was "somewhat hurtful" but I take your point.
It definitely gives purchase to the Approved Party Lies that we see above.

But the Senate will ask a very different series of questions.
I do not trust Tim Scott but his public statements leaves little wiggle room.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

I fear that Fran D may have hit the Thanksgiving punch too early and too often.

mccullough said...

The Dem playbook is tired.

The Swamp is filled with stupid, lazy people.

Birkel said...

ARM,
Your 11:13 cut and paste confirms one thing, only:
State Department officials are butt hurt that President Trump ignores their demonstrated, ineffective, self-serving directions.

What else ya got?

Because if we are supposed to hate unelected bureaucrats more than we currently do, it's working.

Drago said...

ARM should definitely forward his 11:13 cut and paste to the DNC for immediate inclusion in democrat attack ads targeting the battleground states......

................LOLOLOLOLOLOL

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Unelected bureaucrats are the real president. So say the media! collectively.

Drago said...

BTW, I think we should all have the opportunity to hear from the two (yes 2!) Adam Schiff staffers who have connections to Burisma.

Isn't that a fascinating little tidbit?

Yancey Ward said...

So, ARMs position is that Trump should be impeached for thinking ill of Ukrainian corruption. Got it now.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 277   Newer› Newest»