‘The Five’ break down key moments from Sondland’s testimony

‘The Five’ break down key moments from Sondland’s testimony

100 thoughts on “‘The Five’ break down key moments from Sondland’s testimony


  2. 4 of the 5 are total jokes smh. Shame shame shame, history will not look kindly on you. Chief justice will not look kindly on Trump.

  3. I've watched all of these witnesses testimony. I don't know what everybody else is watching, but their testimony seems to me to be truthful. What they are actually saying out loud is that they haven't heard anything first hand. They testify to that. This Ambassador actually gave the Dems several "back atcha moments". He said clear as day that there was no quid quo pro. What else do you want him to say? I don't think any of them are anti Trump, they've actually helped him with their testimony. I can't see why they are being attacked, they told exactly what they knew, which is NOTHING! It's not their fault that the Dems hear exactly what they want to hear. All I heard was that they didn't know anything, and couldn't testify that they did.

  4. There has been only a few times minimal that I did not agree with Greg. He makes sense and he puts his opinion in a way that all can understand.. Huan looks confused all the time. His face looks like he is constipated.


  6. the Ambassador said he presumed there was a quid pro quo but the when asked what direction he got from the president, the statement was The President didn't want anything for the aid.

  7. Wow, there's a lot of confusion about the difference between quid pro quo, bribery, and extortion. FYI, bribery and extortion are forms of quid pro quo, but not all quid pro quo is bribery or extortion.

    In this case, it would be bribary if President Trump said to Presiden Zelensky "I'll make sure that the construction company that you own will be awarded a lucrative no-bid contract from the US to build us a new embassy, provided you investigate Joe Biden".

    Like bribery, extortion is a subset of quid pro quo. In this case, extortion would be like if President said to President Zelensky "If you don't investigate the Bidens, I'm going to send your wife some pictures of you in bed with a bunch of hookers".

    The difference between bribery and extortion is that people receive something of value when they are being bribed, but when they are extorted they just avoid losing something of value.

    A quid pro quo is much broader in scope in that it litterally means this for that. Every purchase or deal that is made is technically a quid pro quo. However, the way the term is frequrntly used, it implies an impropriety. An example would be the classic story of strangers killing each others spouses so that the perpetrators each have alabis for the times when their spouses were murdered and thus it is much less likely that either of them will be caught and prosecuted. However, in the realm of foreign relations, the term quid pro quo is also often just a perfectly valid trade. An example would be "If your country will drop your tariffs on the import of US wheat, we'll drop our tariffs against the import of your country's automobiles into the US".

    In this impeachment inquiry, the Democrats story is that President Trump was tying US defense aid to the Ukraine to an investigation of his Political rival, Joe Biden because such an investigation would exclusively benefit President Trump in the 2020 elections and this would essentially constitute the President using US taxpayer money to buy a personal favor from the Zelensky administration.

    The Republican story is that there was no explicit requirement that the Ukrainians had to investigate Biden in order to get the US aid. Since the President never explicity stated that the aid was contingent on the investigation, even if his subordinates inferred that it was, then the President is not guilty of making an inappropriate quid pro quo. They also argue that the aid was released, so, in fact, there was no quid pro quo.

    Republicans also argue that while Trump said that he'd like to see investigations into Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election and into Burisma, he didn't explicitly say that he wanted the Bidens investigated. Democrats countered that by showing that, at least in the minds of some of the players, Burisma really means the Bidens (since Joe's son Hunter was on the board of Burisma). But there is a problem with using this argument because the Democrats have held out that President Trump simply wants to have a Ukrainian investigation into the Bidens to smeer Joe during the election cycle and that Joe is innocent of any wrongdoing. If they try to push hard on the idea that the investigation into Burisma is just a smeer job on Joe for the benefit of the Trump 2020 election, they'll open themselves up to the Republican counter argument that a Ukrainian investigation into Burisma, while admittedly helpful to the Trump 2020 camaign, is also actually in the best interests of both the Ukraine and the US because the investigation will route out corruption in the governments of both countries and, thus, such a quid pro quo (if it actually existed) is entirely appropriate.

    If Democrats stick with the argument that Joe is innocent and this is just an attempt by President Trump to smeer his innocent political opponent, but then Republicans will counter with "if Joe is innocent then how can an investigation into Burisma tarnish his campaign? It might tarnish Hunter, but not Joe since you claim Joe has no direct ties to Burisma and did no inappropriate lobbying on their behalf". So, if the Democrats stick with that argument, especially since the Ukraine recently reopened their investigations into Burisma and indicted the head of the company, they'll be committing political suicide for their whole party.

    No matter what the Democrats do with this impeachment inquiry, Joe Biden and his son Hunter are going to go down as will numerous other players in the Obama administration. The only smart plays for the House Democrats are to either drop this sham inquiry, pretend they dropped it because they couldn't find the right witnesses or were simply misinformed or mislead by some witnesses, and hope everyone forgets about this inquiry before the 2020 elections, OR they can pretent to be shocked at the revelations that Joe was dirty and promptly through him under the bus along with some other Obama folks (maybe even Barack himself) and claim that they are cleaning their own house of corruption. The latter option is the smart one, so rest assured they won't choose it.

  8. So,. Why is Biden who admitted that he withheld funds until an investigation got terminated is clear? I didn't get the memo!

  9. Juan Williams is a hell of a salesman of the Democratic Party. But he looks like a salesman that knows he is selling a faulty product.

  10. Trump said that statement the same day the whistleblower complaint made its way the the executive branch and congress, so of course he would say that. Advice to trump sycophants, he lies, hes a con, fox news is opinion not based on logic.

  11. Trying to call out my Democrat friends about the truth is like arguing with flat.earthers. The truth is plaim to.see but they keep buying the medias lies.

  12. Quid Pro Quo is not a crime without it their would be no negotiations between businesses governments or countries. now as for bribery or pay for play you would look to your Bidens or Clintons and other corrupt government swamp creatures!

  13. Does Juan every do any of his own research or investigations on his own ? cause it seems like he just gets all his info from CNN.

  14. Juan makes a fool of himself every time he opens his mouth. Does he like being a fool? He has to like being a fool because Katie just ate him up with good journalism. She got the salient point correct. NO QUID PRO QUO. Juan is a shill for the Democrats, he can do nothing but spew out their talking points. He doesn't have a working brain.

  15. Not all quid pro quo arrangements are criminal in nature. Trade deals, like the USMCA for example, involve quid pro quo arrangements with mutual benefits: US dairy products will not be slapped tariffs by Canada in exchange for tariff-free imports from Canada. Another example is when the EU helped out Greece with loan guarantees to solve their shortage of funds in government in exchange for Greece implementing austere measures to cut spending. Only quid pro quo that profits a government official or his relatives/friends personally from a transaction that is considered as improper and corrupt. Withholding US aid in Ukraine to properly vet the newly elected government that it is serious in being transparent and in rooting out corruption in government does not profit Pres. Trump personally or his family & friends, but helps the furtherance of clamping down on corruption both in the US and Ukraine. While the quid pro quo committed by former VP Joe Biden holding on to $1+ billion US aid to Ukraine until after the prosecutor investigating Burisma Holdings (where his son Hunter Biden continued to receive $83,333 per month for sitting on its Board doing nobody knows what) was fired, was considered as improper and corrupt, as it profited Hunter Biden. This is an example of corruption that Pres. Trump has been trying to eradicate, in keeping his promise to the American people to DRAIN THE SWAMP IN WASHINGTON D.C. Many millions, billions, and even trillions of US taxpayers money have already been reported as "unaccounted for". So it has become one of the top-most agenda of POTUS to properly address and get resolved accordingly. Remember, it is the duty of POTUS to enforce our laws, and that includes rooting out corruption in government. That is why POTUS issued that Executive Order on December 21, 2017 to address just that, as well as other human rights violations. Everyone should note that the US and Ukraine have an existing comprehensive treaty agreement to cooperate in investigating and prosecuting crimes (which include corruption) signed by former president Bill Clinton.

  16. This whole process must be humiliating for Pelosi and Chuck. Why did they trust that idiot Schiff? Oh well it’s a huge Trump win now.

  17. "Block Buster Testimony turns into Block Head Testimony Slam Dunk Explosive Revelations of Normal Presidential Stuff"
    Compare Fundraising Stats.
    Trump versus "The Peanut Gallery"

  18. Greg explained this far better and that makeup angle can create a good narrative. All other angles cancels each other.

  19. It would be suicide for the Dems to impeach Trump and send it to the Senate for a trial. The senate will subpoena the whistleblower, hunter biden, Joe Biden, Adam Schiff etc etc

  20. Democrats heard quid pro quo and completely focused on the words while ignoring all the qualifiers. They always do this crap

  21. The EU hate Trump. Sondlands the Ambassador to the EU. Need I say more? Sondland's testimony was ALL "PRESUMPTION"-based. What a complete WASTE of Taxpayer's money. The Dems are a SICK joke – all PAID for by George Soros I suspect or should I say "I PRESUME." Anyone agree?

  22. Americans have learned something from all these hearings..we learned that trump knows what hes doing n that hes a great president n that he hasn't done anything wrong but we knew that already without having to hear it from people who had their feelings hurt because our taxes weren't being sent to another country….I like the five but omg Juan has to go,he belongs on CNN or MSNBC or something

  23. Love the trump supporters comments😆ye haw……….. y'all fked up, byebye mr.donald 😆😆😆😆👋🤠🤠🤠🤠there's no argument , let it be he fked up and he belongs in jail and all around him! BUHAAAAAA! Stop trying to defend him people what wrong with you! Can't wait for Republican candidates for president there's so many more qualified applicants😆

  24. This is so stupid . He answered truthfully that the Whitehouse meeting was conditional as most are but the aid wasn't . As a businessman I know that all dealings are conditional . It's how things are done

  25. It's CLEAR NOW!! WINDMAN is the WHISTLEBLOWER's informant. WINDMAN is the leaker. DMS and SCHIFF are fuckt. Damned. Everyone in US have matched and understand it right away.. It was a big "blank" after Jim Jordan's question to Windman about WHO HE TALKED TO about. . And Schiff interrupted that sequence right away. No one had spelled the word "whistleblower" . But Schiff did. Now we ALL know !! BTW. This Windman is NOT A WARRIORS. He's a Native Russian ELITE's Kid. A Traitors. Look at his face. Strange.. Ambassador Maria IVANOVITCH is Russian TO.

  26. im done with this, im voting for Trump again, and if some how hes impeached, I'll be in a militia fighting the dems, and the Republicans will win, AGAIN.

  27. Hey Juan do you know what size hammer is coming down on the corrupt Demon-o-crats? It's a NINE POUND HAMMER Juan, and the person wielding it will be A.G. William Barr.

  28. I love how 2 people can watch the same thing, and hear two completely different things. I admit that what Sondland said in his opening statement looked bad. However, I guess Juan turned off the TV after Schiff talked to the press during the break, and missed the republicans tear him apart. Especially when they got him to admit that Trump specifically said "I don't want nothing. I don't want any quid pro quo", or when Sondland said that he only "presumed" that's what he wanted. How many people have presumed something and been totally wrong?

  29. I’m ngl , as much as I disagree with , I respect Juan a liberal to be on a fox show , it’s nice to see a little bit into a democratics thought process

  30. what is the crime? how do you whistle blow on a fully released transcript?

    Patriots fight for America, the left will cheat, steal and find unfairly

  31. How I see it… Schiff will keep this going as long as he possibly can to avoid being charged and indicted for his crimes. How long can he cast these fake actors, to play with him in this theatre of insanity, before he's forced to shut it down?

  32. Vidman and Schiff obviously both know who the whistleblower is. Which means they lied to Congress, and is a federal offense and worthy of up to five years in prison.

  33. 4:36 HR this is how the world works. It sounds like his companies were letting corrupt managers bribe and/or extort people in the company, this sounds like a corrupt business that had white collar crime problems

  34. Sondland tried to end the boycot and demonstrations at his hotels and the threats to his family by giving a statement that is damning for Trump. Understandable, but unfortunately he didn't prepare it very well.

  35. That stupid mug. I hope he accidentally knocks it off of the desk one day it's so large and ominous

  36. Today!.. thanks to all these Democrat's Clown Circus Shows, and the Fake News.. the Republicans have GAIN another Republican Trump  VOTER  "ME"   33 yrs as a Democrat is no more.  I don't TRUST them

  37. Why do they leave out that that phonecall was after the wistleblower complaint came out? That is not fair reporting.. And why don’t we discuss how our mayor of the usa gave these orders?

  38. I cant wait for Trump 2020 – me and my friends are getting Pizza and Beers just to watch all the "liberal trigger melt down" compilation videos. It will be delightful.

  39. If POTUS was so concerned about corruption in Ukraine that he held the military aid from February when the aid bill was passed in congress and when it was released in September why did he finally release the funds? In the phone call that took place in July, POTUS claims he's concerned about corruption. What had the newly elected Ukrainian president done between July and September that convinced POTUS to release the original aid of 240 million dollars, along with an additional 150 million dollars, especially if reports are true that POTUS was utterly convinced that Ukraine was still as corrupt today as it was before POTUS became president.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *