Ex-Republican Justin Amash Says There's Not a Jury in Country That Wouldn't Indict Trump Based on Impeachment Testimony So Far
Independent Rep. Justin Amash said on Wednesday that U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland’s testimony to House Intelligence Committee hearing on impeachment was the latest evidence against President Donald Trump that—if Trump was a regular person facing a grand jury—would result in certain indictment.
Amash, who left the Republican party in July 2019 over Trump’s behavior and the refusal of GOP leaders to hold him accountable, pointed out on Twitter that “impeachment in the House is an indictment.”
“If this were an ordinary prosecution, there’s no grand jury in America that would not return an indictment on the facts and evidence presented in these hearings,” said Amash.
As Common Dreams reported, Sondland testified Wednesday that Trump’s pressuring of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to publicly announce an investigation into Hunter Biden, son of Democratic 2020 presidential primary candidate former Vice President Joe Biden, was absolutely meant as a quid pro quo to release aid to the eastern European nation.
Sondland also said that Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were “in the loop” on the scheme.
Talking with reporters on the South Lawn, the president repeatedly referred to a notepad in his hand with the following words written in large black marker: “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zellinsky to do the right thing. This is the final word from the Pres of the U.S.”
Telling the journalists he hoped the cameras were rolling, Trump glanced at the notes as he offered his rendition of what Sondland testified earlier during sworn testimony.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
Journalist Ryan Cooper commented on the notepad and opined that the large letters were further proof of Slate‘s Ashley Feinberg’s theory that the president can’t see without glasses—which he won’t wear out of vanity.
“Trump definitely cannot see for shit,” tweeted Cooper. “Look at these enormous letters.”
As Matt Ford wrote at The New Republic, Trump’s comments don’t change the reality that Sondland’s testimony was incredibly damaging to the White House.
The Washington Post‘s Aaron Blake pushed back on that idea, however, claiming that Trump’s guilt and knowledge were a little more difficult to ascertain, even with Sondland’s testimony—though that shouldn’t be taken as evidence of the president’s innocence:
In a statement, Lisa Gilbert, vice president of Legislative Affairs at Public Citizen, said the group believes the new testimony is clear evidence of the president’s crimes.
“The immensity of Ambassador Sondland’s bombshell testimony cannot be overstated,” said Gilbert. “Sondland has confirmed the bribery scheme, in other words, flatly admitted a quid pro quo, and detailed how widespread the knowledge of the conditioned meeting and aid were within the Trump administration.”
“The president’s defenses are crumbling,” Gilbert added, “and the likelihood of impeachment has moved significantly forward with Sondland’s clear statements this morning.”
Testimony continues Wednesday evening with State Department officials Laura Cooper and David Hale.
Watch the evening hearing:
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.