Sondland’s Revision and Extortion

Nadin Brzezinski
4 min readNov 5, 2019

So the Ambassador revised his testimony, and it is significant. Was he heading towards perjury? If so, did he decide it’s best to correct the record? Because prison is not a nice place to be. The last pages of the transcript are extremely significant.

He wrote in his revised statement:

Also, I now do recall a conversation on September 1, 2019, in Warsaw with Mr Yermak. This brief pull-aside conversation followed the larger meeting involving Vice President Pence and President Zelensky, in which President Zelensky had raised the issue of the suspension of U.S. aid to Ukraine directly with Vice President Pence. After that large meeting, I now recall speaking individually with Mr. Yermak, where I said that resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks. I also recall some question as to whether the public statement could come from the newly appointed Ukrainian Prosecutor General, rather than from President Zelensky directly.

Now, this small snippet of text is clear on the intent. We will not resume aid until you do what we want. This is as clear as can be. The President of the United States was pressuring another nation to help dig out dirt for his own political goals.

--

--

Nadin Brzezinski

Historian by training. Former day to day reporter. Sometimes a geek who enjoys a good miniatures game. You can find me at CounterSocial, Mastodon and rarely FB