Thread by @mkraju

Vindman testimony contradicts Sondland in big ways
Re July 10 WH meeting:
“Amb. Sondland started to speak about Ukraine delivering specific investigations in order to secure the meeting with the President, at which time Ambassador Bolton cut the meeting short,” Vindman said

“Following this meeting, there was a scheduled debriefing during which Amb. Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma,” Vindman said.

”I stated to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security, and that such investigations were not something the NSC was going to get involved in or push,” Vindman said

”Dr. Hill then entered the room and asserted to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate,” Vindman will testify.

What Sondland said about that meeting: “But if Ambassador Bolton, Dr. Hill, or others harbored any misgivings about the propriety of what we were doing, they never shared those misgivings with me, then or later.”

Sondland also said: “Although Mr. Giuliani did mention the name "Burisma" in August 2019, I understood that Burisma was one of many examples of Ukrainian companies run by oligarchs and lacking the type of corporate governance structures found in Western companies.”

Sondland testified he “did not know until more recent press reports that Hunter Biden was on the board of Burisma.”

Sondland added: “Again, I recall no discussions with any State Department or White House official about Former Vice President Biden or his son, nor do I recall taking part in any effort to encourage an investigation into the Bidens.”

Read for yourself: cnn.com/2019/10/17/pol… cnn.com/2019/10/28/pol…

Sondland’s attorney is declining to comment on the apparent contradictions, per @kpolantz