Himes: 'I don't think it blows a hole in the case' if Sondland testifies there was no quid pro quo

Himes: 'I don't think it blows a hole in the case' if Sondland testifies there was no quid pro quo
© Greg Nash

Rep. Jim HimesJames (Jim) Andres HimesDemocrats press Biden to step up fight against domestic hunger McCarthy pulls GOP picks off House economic panel Pelosi picks Democrats for special panel tackling inequality MORE (D-Conn.), a top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Sunday that Democrats’ case against President TrumpDonald TrumpCheney says a lot of GOP lawmakers have privately encouraged her fight against Trump Republicans criticizing Afghan refugees face risks DeVos says 'principles have been overtaken by personalities' in GOP MORE would not necessarily collapse if Ambassador to the European Union Gordon SondlandGordon SondlandThe Hill's 12:30 Report - Biden to mark Tuesday anniversary of George Floyd's death Trump impeachment witness suing Pompeo, State over legal fees America's practice of 'pay-to-play' ambassadors is no joke MORE testifies this week that there was no quid pro quo in the release of military aid to Ukraine.

“Doesn’t your case essentially depend on Sondland? If he doesn’t say that the president set this condition, this quid pro quo, doesn’t that blow a hole in your case?” Fox News’ Chris WallaceChristopher (Chris) WallaceAbbott promises to hire Border Patrol agents punished by Biden administration DHS secretary says Haitian migrant crisis is 'nothing new' Yarmuth and Clyburn suggest .5T package may be slimmed MORE asked Himes on “Fox News Sunday.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“I don’t think it blows a hole in the case… there is ample evidence that there was a corrupt deal being cooked up,” Himes responded, citing former National Security Advisor John BoltonJohn BoltonOvernight Defense & National Security — Milley becomes lightning rod Joint Chiefs Chairman Milley becomes lightning rod on right Ex-Trump adviser Bolton defends Milley: 'His patriotism is unquestioned' MORE’s reported reference to the arrangement as a “drug deal.”

“We know what [Sondland] has already said in his revised testimony where he revised his recollection,” Himes added, also citing the closed-door deposition of Lt. Col. Alexander VindmanAlexander VindmanShould reporters Woodward, Costa have sat on Milley-Trump bombshell for months? Overnight Defense & National Security — Milley becomes lightning rod Joint Chiefs Chairman Milley becomes lightning rod on right MORE, who is scheduled to deliver public testimony this week.

Moreover, Himes said, “The president, who frequently says ‘I’m the most transparent guy out there’ is not letting, is refusing to permit, other people like his chief of staff, to come testify… he is refusing to permit emails and phone calls and other documents that might actually shed some light on this to come forward.”

Wallace suggested to Himes that if House Democrats don’t have any witnesses “who can take us into the Oval Office, it seems to me that creates a big problem,” and asked if Sondland could be considered a credible witness after already revising his testimony.

“That’s a good question,” Himes responded, but said “it was not lost on Ambassador Sondland what happened to the president’s close associate Roger StoneRoger Jason StoneBannon says he discussed how to 'kill this administration in the crib' with Trump before Jan. 6 Roger Stone served with Capitol riot lawsuit during radio interview Lawyer for 17 Jan. 6 defendants says he's been released from hospital MORE for lying to Congress [so] my guess is Ambassador Sondland is going to do his level best to tell the truth.”

Stone was convicted on seven counts, including witness tampering and making false statements, on Friday.