Rep. Meadows’ Statement on Ambassador Gordon Sondland Deposition
Washington, D.C. – Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) released the following statement regarding Ambassador Gordon Sondland’s absence this morning before the House Intelligence Committee’s scheduled deposition:
“I want to hear from Ambassador Gordon Sondland and anticipate we will in the near future. And from what we’ve seen, I fully expect his testimony to corroborate the information we heard from Ambassador Volker last week: that there was no quid pro quo, no pressuring of the Ukrainian government, and that the Trump administration was acting in the best interests of the American public throughout this episode.
However, I want to hear from Ambassador Sondland and future additional witnesses under a fair process—one that is focused on fact-finding and presenting the full truth to the American public. Instead, it’s crystal clear Chairman Schiff and House Democrats have no such process in mind. They held a 10 hour interview with Ambassador Volker last week—one that actually undermined their impeachment purpose—prompting them to leak a cherry-picked group of text messages out of context rather than the full interview transcript, which contained information that would benefit the President.
This kind of conduct underscores the blatantly obvious truth that House Democrats have no intention of being fair, but have every interest in being vindictive. They’re conducting a secretive, closed-door process seeking only information that supports their pre-determined narrative—and when they fail to find such evidence, they instead leak selective documents to give the appearance of building a case, as they hide facts that exonerate the President.
This is wrong. It’s an abuse of investigative authority that does not serve the country well. Until House Democrats are willing to engage in a fair process—ending the secrecy, releasing the Volker transcript, and perhaps holding a vote outlining what this now unauthorized “impeachment inquiry” even is—it’s no wonder why the President and his administration have no interest in participating. Until then, this should be called what it is: a political charade in search of validation.”