Impact of Sondland’s testimony and White House response

ABC News chief White House correspondent Jon Karl and chief legal analyst Dan Abrams weigh in on the major takeaways from Ambassador Sondland’s testimony and the response from the White House.
2:20 | 11/21/19

Coming up in the next {{countdown}} {{countdownlbl}}

Coming up next:

{{nextVideo.title}}

{{nextVideo.description}}

Skip to this video now

Now Playing:

{{currentVideo.title}}

Comments
Related Extras
Related Videos
Video Transcript
Transcript for Impact of Sondland’s testimony and White House response
Let's get analysis from our chief legal analyst Dan Abrams and chief white house correspondent Jon Karl and, Dan, let's take a step back after sondland's testimony yesterday. We've had several days of public hearings and the overwhelming weight of the testimony evidence leads to a pretty clear fact pattern, the president wanted Ukraine to announce political investigations. He froze their aid, wouldn't agree to a white house meeting until Ukraine announced the investigations. Directed Rudy Giuliani, Gordon sondland and others to get that done but then the campaign fell apart after the whistle-blower complaint was going to congress and the aid was released so the question now that's pretty much uncontested those facts. Is that an impeachable offense. You're right to look at this in its totality, right. You can't just look at Gordon sondland in a vacuum. You have to say, wait, where was his testimony supported? How did this jibe with what other witnesses testified? Anything can be impeachable. That's up to congress to decide. We talk about the legal definitions of bribery, et cetera. Congress can decide to pursue abuse of power. It's a broad sort of overarching type of allegation that has existed in previous impeachments that expect would be one of the articles here. So I think the question now is not will there be articles of impeachment but what will the articles of impeachment be? And at that point, then it's going to be for the senate to decide an it doesn't seem like anything has moved much. That's whey want to take to Jon Karl. Jon, there is another clear fact pattern emerging, nothing that has come out to date has shaken the partisan divide in the house in any way. Reporter: It hasn't shaken it in the senate, George. The bottom line is that there is no significant breaking of the ranks. You did hear a few Republican senators express some concerns about what they heard from sondland. But absolutely no sign of any Republican senator I have seen so far suggest that what they see would warrant removing the president from office. That said, there's been a very aggressive campaign here by the white house to keep the senators on board, in fact, George, I am told that the president will be having lunch today with a group of ten Republican senators, among those expected to be here at the white house, dining with the president, Mitt Romney and Susan Collins, two of those moderates who would be expected to possibly break ranks if anybody would. And Mitt Romney has been publicly critical so far. Thanks very much. You'll both be joining our live coverage of the house impeachment hearings that start at 9:00 eastern this morning.

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

{"duration":"2:20","description":"ABC News chief White House correspondent Jon Karl and chief legal analyst Dan Abrams weigh in on the major takeaways from Ambassador Sondland’s testimony and the response from the White House. ","mediaType":"default","section":"ABCNews/GMA","id":"67193023","title":"Impact of Sondland’s testimony and White House response","url":"/GMA/News/video/impact-sondlands-testimony-white-house-response-67193023"}