Politics: Top White House official told Congress ‘there was no doubt’ Trump sought quid pro quo with Ukrainians - - PressFrom - US

Politics Top White House official told Congress ‘there was no doubt’ Trump sought quid pro quo with Ukrainians

06:45  09 november  2019
06:45  09 november  2019 Source:   washingtonpost.com

'A very honest person': Trump defends Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine

  'A very honest person': Trump defends Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine President Trump is defending personal attorney Rudy Giuliani as concern grows that the former New York mayor’s meddling in Ukraine is lending credibility to the Democratic impeachment effort. © Provided by MediaDC: Washington Newspaper Publishing Company, Inc.“I think Rudy is a corruption fighter. I think he viewed Ukraine as a very corrupt place,” Trump said Thursday during a wide-ranging Oval Office interview with Washington Examiner reporters and editors, just hours after the House voted to formalize impeachment proceedings.

Alexander Vindman described Trump ’s call with Ukraine president, and former White House Russia expert Alexander Vindman said “ there was no doubt ” about what Trump wanted when he spoke by phone on July 25 to Ukrainian President In a crucial discussion of what constitutes a quid pro quo

A White House official who was on President Trump 's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told Congress there was “ no doubt ” that Trump had invoked a quid pro quo , according to transcripts.

In vivid and at times contentious testimony before House impeachment investigators, the senior White House official responsible for Ukraine described what he believed was an unambiguous effort by President Trump to pressure the president of Ukraine to open investigations targeting American politicians in exchange for a coveted Oval Office meeting.

Under questioning from Rep. Peter Welch (Vt.) and other Democrats, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman said “there was no doubt” about what Trump wanted when he spoke by phone July 25 with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — particularly in contrast with an April call between the two leaders shortly after Zelensky’s election.

Former diplomat Kurt Volker says Rudy Giuliani was a 'direct conduit' to Ukraine and demanded they publicly announce an investigation into the Bidens

  Former diplomat Kurt Volker says Rudy Giuliani was a 'direct conduit' to Ukraine and demanded they publicly announce an investigation into the Bidens Giuliani pushed discredited allegations that the Bidens were involved in corruption, and the conspiracy that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election.Volker testified as part of the ongoing impeachment inquiry into Trump, which centers around a whistleblower complaint claiming that the Trump administration withheld a $400 million military aid package in exchange for Ukraine announcing an investigation into the Ukrainian oil and gas company Burisma Holdings - where former Vice President Joe Biden's son Hunter Biden served on the board from 2014 to 2019

Democrats have accused Trump of abuse of power and illegally leveraging US military aid for political favors from a foreign country — a quid pro quo that Trump Republicans painted the whistleblower, who had worked on the White House national security council earlier this year, as a Democratic Party

Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, told House impeachment investigators " there was no doubt " what President Donald Trump was demanding during Vindman also testified that Trump administration officials delivered a clear quid quo pro message to Ukraine .

Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Today’s most popular stories on The Washington Post

“The tone was significantly different,” Vindman said, according to a transcript of his Oct. 29 deposition released Friday. Vindman, who as a senior White House official listened in on both calls, went on to tell Welch: “I’m struggling for the words, but it was not a positive call. It was dour. If I think about it some more, I could probably come up with some other adjectives, but it was just — the difference between the calls was apparent.”

Welch asked Vindman if he had any doubt that Trump was asking for investigations of his political opponents “as a deliverable” — in other words, as part of a quid pro quo.

“There was no doubt,” Vindman said.

The release of Vindman’s testimony, and that of Fiona Hill, a former senior official for Russia on the National Security Council, comes as the House enters the next phase of its impeachment investigation.

White House dismisses impeachment transcripts: Trump 'has done nothing wrong'

  White House dismisses impeachment transcripts: Trump 'has done nothing wrong' The White House claimed Tuesday that newly released transcripts showed there is “even less evidence” underscoring House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry into President Trump’s interactions with Ukraine than previously known. © The Hill White House dismisses impeachment transcripts: Trump 'has done nothing wrong' "Both transcripts released today show there is even less evidence for this illegitimate impeachment sham than previously thought," White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement.

WASHINGTON — A crucial witness in the impeachment inquiry reversed himself this week and acknowledged to investigators that he had told a top Ukrainian official that the country would most likely have to give President Trump what he wanted — a public pledge for investigations — in order to

He originally told investigators he took Trump at his word that there was never a quid pro quo attaching aid Trump has argued that there was no ' quid pro quo ' with Ukraine – but even if there was , ' there is nothing On Tuesday, the White House sought to play down the latest disclosures.

Next week will bring two days of public testimony from three senior State Department officials who have already met with lawmakers behind closed doors. Hill and Vindman are in discussions to testify at a public hearing later this month, according to congressional Democratic advisers familiar with the plan who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing inquiry.

Vindman’s description of a quid pro quo focused on the White House meeting desired by Zelensky as Ukraine’s new president desperately sought a show of U.S. support in his country’s continued battle with Russia-backed separatists. But the Army officer also detailed a previously undisclosed discussion in the Oval Office on Aug. 16, a conversation among senior leaders that he did not witness but understood to be aimed at persuading Trump to restore the flow of hundreds of millions of dollars in security aid to Ukraine.

Graham now says Trump's Ukraine policy was too 'incoherent' for quid pro quo

  Graham now says Trump's Ukraine policy was too 'incoherent' for quid pro quo A day after saying he wouldn’t bother reading transcripts released by House Democrats in the impeachment inquiry into President Trump, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., now says he did read the testimony, and his conclusion is that the administration’s Ukraine policy was too “incoherent” for it to have orchestrated the quid pro quo that is at the heart of the probe. © Provided by Oath Inc. Sen. Lindsey Graham at an Oct. 24 press conference on impeachment. (Photo: Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images) Testimony released Tuesday included depositions from Gordon Sondland, U.S.

Trump was a businessman, Taylor was told , and therefore would make sure he got the goods he was supposed to be getting before signing any checks for There was no other reason offered for the aid being withheld. Nor was that stipulation ever met, but not because Trump had a change of heart.

US officials said Trump would not ‘sign a check’ for military aid without investigation into Joe Biden, Bill Taylor Trump - Ukraine scandal: Taylor transcript details direct quid pro quo via irregular channels – live. The new material adds color to a previously reported showdown at the White House between

Those involved included national security adviser John Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Secretary of Defense Mark T. Esper, Vindman said. They gathered with Trump “to discuss the hold and other issues” after Bolton instructed Vindman to draft a memo for the president explaining why distribution of the security aid — totaling almost $400 million — was in the United States’ interests.

Donald Trump wearing a suit and tie: President Trump speaks during a campaign event in Atlanta on Friday.© Jonathan Ernst/Reuters President Trump speaks during a campaign event in Atlanta on Friday.

Vindman told lawmakers that there was broad agreement among national security officials that not providing the aid to Ukraine “would significantly undermine the message of support” for the country and “also signal to the Russians that they could potentially be more aggressive.”

But accounts of what transpired in the Oval Office varied, Vindman told impeachment investigators. One official told him that, inexplicably, the hold on military aid “never came up,” according to Vindman’s testimony. A second account indicated that it was raised, “but no decision was taken.”

House withdraws subpoena for former National Security Council deputy Charles Kupperman

  House withdraws subpoena for former National Security Council deputy Charles Kupperman House Democrats on Wednesday withdrew a subpoena for former White House deputy national security adviser Charles Kupperman, a little under two weeks since Kupperman asked a federal court whether he should comply with the order. © Provided by Fox News Network LLCKupperman, who left the administration when National Security Adviser John Bolton exited in September, was slated to appear before the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight Committees last month as part of their impeachment investigation and the Trump-Ukraine controversy. Filing last month with U.S.

White House official corroborates diplomat’s account that Trump appeared to seek quid pro quo . Sondland “made a presumption,” House Oversight Committee member Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) told reporters, stressing that “what Sondland was told by the president [ is ] there was no quid pro quo .”

A State Dept. official began testifying this morning, the first administration official who appeared as The lawyer for Fiona Hill, a former top White House foreign policy adviser, on Wednesday Mr. Volker said he did not have conversations about a quid pro quo because he did not know that there was one.

In a discussion with impeachment investigators about what constitutes a quid pro quo, Vindman was grilled by a Republican lawmaker about why he believed Trump had made a “demand” that Ukraine launch an investigation of Hunter Biden in return for a White House meeting for Zelensky. Biden is the son of former vice president Joe Biden, a leading contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, and was once employed by a controversial Ukrainian energy firm.

Vindman, explaining what he called the vast “power disparity” between Trump and Zelensky, told Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Tex.) that Trump’s request for a “favor” from Zelensky was fairly interpreted as a demand.

“When the president of the United States makes a request for a favor, it certainly seems — I would take it as a demand.”

“Fair enough,” said Ratcliffe, who went on to express doubts about the premise.

Vindman said his reasoning was that “this was about getting a White House meeting. It was a demand for him to fulfill . . . this particular prerequisite to get the meeting.”

Ratcliffe pressed Vindman on the word “demand,” saying, “The word when we’re talking about an allegation that there was a quid pro quo has significance, and ‘demand’ has a specific connotation.” He stressed that Trump and others have denied there was any such demand.

Trump Impeachment Inquiry Delves into Idea of Quid Pro Quo

  Trump Impeachment Inquiry Delves into Idea of Quid Pro Quo At the heart of the House impeachment inquiry into President Trump’s Ukraine dealings is a Latin term that is easy to translate but legally difficult to define and prove. require(["medianetNativeAdOnArticle"], function (medianetNativeAdOnArticle) { medianetNativeAdOnArticle.getMedianetNativeAds(true); }); Democrats beginning public hearings next week with three key witnesses are focused on whether Mr. Trump engaged in an inappropriate quid pro quo.

Gordon Sondland says he now remembers telling a Ukrainian official that US military aid "likely" hinged on a political inquiry sought by Mr Trump . The president has been crystal clear no quid pro quo 's of any kind." The White House responded by noting that in his addendum, Mr Sondland "did

President Trump ’s insistence that there was “ no quid pro quo ” involved in pressuring Ukraine to The White House withheld 1 million in security aid approved by Congress ahead of the July 25 Several witnesses sought by the House , including Energy Secretary Rick Perry and former National

a man wearing a suit and tie: Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman appeared on Capitol Hill on Thursday to review his impeachment testimony.© Susan Walsh/AP Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman appeared on Capitol Hill on Thursday to review his impeachment testimony.

But Vindman stood by his description, saying: “It became completely apparent what the deliverable would be in order to get a White House meeting. That deliverable was reinforced by the President. . . . The demand was, in order to get the White House meeting, they had to deliver an investigation.”

Vindman also testified that Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, told him that the idea to precondition a White House meeting on the Ukrainians’ help in investigating the Bidens was “coordinated” with the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney.

Sondland “just said that he had had a conversation with Mr. Mulvaney, and this is what was required in order to get a meeting,” Vindman testified.

Mulvaney defied a subpoena Friday to appear for a deposition, claiming through his attorney “absolute immunity,” an official working on the impeachment inquiry said.

Trump later told reporters that allowing White House officials to testify would validate what he sees as an illegitimate proceeding. “They’re making it up,” he said. “I don’t want to give credibility to a corrupt witch hunt. I’d love for Mick to go up . . . except it validates a corrupt investigation.”

Sondland, a Trump donor turned diplomat, told impeachment investigators last month that the disbursement of military aid was contingent on the investigations Trump desired. A transcript of his deposition was released earlier this week.

Rand Paul claims Trump had 'every right' to engage in quid pro quo with Ukraine

  Rand Paul claims Trump had 'every right' to engage in quid pro quo with Ukraine Sen. Rand Paul questioned the White House's strategy of claiming President Trump didn't commit a quid pro quo with Ukraine, arguing that the president has "every right" to do so.Speaking on Sunday's Meet the Press, the Kentucky Republican defended the president's July 25 phone call with the leader of Ukraine and insisted that there is nothing wrong with Trump conditioning military aid on the country fighting corruption.

Now that a quid pro quo has been extensively confirmed, the GOP has moved from arguing that there was no quid pro quo to arguing that it couldn’t have been Even before Sondland communicated that quid pro quo directly to top Ukrainian official Andriy Yermak, Ukraine knew the White House was

They said there was evidence Mr. Mulvaney was involved in setting up a quid pro quo in which Ukraine could not receive a White House meeting unless top officials there committed to investigations that Mr. Trump wanted. And they showed how the foreign policy officials most deeply

Within an hour of Trump’s July call with Zelensky, Vindman said, he told White House lawyers that Trump had made an inappropriate request for an investigation.

“I thought it was troubling and disturbing” and “wrong,” Vindman told House investigators.

He said he brought notes of the conversation into a meeting that included White House lawyers John Eisenberg and Mike Ellis, as well as Vindman’s twin brother, Yevgeny, an ethics attorney on the National Security Council.

Vindman said what he found “particularly troubling was the references to conducting an investigation” into Hunter Biden, telling lawmakers he thought it was wrong for the president to ask a foreign power to investigate an American citizen.

He was also disturbed by Trump’s request that Zelensky speak with his personal attorney, Rudolph W. Giuliani, and Attorney General William P. Barr to “conduct an investigation that didn’t exist.”

Many of Vindman’s concerns about politicizing the relationship with Ukraine, which the United States sees as a bulwark against Russian expansion in Europe, were shared by Hill, the former NSC Russia official.

Hill testified that Giuliani and his business associates, Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas, were trying to use the powers of the presidency to further their personal interests. Fruman and Parnas were arrested last month and face federal charges of funneling foreign money to U.S. politicians while trying to influence U.S.-Ukraine relations.

Hill said Bolton repeatedly told his staff and colleagues in the administration “that nobody should be talking to Rudy Giuliani, on our team or anybody else should be.”

Even before Trump’s July phone call with Zelensky, during which Trump said Ukraine’s president should be in touch with Giuliani about investigations, “there was a lot of usurpation of that power,” Hill told impeachment investigators, characterizing Giuliani and his associates as “trying to appropriate presidential power or the authority of the President, given the position that Mr. Giuliani is in, to also pursue their own personal interests.”

Hill said that, in hindsight and with the benefit of a rough transcript of the call and media reports, she believed that her “worst nightmare” for U.S.-Ukraine relations had come to pass.

“My worst nightmare is the politicization of the relationship between the U.S. and Ukraine and, also, the usurpation of authorities, you know, for other people’s personal vested interests,” Hill said. “And there seems to be a large range of people who were looking for these opportunities here.”





Greg Jaffe, Karoun Demirjian, Josh Dawsey, Rachael Bade, Ellen Nakashima, John Hudson, Karen DeYoung, John Wagner, Colby Itkowitz, Matt Zapotosky, Tom Hamburger and Paul Kane contributed to this report.

White House stresses 'hearsay' in witness testimony ahead of public impeachment hearings .
The White House is seeking to undercut the accounts of three witnesses who have testified in the Democrats' impeachment inquiry, attacking their claims about President Trump's contacts with Ukraine ahead of this week's public hearings.In an email sent Tuesday morning to GOP congressional offices, the White House claimed that the testimonies of top Defense official Laura Cooper as well as Catherine Croft and Christopher Anderson, two onetime assistants to former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker, "were filled with hearsay.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 0
This is interesting!