Impeachment Witnesses Portray an ‘Insidious’ Push: Key Takeaways

(Bloomberg) -- The House committees leading the impeachment investigation into President Donald Trump released transcripts of testimony Tuesday from two key witnesses: Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union and a political supporter of the president, and Kurt Volker, a former special envoy to Ukraine.

In more than 700 pages of transcripts — plus a sworn statement and additional text messages among some of the key players — the committees laid out what Sondland called the “insidious” evolution of an effort to inject U.S. politics into relations with Ukraine. Key takeaways from the testimony:

‘Talk to Rudy’ was Trump’s refrain

Both of the State Department officials said that Trump was insistent on getting his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, involved in Ukraine policy.

“He wasn’t even specific about what he wanted us to talk to Giuliani about,” Sondland said. “He just kept saying: ‘Talk to Rudy, talk to Rudy.’”

Sondland said Trump thought Ukraine was a “problem.” Volker said Trump accused the Ukrainians of trying to “take me down” in the 2016 election. That reflected the embrace by Trump and Giuliani of a conspiracy theory that interference in that year’s campaign was plotted by Ukranians supportive of Democrat Hillary Clinton -- not, as U.S. intelligence agencies and Special Counsel Robert Mueller found, by Russians who opposed Clinton and favored Trump.

Giuliani’s involvement caused consternation at the State Department. “People usually smiled when they heard Rudy’s name because he was always swirling around somewhere,” Sondland said. “The State Department was fully aware of the issues, and there was very little they could do about it if the president decided he wanted his lawyer involved.”

‘Continuum’ of demands on Ukraine’s new president

Sondland described a “continuum” of escalating demands from the Trump White House.

It started with a request to get Ukraine to make a public statement about pursuing corruption. Then it became more specific: Ukraine shouldn’t just announce a probe into corruption but one that explicitly included Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden and his son Hunter. Finally, Sondland said, the White House withheld aid to Ukraine and an invitation for new president Volodymyr Zelenskiy to visit the White House.

“It kept getting more insidious” as time went on, he said even though at the start “it was all about just corruption.”

Crafting a statement Trump wanted from Ukraine

Text messages show U.S. officials were negotiating with the Ukrainians on the exact content of the public statement that Trump wanted them to make about corruption to win the White House visit they coveted.

On Aug. 12, Ukrainian presidential adviser Andriy Yermak proposed this language: “Special attention should be paid to the problem of interference in the political processes of the United States, especially with the alleged involvement of some Ukrainian politicians. I want to declare that this is unacceptable. We intend to initiate and complete a transparent and unbiased investigation of all available facts and episodes, which in turn will prevent the recurrence of this problem in the future.”

Volker said he thought that statement was “valuable” for improving the U.S.-Ukraine relationship. But it wasn’t enough for Giuliani.

“Rudy says, ‘Well, if it doesn’t say Burisma and if it doesn’t say 2016, what does it mean?’” Volker testified.

So Volker sent Yermak revisions the next day, inserting the phrase “including those involving Burisma and the 2016 U.S. elections” after the mention of the investigation.

Burisma Holdings is one of Ukraine’s largest private natural gas companies, and Hunter Biden was named to its board in 2014. Trump and Giuliani contend that, as vice president, Biden pushed for the ouster of a Ukrainian prosecutor who wanted to investigate Burisma. In fact, Democrats and Republicans -- and the U.S.’s European allies -- wanted the prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, removed for failing to pursue corruption.

Volker said he warned Giuliani that the allegations against Joe Biden weren’t credible. “He was executing U.S. policy at the time and what was widely understood internationally to be the right policy,” he said.

‘Refreshing’ some recollections after others testify

Sondland said “I don’t remember” or “I don’t recall” more than 100 times in his testimony. By comparison, Volker faulted his memory fewer than 20 times.

But after reading the opening statements of two other witnesses -- William Taylor, the ambassador to Ukraine, and Tim Morrison of the National Security Council -- Sondland said he had “refreshed his recollection of certain events.” He sent an affidavit to the House committees Monday clarifying his testimony.

Specifically, Sondland originally testified that he didn’t remember talking to Yermak in Warsaw on Sept. 1.

He now says he remembers a “pull-aside” conversation with Yermak that both Taylor and Morrison testified to.

“I now recall speaking individually with Mr. Yermak, where I said that resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks,” he wrote to the committees. He said there was also discussion of whether that statement would have to come from the Ukrainian president or its prosecutor general.

The inclusion of Burisma makes clear that the U.S. concern wasn’t with Ukrainian corruption generally, but with Biden specifically.

When negotiations become a ‘quid pro quo’

Volker and Sondland described conversations with Ukrainian officials in which they discussed both what Trump wanted (a public acknowledgment of an ongoing Burisma investigation) and what the Ukrainians wanted (military aid and a White House visit).

But under repeated questioning from House Democrats — and especially from Republicans who support Trump — each refused to call the reciprocal requests a “quid pro quo.”

“You asked what conversations did I have about that quid pro quo, etc.,” Volker responded to one question. “None, because I didn’t know that there was a quid pro quo.”

Sondland said that after other diplomats raised concerns, he called Trump to ask him directly. He said the president is “not big on small talk” and “as I recall he was in a very bad mood” during their brief conversation.

Here’s Sondland’s account of that phone call under questioning from Democratic attorney Daniel Noble:

Q: “During that telephone conversation with President Trump, you didn’t ask the President directly if there was a quid pro quo, correct?”

A: “No. As I testified, I asked the question open-ended: ‘What do you want from Ukraine?’”

Q: “President Trump was the first person to use the word ‘quid pro quo,’ correct?”

A: “That is correct.”

Q: “And I believe you testified that President Trump said he didn’t want anything from Ukraine. Is that correct?”

A: “That’s what he said.”

Q: “OK. But that wasn’t true, correct?”

A: “I’m just telling you what he said.”

--With assistance from Billy House, Steven T. Dennis and Erik Wasson.

To contact the reporter on this story: Gregory Korte in Washington at gkorte@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Kevin Whitelaw at kwhitelaw@bloomberg.net, Larry Liebert, Justin Blum

©2019 Bloomberg L.P.