Impeachment hearing: Gordon Sondland confirms Ukraine 'quid pro quo,' says he raised concerns
WASHINGTON – U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland confirmed Wednesday the existence of a “quid pro quo” in which military aid to Ukraine was tied to President Donald Trump’s call for an investigation of his political rival, Joe Biden.
Sondland, testifying on Capitol Hill in the Trump impeachment inquiry, said he was acting on Trump’s orders in his actions with regard to Ukraine.
He said, “At all times, I was acting in good faith. As a presidential appointee, I followed the directions of the President.”
Sondland said Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani pressed the demand for investigations of Biden, the former vice president, and his son, Hunter, who worked for Burisma Holdings. Giuliani made clear that the investigations would be required in order for the White House grant a meeting that Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky was seeking with Trump.
— Bart Jansen, William Cummings, Courtney Subramanian and Nicholas Wu
Sondland: Trump told us to work with Giuliani
Sondland said he, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and Ukraine special envoy Kurt Volker worked with “Giuliani on Ukraine matters at the express direction of the President of the United States.”
“We did not want to work with Mr. Giuliani, ” he said. “Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr. Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine. So we followed the President’s orders.”
“We worked with Mr. Giuliani because the President directed us to do so,” he said again.
The testimony from Sondland, a wealthy Portland, Oregon, hotelier and Trump donor, is being closely watched because of his ability to offer a first hand account of his discussions with Trump on Ukraine.
Sondland described raising worries about a “quid pro quo” with Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., a close Trump ally who served on a congressional task force on Ukraine.
“I shared concerns of the potential quid pro quo regarding the security aid with Senator Ron Johnson,” Sondland said, adding that he also raised concerns with Ukrainian officials.
Sondland said he became aware in July and August that the White House suspended security aid, which he opposed. He said he wasn’t told why the aid was held up, but that he understood it’s release would depend on Ukraine beginning investigations.
“I was adamantly opposed to any suspension of aid, as the Ukrainians needed those funds to fight against Russian aggression,” Sondland said. “I tried diligently to ask why the aid was suspended, but I never received a clear answer. In the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid, I later came to believe that the resumption of security aid would not occur until there was a public statement from Ukraine committing to the investigations of the 2016 election and Burisma, as Mr. Giuliani had demanded.”
Trump has attempted to put distance between himself and Sondland, telling reporters on Nov. 8, “I hardly know the gentleman.”
Nunes compares Ukraine outreach to George Washington
Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., the top Republican on the Intelligence Committee, compared the Ukraine outreach to George Washington’s diplomacy with Great Britain in his opening statement.
“I would remind my friends on the other side of the aisle that our first president, George Washington, directed his own diplomatic channels to secure a treaty with Great Britain. If my Democratic colleagues were around in 1794, they’d probably want to impeach him, too,” Nunes said.
He also lashed out at “partisan extremists” who transformed the Intelligence Committee into an “Impeachment Committee.”
“The Democrats have exploited the Intelligence Committee for political purposes for three years, culminating in these impeachment hearings,” he said.
— Nicholas Wu
Stay updated: Follow USA TODAY’s impeachment coverage
Schiff lays out Sondland’s role in Ukraine saga
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-California, began his opening remarks by laying out the Democratic case of impeachment against President Donald Trump.
“Trump’s scheme undermined military and diplomatic support for a key ally and undercut U.S. anti-corruption efforts in Ukraine,” he said.
Schiff recounted Sondland’s role in the Ukrainian saga, placing him in key moments in the timeline and underscoring his importance as a witness to whether Trump abused his power. The top Democrat described Sondland as a “skilled dealmaker” who “found himself increasingly embroiled in an effort to press the new Ukrainian President that deviated sharply from the norm, in terms of both policy and process.”
“Now, it is up to Congress, as the people’s representatives to determine what response is appropriate,” he said after recalling the events in Ukraine.
“If the President abused his power and invited foreign interference in our elections, if he sought to condition, coerce, extort, or bribe an ally into conducting investigations to aid his reelection campaign and did so by withholding official acts – a White House meeting or hundreds of millions of dollars of needed military aid – it will be up to us to decide, whether those acts are compatible with the office of the Presidency,” Schiff said.
— Courtney Subramanian
Why Sondland’s testimony matters
In an addendum to his original testimony, Sondland said he communicated a quid pro quo to a top Ukrainian presidential adviser, Andriy Yermak.
“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,” Sondland said.
David Holmes, a State Department official in the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, testified that he overheard a call between Sondland and Trump in which Trump asked Sondland about “investigations.”
According to Holmes, Sondland assured Trump that Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky “loves your a–” and would do “anything you ask him to” about investigations.
Holmes said, “I then heard President Trump ask, ‘So, he’s gonna do the investigation?’ Ambassador Sondland replied that ‘he’s gonna do it,’ adding that President Zelensky will do ‘anything you ask him to.'”
How to stay updated on USA TODAY’s impeachment coverage
More: Aide testifies Sondland told Trump that Zelensky would ‘do anything you ask him to’
Holmes also told lawmakers that when he asked Sondland “if it was true that the President did not ‘give a s— about Ukraine,” Sondland replied that Trump only cared about “big stuff” that worked to Trump’s personal benefit like investigations into his political adversaries.
Other testimony has indicated that Sondland was in contact with Trump as he waged a “parallel” campaign of diplomacy that Trump’s national security adviser, John Bolton, said was like a “drug deal.”
National Security Council official Tim Morrison told members of Congress and staff behind closed doors that Sondland told him “the President was giving him instruction” related to the “parallel” campaign to pressure Ukraine to open investigations into Trump’s political adversaries.
“Ambassador Sondland believed and at least related to me that the President was giving him instruction,” Morrison said of a conversation with Sondland.
And before the July 25 call, Sondland emailed Morrison and other White House staff to say “he had spoken to the President that morning to brief him on the call.”
Recounting a later conversation between Morrison and Sondland, Morrison said Trump told Sondland “there was no quid pro quo, but President Zelensky had to do it and he should want to do it.”
What Hale and Cooper have said
The officials testifying in the afternoon are expected to shed further light on the campaign to remove U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and the withholding of aid.
Cooper oversees Ukrainian policy at the Pentagon and previously told lawmakers and staff in her closed-door testimony how it became clear after Trump’s call with Zelensky how the nearly $400 million of security aid was being withheld as “it relates to the President’s concerns about corruption.”
Hale testified behind closed doors about Yovanovitch’s ouster.
When asked who would decide against releasing a statement in support of Yovanovitch in light of the “smear” campaign against her, he said it would have been “someone more senior than me.”
“Given my position in the State Department, it could only have been someone more senior to me. The Secretary most likely would have been the person.”
Click Here: liverpool mens jersey
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Impeachment live updates: Gordon Sondland confirms quid pro quo