WTF Community

The Impeachment of President Donald J. Trump

General Discussion
, , , ,
#945

T stands by Giuliani…Aides do not like the hyperbolic nature of Rudy’s comment…Round and round they go…

Behind the scenes, however, many of Trump’s closest aides and advisers, inside and outside the White House, quietly wish the president would cut ties with Giuliani, whose leadership of New York after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks earned him worldwide admiration and the moniker of “America’s mayor.”

Giuliani was a force in Trump’s defense during the lengthy Russia investigation by the special counsel. Yet the effort to undermine special counsel Robert Mueller led Giuliani to Ukraine, which now entangles the former federal prosecutor and mayor in legal jeopardy and is central to the danger threatening the presidency he labored to protect.

The New York Times reported Friday, citing a pair of anonymous sources familiar with the matter, that the investigation is linked to Giuliani’s efforts to undermine Marie Yovanovitch, formerly the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. The U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan has declined to comment on the Times report.

On Saturday, Trump deployed in Giuliani’s defense the same two-word phrase — “Witch Hunt!” — he repeatedly used to attack the legitimacy of the special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and now the House impeachment inquiry against him.

“So now they are after the legendary ‘crime buster’ and greatest Mayor in the history of NYC, Rudy Giuliani,” Trump tweeted while on the way to his northern Virginia golf club. “He may seem a little rough around the edges sometimes, but he is also a great guy and wonderful lawyer.”

…

Asked if he still represented Trump, Giuliani replied to The Associated Press with a one-word text message: “Yes.”

White House officials have been flabbergasted by Giuliani’s performance on Trump’s behalf, particularly his habit of revealing embarrassing information without so much as a heads-up to the president’s full-time aides.

Aides have come to view Giuliani’s behavior much as they have their boss’ — with resignation that they will rarely be consulted beforehand to develop a strategic plan, and that any plan will be ignored.

One White House aide said there was frustration among aides that they have borne the brunt of criticism from some in Trump’s orbit for not having a more coordinated response to the impeachment probe, saying they were operating without visibility into what Giuliani has been doing. The aide and others who spoke on this subject did so on the condition of anonymity.

White House lawyers rarely deal with Giuliani directly, preferring to coordinate when necessary with Jay Sekulow, viewed as the more even-keeled lawyer on the president’s outside team.

Aides who spoke on this subject said the general feeling among them is that Trump has yet to fully grasp the extent of Giuliani’s side-dealings and hope Trump will eventually sour on his fellow New Yorker.

Giuliani was first brought on as the public face of Trump’s defense of the Russia investigation, with Trump valuing his pugnacious style from the 2016 campaign and his reputation as “America’s mayor.”

…

Many in the administration — including in the West Wing and at the State Department — have tried to distance themselves from Giuliani’s dealings in Ukraine, eagerly leaking to reporters unflattering stories about the former mayor’s clumsy investigative efforts.

And while there is a grudging respect among some Trump allies and in the reelection campaign at Giuliani’s willingness to defend the president on TV, something few others in the White House have done of late, many believe his interviews have become too hyperbolic and his undisciplined manner of speaking could put Trump at risk.

But though Trump himself has at time grown frustrated with Giuliani, he has defended the former mayor to people around him. Trump has spoken admiringly of Giuliani’s no-nonsense style and willingness to go all-out to defend the administration and attack the president’s Democratic foes and the news media, according to three White House officials and Republicans close to the White House. The officials insisted on condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Trump admired Giuliani’s two terms as mayor and has told confidants he was the last “strong” mayor his hometown had.

1 Like
#946

:smirk::clap::clap:

Wow what perfect description

3 Likes
#947

Check out these arguments laid out by our friend Marcy Wheeler, at Emptywheel.net.

She pivots her argument on a statement John Dowd had made on behalf of T Oct 3rd…I am not a lawyer, nor do I think like one…but I believe this letter could be significant in that it joins T in with all those other indicted creeps Igor and Lev, and places T and Giuliani in sort of a joint defense agreement. Read on…and tell me what you think. It worked during the Mueller Report proceedings with all that back-and-forth info sharing and stalling…

If we survive Trump and there are still things called museums around that display artifacts that present things called facts about historic events, I suspect John Dowd’s October 3 letter to the House Intelligence Committee will be displayed there, in all its Comic Sans glory.

In it, Dowd memorializes a conversation he had with HPSCI Investigation Counsel Nicholas Mitchell on September 30, before he was officially the lawyer for Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, now placed in writing because he had since officially become their lawyer. He describes that there is no way he and his clients can comply with an October 7 document request and even if he could — this is the key part — much of it would be covered by some kind of privilege.

Be advised that Messrs. Parnas and Fruman assisted Mr. Giuliani in connection with his representation of President Trump. Mr. Parnas and Mr. Fruman have also been represented by Mr. Giuliani in connection with their personal and business affairs. They also assisted Joseph DiGenova and Victoria Toensing in their law practice. Thus, certain information you seek in your September 30, 2019, letter is protected by the attorney-client, attorney work product and other privileges.

Once that letter was sent, under penalty of prosecution for false statements to Congress, it became fact: Parnas and Fruman do work for Rudy Giuliani in the service of the President of the United States covered by privilege, Rudy does work for them covered by privilege, and they also do work for Joseph Di Genova and Victoria Toensing about this matter that is covered by privilege.

Dowd might be forgiven if he immediately adopted the strategy that worked so well in guiding Trump through the Mueller investigation: just engage in a 37-person conspiracy to obstruct justice and name it a Joint Defense Agreement. Indeed, there are even similarities with current events. Then, John Dowd, Jay Sekulow, and Rudy Giuliani offered things of value to the others in the JDA — pardons — in exchange for their silence or even lies. Conspicuously, Toensing represented two people that — the Mueller Report seems to suggest — weren’t entirely candid in their testimony, Erik Prince (who managed to lose texts that explained why he was taking back channel meetings with Russians) and Sam Clovis (who sustained his lack of memory of being told that Russians were offering emails long enough for George Papadopoulos to change his mind on that front). Papadopoulos even managed to call Marc Kasowitz, when he still represented the President, to ask if he also wanted to represent a coffee boy with an inclination to lie to the FBI. The strategy all built to its successful crescendo when, instead of cooperating with prosecutors as he signed up to do, Paul Manafort instead figured out what they did and didn’t know, lied to keep them confused, and reported it all back through his own attorney, Kevin Downing, and Rudy to the President.

…

It all might have worked, too, if Parnas and Fruman hadn’t gotten arrested before they managed to flee the country, headed for what seems to have been a planned meeting a day later with their sometime attorney Rudy Giuliani in Vienna, just one day after a lunch meeting with him at Trump Hotel across the street from the Department of Justice that was busy inking an indictment against the Ukrainians even as they paid money to Trump Organization for their meal.

I mean, it still could work. Trump is still the President and DOJ, at least, will give some consideration to the attorney-client claims, so long as Rudy and Trump can maintain the illusion that Rudy is and was really doing legal work for the President.

But something that Dowd may not have considered, before he sent a letter to Congress laying out an incestuous nest of ethical atrocities, is that by the time he sent the letter, DiGenova and Toensing were on the record as representing Dmitry Firtash, a Ukrainian oligarch who was named in some of the early search warrants targeting Paul Manafort. And in March, Rudy Giuliani went on the record to explain that Firtash was, “one of the close associates of [Semion] Mogilevich, who is the head of Russian organized crime, who is Putin’s best friend.” Yesterday, Reuters closed the circle, making it clear that Parnas and Fruman work for Firtash, the former as a translator for DiGenova and Toensing’s representation of Firtash.

Firtash, by the way, is in Vienna, where Parnas and Fruman attempted to flee and where the President’s lawyer was planning to meet them a day later.

2 Likes
#948

I love this paragraph— I think about this all the time. How will Trump be remembered?

5 Likes
#949

When asked about the incriminating texts, this is the very text Trump quoted, claiming it “nullified” all of the impeachment charges against him.

Watch as Trump quotes himself, “exonerating” himself:

I fixed Trump’s words for him. First, here’s his lying statement:

The one text message that I saw was just … the last text message. Because I don’t even know most of these ambassadors. I didn’t even know their names. But the text message that I saw from ambassador Sondland, who’s highly respected, was “there’s no quid pro.” He said that. … He said, “By the way, there’s no quid pro quo.” … And that was the text message that I saw and that nullified everything.

Fixed in bold:

The one text message that I saw wrote was just … the last text message. Because I don’t even know most of these ambassadors. I didn’t even know their names. But the text message that I saw from wrote for ambassador Sondland, who 's highly respected has no qualifications for being an ambassador, but got the job because he donated $1 million to my inauguration, was “there’s no quid pro quo.” He I said that. … He I said, “By the way, there’s no quid pro quo.” … And that was the text message that I saw wrote and that nullified everything means I’m guilty as hell.

3 Likes
#950

Looks like Defense Sec Mark Esper will be cooperating with the request for documents from the Congressional committees and asking that records be kept. It is unclear if Esper will adhere to the deadline that was asked of them. But for now, T appointee Esper is playing ball.

Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Sunday signaled he would attempt to comply with a subpoena from House Democrats related to their impeachment inquiry but did not commit to honoring the order’s deadline for documents from the Pentagon.

“We will do everything we can to respond to their inquiry, Chris,” Esper told host Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday.”

“My general counsel a week or two ago sent out a note, as we often do in these situations, to the key members in the Pentagon to say, ‘Retain your documents and institute other controls,’” he continued. “So, again, we will respond as we can.”

Congressional Democrats have demanded Esper, as well as acting Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought, produce any documents having to do with the administration’s decision over the summer to withhold military aid to Ukraine.

Lawmakers are probing whether the freezing of those funds marked an effort by President Donald Trump to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into pursuing investigations of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

Trump pushed Zelensky to scrutinize the Bidens over unfounded allegations of corruption in a July phone call that lies at the heart of Democrats’ impeachment push.

“The enclosed subpoena demands documents that are necessary for the Committees to examine this sequence of these events and the reasons behind the White House’s decision to withhold critical military assistance to Ukraine that was appropriated by Congress to counter Russian aggression,” the three House Democratic chairmen leading the impeachment inquiry wrote in letters to Esper and Vought.

Although the subpoena requests the documents by Tuesday, Esper refused Sunday to say whether the Pentagon would meet that target date.

1 Like
#951

Some choice words from Pelosi

Nancy Pelosi Responds to Trump on Impeachment at The New Yorker Festival | The New Yorker

After President Trump accused the Speaker of the House of Representatives of hating America, Nancy Pelosi struck back. During an appearance at the twentieth annual New Yorker Festival, speaking with the staff writer Jane Mayer, she described the President as having “a grotesque personality” and accused him of “undermining the integrity of our elections” in a way that was “not only wrong and unconstitutional—it’s poisonous.”
Pelosi said that Trump’s pressuring of a foreign head of state to dig up dirt for his personal political benefit was “so beyond” that “he’s made lawlessness normal. He’s almost trying to make lawlessness a virtue.” She said that she couldn’t tell whether Trump was incapable of distinguishing right from wrong or if he simply doesn’t care. When he described his Ukrainian actions to her as “perfect,” in a phone call last month, she decided it was time to launch an impeachment inquiry.

“We’ll have an inquiry,” she told Mayer. “Give him all the opportunity to introduce whatever exculpatory information he might have, any evidence that might prove something to the contrary, to be very fair.” She acknowledged that impeachment is “divisive” and said that she understood those who say, of Trump, “I just don’t think he’s worth it to divide the country any further”—a position Pelosi once occupied. But she also argued that Trump has so violated norms and laws that “this is not about him.” She added, “The Constitution is worth it. The Republic is worth it. Our democracy is worth it.”

“Everything he says is a projection of himself. When he calls me ‘Nervous Nancy,’ I know he’s very nervous,” she said, in response to Trump’s name-calling. “When he calls Adam Schiff this or that, this and that, I think he’s projecting. He knows the argument that could be made against him—at least I think he should, or does—so he projects it onto somebody else. And you think, There’s his weakness. He knows.”
Pelosi called Trump’s attacks on Hunter Biden, the son of his potential Democratic Presidential rival Joe Biden, a “ridiculous thing,” and an example of his projecting onto others his own weaknesses: “His kids are so financially invested. Every place . . .” The live audience drowned out the rest of her sentence in laughter and applause.

2 Likes
#952

Tick Tock…

Pelosi/Schiff and Dems have the evidence. One of the many things that may slow this process down I am hearing, is that Pelosi wants to protect her House Dems who have declared they are for the Impeachment inquiry, committing to a vote may affect their chances of re-election in very close and T country elections.

That and not having any real Republican support on the Senate side…with Romney being the only one who has stuck his neck out.

Impeachment alone will be a huge black mark on T’s back, and as such, makes him testier and more disruptive.

But a vote could happen soon…even by Thanksgiving or sooner to impeach. The 51% Fox poll could be enough to send chills down the R’s backs to not back T any longer.

Not sure of the timing but am sure there is a huge concern that T is not equipped to be president, and he’s done wrong by the people. The T Supporters are gonna stick to him no matter what.

Opinions

We investigated the Watergate scandal. We believe Trump should be impeached.

Read the op-ed from 17 Watergate special prosecutors.

The House, through its Judiciary Committee, fulfilled that responsibility by reviewing the evidence, interviewing witnesses and concluding that the facts warranted adopting three articles of impeachment: one for obstruction, one for abuse of power and one for contempt of Congress. Shortly thereafter, the president resigned rather than face a Senate trial.

In our considered view, the same three articles of impeachment could be specified against Trump, as he has demonstrated serious and persistent abuses of power that, in our view, satisfy the constitutional standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” For example:

● Trump conditioned protection of the military security of the United States and of an ally (Ukraine) on actions for his personal political benefit.

● Trump subordinated the integrity of our national electoral process to his own personal political interest by soliciting and encouraging foreign government interference in our electoral process, including by Russia and China. He also appears to have demanded that Ukraine investigate a potential 2020 political opponent and pursue the conspiracy theory that Ukraine had interfered in the 2016 presidential election, despite the unanimous conclusion of the U.S. intelligence community that it was Russia that had interfered.

● According to the evidence laid out in the Mueller report, Trump engaged in multiple acts of obstruction of justice in violation of federal criminal statutes and of his oath of office to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Because Mueller viewed Justice Department policy as precluding him from filing criminal charges against the president, the special counsel appropriately stated that these abuses are for Congress to address.

● Trump obstructed lawful congressional investigations by systematically withholding evidence and by directing government agencies and employees to refuse to cooperate with legitimate oversight by Congress. Most significantly, the president’s blanket refusal to honor requests for relevant information sought by House members conducting an impeachment inquiry constitutes impeachable contempt and obstruction. The public is entitled to know the facts, and Congress is the body our democracy has entrusted with uncovering them.

The Constitution provides for the elected representatives of the people to resort to impeachment in extraordinary circumstances showing that this drastic remedy is necessary to restrain, and possibly remove, a president who has engaged in high crimes and misdemeanors. Proper regard for reestablishing and protecting the rule of law requires firm and resolute action by the House. Lawmakers should not allow any refusal by the president to cooperate in its process to frustrate the performance of its constitutional duties.

If a bill of impeachment comes before the Senate, we urge all members of the Senate to put aside partisan loyalties and carry out their own constitutional duties courageously and honestly. In 1974, it was a group of Republican senators who put national interest over party loyalty and informed Nixon that his conduct was indefensible and would compel conviction by the Senate and removal from office. We hope the current Senate would similarly put honor and integrity above partisanship and personal political interest.

2 Likes
#953

Cross-posting

3 Likes
#954

Schiff says on Face The Nation this AM that he wants to make sure all the witnesses’ testimony is said behind closed doors so that T 'n Co can not corroborate on what is said, and what is not said. Every precaution is being used to tailor this process like a grand jury. Bravo.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff defended holding testimony behind closed doors in the impeachment inquiry he’s heading up against President Donald Trump, likening this phase of the investigation to a “grand jury.”

“We want to make sure that we meet the needs of the investigation and not give the president or his legal minions the opportunity to tailor their testimony and in some cases fabricate testimony to suit their interests,” the California Democrat said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

Schiff said they may call some or all of the witnesses to return to testify in public later, though that might not include the whistle-blower who triggered the impeachment fight in the first place.

While Trump and some of his Republican allies have hoped to unmask the official and question him or her, Schiff said his priority now is to protect the whistle-blower and said they don’t need the person’s testimony to find out what happened on the phone call between Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

https://news.yahoo.com/schiff-says-secret-testimony-aimed-165106637.html

2 Likes
#955

CNN
Monday, October 14, 2019
From live feed…

A day-by-day look at what’s happening with the impeachment inquiry this week

Lawmakers return to Capitol Hill this week with House Democrats set to accelerate their impeachment inquiry against President Trump.

Here are some of the key events we’re watching this week:

  • Today: Trump’s former top Russia adviser Fiona Hill is expected to speak today to three House panels behind closed doors as part of the impeachment probe into the President.
  • Tomorrow: Three Trump administration officials face subpoena deadlines – Vice President Mike Pence faces a deadline on a request for Ukraine-related documents sent earlier this month, while Defense Secretary Mark Esper and acting director of Office of Management and Budget Russ Vought both face a deadline on subpoenas requesting documents as part of the impeachment inquiry.
  • Wednesday: Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, associates of Rudy Giuliani face a subpoena deadline for documents. The subpoenas were issued the same day that the two were indicted by federal prosecutors. The subpoenas are separate from the indictment, in which federal prosecutors allege that Parnas and Fruman illegally funneled foreign money into US elections.
  • Thursday: US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland is set to testify. He’s a key witness, and his earlier scheduled appearance was canceled at the last minute due to objections from the State Department.
  • Friday: There are two more subpoena deadlines. Energy Secretary Rick Perry faces a subpoena deadline for documents related to the administration’s dealings with Ukraine. House Democrats have also subpoenaed acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney for documents.

Also see this excellent preview of what’s happening with the impeachment inquiry from the WaPo – originally posted by @anon95374541:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/politics/impeachment-calendar/

4 Likes
#956

Fiona Hill, a former top National Security Council expert on Russia, was testifying to Congress behind closed doors Monday, the latest former Trump administration official to be subpoenaed as part of the House impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump.

Hill wouldn’t comment as she arrived on Capitol Hill, but her attorney said she had received a congressional subpoena and would “comply and answer questions” from lawmakers. She resigned from the White House National Security Council over the summer.

She is the first White House official to appear as part of the House impeachment inquiry . Her appearance comes despite a White House vow to halt any and all cooperation with what it termed the “illegitimate” impeachment probe. The White House did not immediately respond to questions about whether they had sought to limit Hill’s testimony.

For color,

2 Likes
#957

Could this be Shep Smith’s replacement? John Solomon just left The Hill in disgrace for his part in creating the Ukraine conspiracy theory that has Trump in trouble. His hiring this week by Fox News gives Trump a friend on the network who knows all the intricate workings of that conspiracy theory, because HE started it!

Water Finds Its Level as Fox News Hires Dictator-Loving, Deep State-Loathing John Solomon

2 Likes
#958

Ms. Hill will testify that while she was the president’s top adviser on Russia and Ukraine, she was cut out of the loop as Mr. Giuliani and others ran a shadow diplomacy intended to benefit Mr. Trump’s political position, according to the person informed about her account. She was not told, the person said, that Mr. Trump would use the call to press for an investigation into Mr. Biden.

Her testimony will not establish a quid pro quo between Mr. Trump’s pressure for investigations and his decision to withhold $391 million in American assistance to Ukraine, the person said. But she will confirm that the administration leveraged a coveted White House invitation for Mr. Zelensky to a commitment to investigate corruption, which was seen as code for investigating Democrats.

Ms. Hill took her objections to the treatment of Ms. Yovanovitch, who was targeted by Mr. Giuliani and conservative media outlets, to John R. Bolton, then the national security adviser, as well as others. Mr. Bolton shared her concerns, according to the person, and was upset at Mr. Giuliani’s activities, which she viewed as essentially co-opting American foreign policy toward Ukraine.

2 Likes
#959

Related, and hilarious.





3 Likes
#960

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/14/politics/rudy-giuliani-semyon-kislin-house-impeachment/index.html

Semyon Kislin, the Russian mob-connected associate of Trump and Giuliani, was scheduled to give a deposition today. He is not. His lawyer says he is cooperating and as such has reached an amicable agreement with the House Intelligence committee that mitigates the need for him to testify today. Excuse my cynicism, but I’ll believe this when I hear the same from the committee.

The House Intelligence Committee and one of Rudy Giuliani’s associates have reached “an understanding” for now to avoid a closed-door deposition over any knowledge he may have of Giuliani’s efforts to push the Ukrainian government to open an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden, according to the associate’s attorney.

The committee had scheduled a deposition with Semyon Kislin, the Giuliani associate, for Monday, sending a letter earlier this month demanding a wide range of information related to President Donald Trump’s personal attorney’s efforts to push for an investigation into the Bidens and what he may know about the freezing of US aid for Ukraine. There is no evidence of wrongdoing by either Biden in Ukraine.

Kislin’s attorney Jeffrey Dannenberg told CNN his client was “being cooperative” with the House panel but had no knowledge to advance the inquiry.

Kislin was one of three Giuliani associates that received requests for documents and testimony from House Democrats. The other two, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, were indicted last week on charges of funneling foreign money into US elections, and were served with subpoenas last week by the House Intelligence Committee to turn over documents. But it had been unclear why Kislin had not been issued a subpoena.

Kislin’s emergence in the Ukraine scandal, begs the question, who is this guy? Here’s a couple in-depth pieces that attempt to provide some answers.

This is a deep dive into Kislin’s background. I won’t provide excerpts here – it’s the kind of piece you really need to curl up with in an easy chair.

Suffice it to say that Kislin has long standing ties with the Russian mob, has allegedly laundered large sums of rubles through New York real estate and has done business with our President.

His specific involvement in the Ukraine scandal is the allegation that he leaned on Giuliani to promote the investigations of the Bidens. Just like, Giuliani, Perry, Parnas, and Fruman, while he was pushing those probes, he was also running a side hustle. He bought up a shell company that is holding significant “toxic” (aka “stolen”) assets that were once held by the corrupt, pro-Russian former President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovich (who, BTW, was installed with the help of Paul Manafort). Kislin lobbied former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, to unfreeze the assets which would have reaped millions for him. Recall that the ambassador was allegedly wrongfully ousted by Trump and Giuliani because she was resisting the Biden investigations they were pushing. It looks like there was also another motive for ousting her – she may have been standing in the way of unfreezing those assets held by Kislin, but we don’t know at this point if that was a factor.

If you see any issues with my highlights of the article, please step in and I’ll make any necessary updates.

And here’s another in-depth piece that focuses more on Kislin’s and Giuliani’s associations and their ties to the Russian mob.

4 Likes
#961

I am not 100% certain I am correct here, but if I understand the three articles above the way I think I do, Trump & Giuliani’s obsession with smearing Joe Biden and helping Russia through Ukraine may have just revealed some of their OWN crimes?

4 Likes
#962

FYI,

2 Likes
#963

10 hours of testimony and so far we only get whispers.

Trump’s ex-Russia adviser told impeachment investigators of Giuliani’s efforts in Ukraine

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trumps-former-top-russia-adviser-to-testify-in-house-impeachment-probe/2019/10/14/e6015c1c-ee34-11e9-8693-f487e46784aa_story.html

Fiona Hill, the White House’s former top Russia adviser, told impeachment investigators on Monday that Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, ran a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine that circumvented U.S. officials and career diplomats in order to personally benefit President Trump, according to a person familiar with her testimony.

Hill, who served as the senior official for Russia and Europe on the National Security Council, was the latest witness in a fast-moving impeachment inquiry focused on whether the president abused his office by using the promise of military aid and diplomatic support to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rivals.

In a closed-door session that lasted roughly 10 hours, Hill told lawmakers that she confronted Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, about Giuliani’s activities which, she testified, were not coordinated with the officials responsible for carrying out U.S. foreign policy, this person said on the condition of anonymity to disclose details of her deposition.

5 Likes
#964

Here we go…

Bolton Objected to Ukraine Pressure Campaign, Calling Giuliani ‘a Hand Grenade’

The effort to pressure Ukraine for political help provoked a heated confrontation inside the White House last summer that so alarmed John R. Bolton, then the national security adviser, that he told an aide to alert White House lawyers, House investigators were told on Monday.

Mr. Bolton got into a tense exchange on July 10 with Gordon D. Sondland, the Trump donor turned ambassador to the European Union, who was working with Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, to press Ukraine to investigate Democrats, according to three people in the room who heard the testimony.

Mr. Bolton instructed Fiona Hill, the senior director for Russian and Eurasian affairs, to notify the chief lawyer for the National Security Council about a rogue effort by Mr. Sondland, Mr. Giuliani and Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, with legal implications, Ms. Hill told the investigators, according to the people familiar the testimony.

“I am not part of whatever drug deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up,” Mr. Bolton, a Yale-trained lawyer, told Ms. Hill to tell White House lawyers, according to two people familiar with the testimony. (Another person in the room initially said Mr. Bolton referred to Mr. Giuliani and Mr. Mulvaney, but two others said he cited Mr. Sondland.)

It was not the first time Mr. Bolton expressed grave concerns to Ms. Hill about the campaign being run by Mr. Giuliani. “Giuliani’s a hand grenade who’s going to blow everybody up,” Ms. Hill quoted Mr. Bolton saying during an earlier conversation.

The testimony revealed in a powerful way just how divisive Mr. Giuliani’s efforts to extract damaging information about Democrats from Ukraine on President Trump’s behalf were within the White House. Ms. Hill testified that Mr. Giuliani and his allies circumvented the usual national security process to run their own rump foreign policy, leaving the president’s official advisers aware of the rogue operation yet powerless to stop it.

At one point, she confronted Mr. Sondland, who had inserted himself into dealings with Ukraine even though it was not part of his official portfolio, according to the people informed about Ms. Hill’s testimony.

He told her that he was in charge of Ukraine, a moment she compared to Secretary of State Alexander M. Haig Jr.’s declaration that he was in charge after the Ronald Reagan assassination attempt, according to those who heard the testimony.

According to whom, she asked.

The president, he answered.

4 Likes