This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/26/us/politics/trump-impeachment.html

The article has changed 17 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 5 Version 6
Intelligence Committee Questions the Acting Intelligence Chief: Live Updates Intelligence Committee Questions Joseph Maguire: Live Updates
(32 minutes later)
A whistle-blower in the intelligence community accused President Trump of using his office to try to get Ukraine’s government to help him in the 2020 presidential election, according to a complaint released Thursday by the House Intelligence Committee. Joseph Maguire, the intelligence chief at the center of the fight over a whistle-blower complaint about President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine, said the whistle-blower “acted in good faith” and called the case “unique and unprecedented.”
“I believe everything here in this matter is totally unprecedented,” Mr. Maguire emphasized as he testified before the House Intelligence Committee.
Facing tough questioning from Republicans and Democrats, he defended both the whistle-blower’s actions and his handling of the case, which he called “urgent and important.”
“I believe the whistle-blower followed the steps every step of the way,” Mr. Maguire said, a defense of the whistle-blower’s conduct that he repeated often.
The whistle-blower’s complaint accused Mr. Trump of using his office to try to get Ukraine’s government to help him in the 2020 presidential election.
“It was urgent and important, but my job as the director of national intelligence was to comply with the whistle-blower protection act,” he said under questioning from the panel’s chairman, Adam B. Schiff of California.
In his opening remarks, Mr. Schiff said he expected Mr. Maguire to explain “why you stood silent when an intelligence professional under your care and protection was ridiculed by the president, was accused of potentially betraying his or her country, when that whistle-blower, by their very act of coming forward, has shown more dedication to country, more of an understanding of the president’s oath of office than the president has ever demonstrated.”
Mr. Maguire said in his opening remarks that he was not legally obligated to share the whistle-blower report to Congress based on legal advice that he received from the Justice Department earlier this month.
The department had argued that the complaint did not flag behavior related to intelligence activity or a member of the intelligence community, and should therefore not be passed along to Congressional intelligence committees, Mr. Maguire testified.
While the inspector general argued that the allegations met the definition of a matter that should be shared with Congress because “the DNI has operational responsibility to prevent election interference,” the Justice Department argued that the allegations do not concern the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the DNI, and that the “allegations do not arise in connection with any such intelligence activity.”
Here’s an excerpt from the complaint:
“In the course of my duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.”“In the course of my duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.”
The complaint goes on to say the president’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani is “a central figure in this effort,” but that Attorney General William P. Barr “appears to be involved as well.”The complaint goes on to say the president’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani is “a central figure in this effort,” but that Attorney General William P. Barr “appears to be involved as well.”
The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam B. Schiff of California, vowed to protect the whistle-blower, an intelligence officer, from reprisal as he released the complaint. Mr. Schiff vowed to protect the whistle-blower, an intelligence officer, from reprisal as he released the complaint.
White House officials dismissed the significance of the document. “Nothing has changed with the release of this complaint, which is nothing more than a collection of thirdhand accounts of events and cobbled-together press clippings — all of which shows nothing improper,” the press secretary Stephanie Grisham said. She added, “The White House will continue to push back on the hysteria and false narratives being peddled by Democrats and many in the main stream media.”White House officials dismissed the significance of the document. “Nothing has changed with the release of this complaint, which is nothing more than a collection of thirdhand accounts of events and cobbled-together press clippings — all of which shows nothing improper,” the press secretary Stephanie Grisham said. She added, “The White House will continue to push back on the hysteria and false narratives being peddled by Democrats and many in the main stream media.”
With the whistle-blower report now public, Congress and the public will increasingly want to hear from the person who filed the report. Representative Jim Himes, Democrat of Connecticut, asked Mr. Maguire the question on many minds related to the whistle-blower complaint: “Director, did you or your office ever speak to the president of the United States about this complaint?”
Under the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, the whistle-blower is not permitted to make public statements on the substance of the disclosure, or even to testify to the intelligence committees without proper authorization from senior intelligence community officials, including the inspector general. Mr. Maguire hesitated, saying he spoke frequently with Mr. Trump. The congressman insisted on an answer.
In this case, officials including Mr. Maguire would need to let the whistle-blower know how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with appropriate security practices. Mr. Maguire has not yet advised on the situation, and lawmakers could ask him whether he will allow the whistle-blower to speak to Congress. “My conversations with the president, because I am the director of national intelligence, are privileged,” Mr. Maguire said. “And it would be inappropriate for me, because it would destroy my relationship with the president in intelligence matters to divulge any of my conversations with the president of the United States.”
Mr. Maguire, the intelligence chief at the center of the fight over a whistle-blower complaint about President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine, said in his opening remarks that he was not legally obligated to share the whistle-blower report to Congress, based on legal advice that he received from the Justice Department earlier this month. In another exchange, Mr. Maguire said that the White House never directed him not to share the complaint. His delay, he said, was about sorting through possible claims of executive privilege. That detail could prove to be key as Democrats attempt to sort out whether Mr. Trump or his team inappropriately obstructed Congress’s investigation.
The department argued that the complaint did not flag behavior related to intelligence activity or a member of the intelligence community, and should then not be passed along to Congressional intelligence committees.
While the inspector general argued that the allegations met the definition of a matter that should be shared with Congress because “the DNI has operational responsibility to prevent election interference,” the Justice Department argued that the allegations do not concern the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity within the responsibility and authority of the DNI, and that the “allegations do not arise in connection with any such intelligence activity.”
Mr. Maguire called the case “unique and unprecedented,” as he testified before the House Intelligence Committee.
“I believe everything here in this matter is totally unprecedented,” Mr. Maguire emphasized.
He also said he believed the complaint was urgent and important, even though he did not initially forward the complaint to Congress.
“It was urgent and important, but my job as the director of national intelligence was to comply with the whistle-blower protection act,” he told the House Intelligence Committee under questioning from the panel’s chairman, Mr. Schiff.
In his opening remarks, Mr. Schiff said he expected Mr. Maguire to explain “why you stood silent when an intelligence professional under your care and protection was ridiculed by the president, was accused of potentially betraying his or her country, when that whistle-blower, by their very act of coming forward, has shown more dedication to country, more of an understanding of the president’s oath of office than the president has ever demonstrated.”
It is unclear how much Mr. Maguire will be able to disclose about the classified portions of the whistle-blower’s complaint. He is also expected to avoid revealing any details of the whistle-blower’s identity, which could be a violation of the law
Mr. Maguire will be able to discuss why he and his general counsel disagreed with the inspector general for the intelligence agencies that the complaint needed to be handed over to the congressional intelligence panels.
The differences of opinion between Mr. Maguire and Michael Atkinson, the inspector general, will be at the heart of many questions from House Democrats, who objected angrily to Mr. Maguire’s refusal to share the material with Congress, which they said was required by law. The Democrats will also hammer away at the consultations between Mr. Maguire’s office, the Justice Department and the White House, seeking to find out whether the administration influenced Mr. Maguire’s decision. They plan to seek assurances that the whistle-blower will be protected.
Mr. Maguire is expected to argue that his own lawyers reached the same conclusions as the Justice Department’s, and he will have a chance to defend his reputation. The dispute has put Mr. Maguire, a former Navy SEAL and three-star admiral, in a bind, caught between a duty to inform Congress and legal advice that said the complaint could not be handed over.
Representative Devin Nunes of California, the top Republican on the intelligence panel, has been one of Mr. Trump’s most steadfast allies on Capitol Hill and Thursday morning, he showed he was unmoved by the whistle-blower’s allegations.Representative Devin Nunes of California, the top Republican on the intelligence panel, has been one of Mr. Trump’s most steadfast allies on Capitol Hill and Thursday morning, he showed he was unmoved by the whistle-blower’s allegations.
Level-toned but brimming with disgust, Mr. Nunes pointedly accused Democrats of launching another “information warfare operation against the president,” just like they fanned the flames of unsubstantiated “Russia hoax.” He ticked through some of the greatest hits of Republican’s unsubstantiated theories about the Democrats’ “mania to overturn the 2016 election.”Level-toned but brimming with disgust, Mr. Nunes pointedly accused Democrats of launching another “information warfare operation against the president,” just like they fanned the flames of unsubstantiated “Russia hoax.” He ticked through some of the greatest hits of Republican’s unsubstantiated theories about the Democrats’ “mania to overturn the 2016 election.”
They pursued “nude pictures of Trump,” he said. They sought “dirt” on Trump officials from Ukraine. Mr. Biden “bragged that he extorted the Ukrainians into firing a prosecutor who happened to be investigating Biden’s own son.”They pursued “nude pictures of Trump,” he said. They sought “dirt” on Trump officials from Ukraine. Mr. Biden “bragged that he extorted the Ukrainians into firing a prosecutor who happened to be investigating Biden’s own son.”
He even worked in a reference to Nellie Ohr, the wife of a Justice Department official, an employee of Fusion GPS, and a favorite target of Republicans, as he argued that the Russia investigation was cooked up by Democrats and the F.B.I. to take down Mr. Trump.He even worked in a reference to Nellie Ohr, the wife of a Justice Department official, an employee of Fusion GPS, and a favorite target of Republicans, as he argued that the Russia investigation was cooked up by Democrats and the F.B.I. to take down Mr. Trump.
“They don’t want answers,” Mr. Nunes said. “They want a public spectacle.”“They don’t want answers,” Mr. Nunes said. “They want a public spectacle.”
Not every Republican on the panel appeared to be comfortable with the president’s actions. Representative Mike Turner, Republican of Ohio, said the whistle-blower complaint was “based on hearsay” and he criticized Mr. Schiff and the Democrats for jumping to conclusions.
But he also leveled a sharp critique at the president, based on the transcript of his call with the Ukrainian leader released on Wednesday: “Concerning that conversation, I want to say to the president, this is not okay. That conversation is not okay.”
House Democrats passed a significant milestone late Wednesday: 218 lawmakers, a majority of the House, are now on the record supporting an impeachment inquiry into Mr. Trump’s behavior.House Democrats passed a significant milestone late Wednesday: 218 lawmakers, a majority of the House, are now on the record supporting an impeachment inquiry into Mr. Trump’s behavior.
Though the number is not exactly predictive of how lawmakers might vote on actual articles of impeachment, it spoke to the growing consensus among Democrats that emerging details about Mr. Trump’s attempts to pressure President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to help tarnish a leading Democratic rival may reshape Mr. Trump’s presidency and the 116th Congress.Though the number is not exactly predictive of how lawmakers might vote on actual articles of impeachment, it spoke to the growing consensus among Democrats that emerging details about Mr. Trump’s attempts to pressure President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to help tarnish a leading Democratic rival may reshape Mr. Trump’s presidency and the 116th Congress.
Democrats pledged to maintain their legislative work independent of the inquiry, but any cooperation with the White House could soon collapse as the specter of impeachment clouds out other topics.Democrats pledged to maintain their legislative work independent of the inquiry, but any cooperation with the White House could soon collapse as the specter of impeachment clouds out other topics.
Republicans have made clear that they believe Democrats are rushing prematurely into a grave proceeding, but several members of the president’s party who saw the classified complaint on Wednesday either called for its public release or said they were troubled by what they saw.Republicans have made clear that they believe Democrats are rushing prematurely into a grave proceeding, but several members of the president’s party who saw the classified complaint on Wednesday either called for its public release or said they were troubled by what they saw.
Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska and a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, emerged from reading the whistle-blower complaint on Wednesday evening and urged both parties not to rush to “partisan tribalism.” Republicans he said, “ought not be rushing to circle the wagons and say there’s no there there, when there’s obviously a lot that is troubling there.”Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska and a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, emerged from reading the whistle-blower complaint on Wednesday evening and urged both parties not to rush to “partisan tribalism.” Republicans he said, “ought not be rushing to circle the wagons and say there’s no there there, when there’s obviously a lot that is troubling there.”
The speaker is scheduled to step before the cameras at 10:45 a.m. for her weekly news conference, and rarely has there been one of such interest.The speaker is scheduled to step before the cameras at 10:45 a.m. for her weekly news conference, and rarely has there been one of such interest.
A day after throwing her support behind an inquiry, Ms. Pelosi spent Wednesday locked in strategy meetings with her leadership team, top aides and the leaders of six committees investigating Mr. Trump. The objective: Sketch out a path for an investigation that could lead to articles of impeachment that would formally charge Mr. Trump with high crimes and misdemeanors.A day after throwing her support behind an inquiry, Ms. Pelosi spent Wednesday locked in strategy meetings with her leadership team, top aides and the leaders of six committees investigating Mr. Trump. The objective: Sketch out a path for an investigation that could lead to articles of impeachment that would formally charge Mr. Trump with high crimes and misdemeanors.
Many questions remain unanswered about how quickly the House may move to assemble potential articles and on what topics.Many questions remain unanswered about how quickly the House may move to assemble potential articles and on what topics.
Democrats are not yet ready to limit their inquiry to just the Ukraine episode. They plan to continue investigating other, unrelated matters as possible impeachable offenses, including the findings of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, who investigated Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections and Mr. Trump’s attempts to derail that inquiry. Those topics could help populate impeachment articles.Democrats are not yet ready to limit their inquiry to just the Ukraine episode. They plan to continue investigating other, unrelated matters as possible impeachable offenses, including the findings of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, who investigated Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections and Mr. Trump’s attempts to derail that inquiry. Those topics could help populate impeachment articles.
But during a meeting with members of her leadership team, the speaker initiated a discussion about whether Democrats should limit their case strictly to the Ukraine matter and attempts by Mr. Trump and his administration to keep it from Congress, people familiar with the conversation said. An aide to Ms. Pelosi cautioned that no final decisions had been made.But during a meeting with members of her leadership team, the speaker initiated a discussion about whether Democrats should limit their case strictly to the Ukraine matter and attempts by Mr. Trump and his administration to keep it from Congress, people familiar with the conversation said. An aide to Ms. Pelosi cautioned that no final decisions had been made.
Mr. Trump spent the morning re-tweeting supporters, White House and campaign aides and family members, who echoed the talking points that his White House blasted out Wednesday to friends and foes alike — the real scandal is with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and the Democrats, the whistle-blower is politically biased, the news is all fake, perpetuated by a corrupt Washington.
But with the whistle-blower’s complaint public and his acting director of national intelligence testifying, the president grew more emphatic.
Mr. Biden has been more restrained in addressing impeachment than many of his Democratic rivals, indicating earlier this week that he would support impeachment if Mr. Trump refused to cooperate with congressional investigations, but keeping the focus primarily on Congress’s pursuit of information in subsequent remarks.Mr. Biden has been more restrained in addressing impeachment than many of his Democratic rivals, indicating earlier this week that he would support impeachment if Mr. Trump refused to cooperate with congressional investigations, but keeping the focus primarily on Congress’s pursuit of information in subsequent remarks.
But in an appearance on the late-night show “Jimmy Kimmel Live” on Wednesday, Mr. Biden appeared to move closer to supporting impeachment, saying that “based on the material that they acknowledged today, it seems to me it’s awful hard to avoid the conclusion that it is an impeachable offense and a violation of constitutional responsibility.”But in an appearance on the late-night show “Jimmy Kimmel Live” on Wednesday, Mr. Biden appeared to move closer to supporting impeachment, saying that “based on the material that they acknowledged today, it seems to me it’s awful hard to avoid the conclusion that it is an impeachable offense and a violation of constitutional responsibility.”
As news swirled on Wednesday about Mr. Trump’s discussion with Ukraine’s president about Mr. Biden and his son, Mr. Biden spoke at a fund-raiser in California about the challenges of exposing his family to a presidential campaign. “I was worried because I knew what was going to happen if I ran,” he said, but added that his five grandchildren were supportive.As news swirled on Wednesday about Mr. Trump’s discussion with Ukraine’s president about Mr. Biden and his son, Mr. Biden spoke at a fund-raiser in California about the challenges of exposing his family to a presidential campaign. “I was worried because I knew what was going to happen if I ran,” he said, but added that his five grandchildren were supportive.
Katie Benner contributed reporting from Washington and Katie Glueck from New York.Katie Benner contributed reporting from Washington and Katie Glueck from New York.