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/2019/11/07/us/politics/george-kent-impeachment-testimony.html
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 3 | Version 4 |
|---|---|
| George Kent Testimony: Key Excerpts From the Impeachment Inquiry Transcripts | George Kent Testimony: Key Excerpts From the Impeachment Inquiry Transcripts |
| (7 days later) | |
| House impeachment investigators on Thursday released a transcript of the testimony of George P. Kent, a senior State Department official in charge of Ukraine policy. Mr. Kent said in his deposition that he was all but cut out of decisions regarding the country after a May meeting organized by Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff. | |
| New York Times reporters read through the transcript, highlighting key excerpts and offering context and analysis. | New York Times reporters read through the transcript, highlighting key excerpts and offering context and analysis. |
| Kent transcript, Page 253: A conversation that I recall, and I took notes actually, dated to mid-May in which we talked about the change of attitude and approach towards Ukraine, and that was in the wake of meetings that President Trump had, a meeting with Viktor Orban, the leader of Hungary, as well as a call he had with Russian President Putin in early May. | Kent transcript, Page 253: A conversation that I recall, and I took notes actually, dated to mid-May in which we talked about the change of attitude and approach towards Ukraine, and that was in the wake of meetings that President Trump had, a meeting with Viktor Orban, the leader of Hungary, as well as a call he had with Russian President Putin in early May. |
| Q And what was the change following those two conversations with Orban and Putin? | Q And what was the change following those two conversations with Orban and Putin? |
| A Fiona [Hill] assessed the conversations as being similar in tone and approach. And both leaders, both Putin and Orban, extensively talked Ukraine down, said it was corrupt, said Zelensky was in the thrall of oligarchs, specifically mentioning this one oligarch Kolomoisky, negatively shaping a picture of Ukraine, and even President Zelensky personally | A Fiona [Hill] assessed the conversations as being similar in tone and approach. And both leaders, both Putin and Orban, extensively talked Ukraine down, said it was corrupt, said Zelensky was in the thrall of oligarchs, specifically mentioning this one oligarch Kolomoisky, negatively shaping a picture of Ukraine, and even President Zelensky personally |
| Q And did Dr. Hill think that that had an impact on President Trump’s outlook? | Q And did Dr. Hill think that that had an impact on President Trump’s outlook? |
| A I cannot recall what she said in that meeting besides giving me the brief readouts of those two meetings, but that was my takeaway, and that those two world leaders, along with former Mayor Giuliani, their communications with President Trump shaped the President’s view of Ukraine and Zelensky, and would account for the change from a very positive first call on April 21 to his negative assessment of Ukraine when he had the meeting in the Oval Office on May 23.” | A I cannot recall what she said in that meeting besides giving me the brief readouts of those two meetings, but that was my takeaway, and that those two world leaders, along with former Mayor Giuliani, their communications with President Trump shaped the President’s view of Ukraine and Zelensky, and would account for the change from a very positive first call on April 21 to his negative assessment of Ukraine when he had the meeting in the Oval Office on May 23.” |
| Mr. Kent’s account sheds more light on the concerns of Fiona Hill, President Trump’s former adviser on Russia and Europe, that the president’s view of Ukraine was being negatively shaped by President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary. Their countries are foes of Ukraine to varying extents, and Ms. Hill was concerned that their conversations with Mr. Trump were turning him against Ukraine and its new president, Volodymyr Zelensky.— Kenneth P. Vogel | Mr. Kent’s account sheds more light on the concerns of Fiona Hill, President Trump’s former adviser on Russia and Europe, that the president’s view of Ukraine was being negatively shaped by President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary. Their countries are foes of Ukraine to varying extents, and Ms. Hill was concerned that their conversations with Mr. Trump were turning him against Ukraine and its new president, Volodymyr Zelensky.— Kenneth P. Vogel |
| Kent transcript, Page 257: “Q What concerns did she express with Gordon Sondland? | Kent transcript, Page 257: “Q What concerns did she express with Gordon Sondland? |
| A To the best of my recollection, she had concerns possibly based on having been in conversations in the Oval Office that he made assertions about conversations that did not match with what had actually been said in the Oval Office. | A To the best of my recollection, she had concerns possibly based on having been in conversations in the Oval Office that he made assertions about conversations that did not match with what had actually been said in the Oval Office. |
| Q Can you elaborate with any more detail? | Q Can you elaborate with any more detail? |
| A I was not in those conversations, so — | A I was not in those conversations, so — |
| Q I’m just asking what she told you. I understand you weren’t in them. | Q I’m just asking what she told you. I understand you weren’t in them. |
| A I think she may have been as direct as saying that Gordon Sondland lies about conversations that occur in the Oval Office.” | A I think she may have been as direct as saying that Gordon Sondland lies about conversations that occur in the Oval Office.” |
| This reflects the concerns among Ms. Hill, John R. Bolton, the former national security adviser and career diplomats about the involvement of Gordon D. Sondland, the United States ambassador to the European Union, in Ukraine policy, and whether he could be trusted. | This reflects the concerns among Ms. Hill, John R. Bolton, the former national security adviser and career diplomats about the involvement of Gordon D. Sondland, the United States ambassador to the European Union, in Ukraine policy, and whether he could be trusted. |
| Mr. Sondland reversed his testimony this week and acknowledged having laid out a quid pro quo for Ukrainians conditioning military aid they needed on a public commitment to investigations the president wanted. Republicans are likely to seize on Mr. Kent’s mention of Ms. Hill’s belief that Mr. Sondland fabricated conversations with Mr. Trump, to claim that it was the ambassador — not the president himself — who instigated the quid pro quo. — Kenneth P. Vogel | Mr. Sondland reversed his testimony this week and acknowledged having laid out a quid pro quo for Ukrainians conditioning military aid they needed on a public commitment to investigations the president wanted. Republicans are likely to seize on Mr. Kent’s mention of Ms. Hill’s belief that Mr. Sondland fabricated conversations with Mr. Trump, to claim that it was the ambassador — not the president himself — who instigated the quid pro quo. — Kenneth P. Vogel |
| Kent transcript, Page 268: “POTUS wanted nothing less than President Zelensky to go to microphone and say investigations, Biden, and Clinton.” | Kent transcript, Page 268: “POTUS wanted nothing less than President Zelensky to go to microphone and say investigations, Biden, and Clinton.” |
| Several witnesses have offered accounts of the same conversation in early September, in which the president told Mr. Sondland that Mr. Zelensky needed to publicly state his intention to investigate the Biden family and questions about Democratic collusion in 2016. But in Mr. Kent’s telling, there was a new detail: that Mr. Trump wanted to hear Mr. Zelensky say the name “Clinton,” as in Hillary Clinton, his 2016 Democratic presidential rival. | Several witnesses have offered accounts of the same conversation in early September, in which the president told Mr. Sondland that Mr. Zelensky needed to publicly state his intention to investigate the Biden family and questions about Democratic collusion in 2016. But in Mr. Kent’s telling, there was a new detail: that Mr. Trump wanted to hear Mr. Zelensky say the name “Clinton,” as in Hillary Clinton, his 2016 Democratic presidential rival. |
| Mr. Kent said in his interview that “Clinton” was “shorthand” for an investigation into what happened in the 2016 presidential election. The detail suggests that Mr. Trump was thinking of his political fortunes — not a broad interest in Ukraine’s anti-corruption agenda, as many of his defenders have claimed — as he pressed Mr. Zelensky to take action. | Mr. Kent said in his interview that “Clinton” was “shorthand” for an investigation into what happened in the 2016 presidential election. The detail suggests that Mr. Trump was thinking of his political fortunes — not a broad interest in Ukraine’s anti-corruption agenda, as many of his defenders have claimed — as he pressed Mr. Zelensky to take action. |
| It is not clear how significant the mention of the name “Clinton” was, particularly since Mr. Kent’s account of the conversation between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sondland was filtered through several other officials before it reached him. Many of those officials, including Mr. Sondland, have described what happened without including that name.— Nicholas Fandos | It is not clear how significant the mention of the name “Clinton” was, particularly since Mr. Kent’s account of the conversation between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sondland was filtered through several other officials before it reached him. Many of those officials, including Mr. Sondland, have described what happened without including that name.— Nicholas Fandos |
| Kent transcript, Page 131: “Mr. Giuliani, at that point, had been carrying on a campaign for several months full of lies and incorrect information about Ambassador Yovanovitch, so this was a continuation of his campaign of lies.” | Kent transcript, Page 131: “Mr. Giuliani, at that point, had been carrying on a campaign for several months full of lies and incorrect information about Ambassador Yovanovitch, so this was a continuation of his campaign of lies.” |
| In his testimony to investigators, Mr. Kent expressed deep anger about the removal of Marie L. Yovanovitch, former the ambassador to Ukraine. He repeatedly accused Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, of mounting a campaign to smear her as disloyal to Mr. Trump to have her removed, later saying that Mr. Giuliani’s “assertions and allegations against former Ambassador Yovanovitch were without basis, untrue, period.” — Michael D. Shear | In his testimony to investigators, Mr. Kent expressed deep anger about the removal of Marie L. Yovanovitch, former the ambassador to Ukraine. He repeatedly accused Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, of mounting a campaign to smear her as disloyal to Mr. Trump to have her removed, later saying that Mr. Giuliani’s “assertions and allegations against former Ambassador Yovanovitch were without basis, untrue, period.” — Michael D. Shear |
| Kent transcript, Page 66: “Particularly after there were tweets by members of the Presidential family, it was clearly a crisis for Ambassador Yovanovitch and a crisis that was threatening to consume the relationship. So our recommendation to our superiors was that there should be a clear statement of support for Ambassador Yovanovitch.” | Kent transcript, Page 66: “Particularly after there were tweets by members of the Presidential family, it was clearly a crisis for Ambassador Yovanovitch and a crisis that was threatening to consume the relationship. So our recommendation to our superiors was that there should be a clear statement of support for Ambassador Yovanovitch.” |
| Attacks on Ms. Yovanovitch by Mr. Giuliani — and his allies in Ukraine and the United States — mark the beginning of the story Democratic investigators seek to tell the public. Mr. Kent’s testimony makes clear that he and other State Department officials responsible for the United States-Ukraine relationship were deeply alarmed by the smears, and they believed that unsubstantiated accusations Ms. Yovanovitch’s disloyalty could undermine the relationship between the two countries and ultimately create a vacuum for bad actors. | Attacks on Ms. Yovanovitch by Mr. Giuliani — and his allies in Ukraine and the United States — mark the beginning of the story Democratic investigators seek to tell the public. Mr. Kent’s testimony makes clear that he and other State Department officials responsible for the United States-Ukraine relationship were deeply alarmed by the smears, and they believed that unsubstantiated accusations Ms. Yovanovitch’s disloyalty could undermine the relationship between the two countries and ultimately create a vacuum for bad actors. |
| Despite their concerns, requests from the American Embassy in Kiev and Mr. Kent’s office at the State Department were declined, he said. He watched in growing exasperation as what had begun as a fringe campaign against Ms. Yovanovitch moved into Mr. Trump’s inner circle and eventually led the president to order her recall to the United States this spring. — Nicholas Fandos | Despite their concerns, requests from the American Embassy in Kiev and Mr. Kent’s office at the State Department were declined, he said. He watched in growing exasperation as what had begun as a fringe campaign against Ms. Yovanovitch moved into Mr. Trump’s inner circle and eventually led the president to order her recall to the United States this spring. — Nicholas Fandos |
| Kent transcript, Page 249-251: “Q Did you have any discussions with anyone else at the State Department by mid-July, any time up to mid-July or prior to, about Mr. Giuliani’s potential influence on the President and the fact that what he was advocating may be contrary to official U.S. Policy? | Kent transcript, Page 249-251: “Q Did you have any discussions with anyone else at the State Department by mid-July, any time up to mid-July or prior to, about Mr. Giuliani’s potential influence on the President and the fact that what he was advocating may be contrary to official U.S. Policy? |
| A I did not, in part because after Giuliani attacked me, as well as Ambassador Yovanovitch and the entire embassy, in his late May interview, I was told to keep my head down and lower my profile in Ukraine. | A I did not, in part because after Giuliani attacked me, as well as Ambassador Yovanovitch and the entire embassy, in his late May interview, I was told to keep my head down and lower my profile in Ukraine. |
| Q Who told you that? | Q Who told you that? |
| A The message was relayed from my supervisor, Acting Assistant Secretary Reeker message relayed from Under Secretary Hale. | A The message was relayed from my supervisor, Acting Assistant Secretary Reeker message relayed from Under Secretary Hale. |
| Q Do you know if it became from above Under Secretary Hale? | Q Do you know if it became from above Under Secretary Hale? |
| A All I know is that Assistant Secretary Reeker, after a meeting with Under Secretary Hale said that Under Secretary Hale had directed me to keep my head down and a lower profile in Ukraine. | A All I know is that Assistant Secretary Reeker, after a meeting with Under Secretary Hale said that Under Secretary Hale had directed me to keep my head down and a lower profile in Ukraine. |
| Mr. Kent’s testimony underscores how Mr. Trump gave Mr. Giuliani wide latitude to steer United States policy on Ukraine, muscling aside career diplomats and senior officials with expertise in the region in the process. The message was clearly understood throughout the foreign policy apparatus, and communicated to diplomats like Mr. Kent who were told that that they would be better off taking a back seat on Ukraine policy to others who were more aligned with Mr. Trump’s interests. — Kenneth P. Vogel | Mr. Kent’s testimony underscores how Mr. Trump gave Mr. Giuliani wide latitude to steer United States policy on Ukraine, muscling aside career diplomats and senior officials with expertise in the region in the process. The message was clearly understood throughout the foreign policy apparatus, and communicated to diplomats like Mr. Kent who were told that that they would be better off taking a back seat on Ukraine policy to others who were more aligned with Mr. Trump’s interests. — Kenneth P. Vogel |
| Kent transcript, Page 246-247: “But he did tell me that he planned to start reaching out to the former Mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani. And when I asked him why, he said that it was clear that the former mayor had influence on the President in terms of the way the President thought of Ukraine. And I think by that moment in time, that was self-evident to anyone who was working on the issues, and therefore, it made sense to try to engage the mayor. | Kent transcript, Page 246-247: “But he did tell me that he planned to start reaching out to the former Mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani. And when I asked him why, he said that it was clear that the former mayor had influence on the President in terms of the way the President thought of Ukraine. And I think by that moment in time, that was self-evident to anyone who was working on the issues, and therefore, it made sense to try to engage the mayor. |
| Later adding, “And Kurt’s reaction, or response to me at that was, well, if there’s nothing there, what does it matter? And if there is something there, it should be investigated. My response to him was asking another country to investigate a prosecution for political reasons undermines our advocacy of the rule of 1aw.” | Later adding, “And Kurt’s reaction, or response to me at that was, well, if there’s nothing there, what does it matter? And if there is something there, it should be investigated. My response to him was asking another country to investigate a prosecution for political reasons undermines our advocacy of the rule of 1aw.” |
| This provides more visibility into why Mr. Volker, a well-respected veteran diplomat, was willing to relay Mr. Giuliani’s requests for politically motivated investigations that he and Mr. Trump were seeking into the Bidens and accusations that Ukrainian officials sought to damage Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign. | This provides more visibility into why Mr. Volker, a well-respected veteran diplomat, was willing to relay Mr. Giuliani’s requests for politically motivated investigations that he and Mr. Trump were seeking into the Bidens and accusations that Ukrainian officials sought to damage Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign. |
| Mr. Kent recounts how Mr. Volker was essentially trying to appease Mr. Giuliani, recognizing that he had the president’s ear on Ukraine, and arguing that doing his bidding would not do any harm. But Mr. Kent disagreed, saying that politically motivated investigations were inappropriate and pursuing them could do substantial harm to the United States’ standing in the world. — Kenneth P. Vogel | Mr. Kent recounts how Mr. Volker was essentially trying to appease Mr. Giuliani, recognizing that he had the president’s ear on Ukraine, and arguing that doing his bidding would not do any harm. But Mr. Kent disagreed, saying that politically motivated investigations were inappropriate and pursuing them could do substantial harm to the United States’ standing in the world. — Kenneth P. Vogel |