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/2019/11/15/us/politics/impeachment-hearings.html

The article has changed 12 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Impeachment Hearings: Live Updates of Marie Yovanovitch’s Testimony Impeachment Hearings: Live Updates of Marie Yovanovitch’s Testimony
(32 minutes later)
President Trump wasted little time assailing Marie L. Yovanovitch, the former ambassador to Ukraine, as she testified during impeachment hearings on Friday, denigrating her career of diplomacy and reasserting his right to remove her. Marie L. Yovanovitch recounted in powerful and personal terms on Friday the devastation and fear she felt as she was targeted first by President Trump’s allies and later by the president himself, saying she felt threatened.
Ms. Yovanovitch had barely started her day of testimony when Mr. Trump weighed in on Twitter as he sought to turn her description of all the hardship posts she had served in against her. Removed from her post as ambassador to Ukraine, Ms. Yovanovitch said she was bereft when she came under fire from the president’s personal attorney and eldest son last spring, but even more stunned in September when she learned that Mr. Trump himself had disparaged her in his now-famous July 25 phone call with Ukraine’s president.
“Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad,” he wrote. “She started off in Somalia, how did that go? Then fast forward to Ukraine, where the new Ukrainian President spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him. It is a U.S. President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors.” “It was a terrible moment,” she told the House Intelligence Committee on the second day of public impeachment hearings. “A person who saw me actually reading the transcript said that the color drained from my face. I think I even had a physical reaction. I think, you know, even now, words kind of fail me.”
In fact, while he seemed to attribute his decision to remove her in part to the opinion of President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, Mr. Trump had already removed Ms. Yovanovitch by the time of the July 25 call. In the July 25 phone call, according to a rough transcript released by the White House, Mr. Trump called Ms. Yovanovitch “bad news” and said that “she’s going to go through some things.”
Asked her reaction when she read that, Ms. Yovanovitch said: “Shocked. Appalled. Devastated that the president of the United States would talk about any ambassador like that to a foreign head of state — and it was me. I mean, I couldn’t believe it." Asked what the words “going to go through” sounded like to her, she said, “It sounded like a threat.”
At the very moment she was testifying about how Mr. Trump had denigrated her, the president was assailing Ms. Yovanovitch, insulting her career of diplomacy and reasserting his right to remove her, prompting Democrats to suggest he was trying to intimidate a witness.
“Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad,” he wrote on Twitter. “She started off in Somalia, how did that go? Then fast forward to Ukraine, where the new Ukrainian President spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him. It is a U.S. President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors.”
Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, interrupted the hearing to read Ms. Yovanovitch the tweet and ask her what she thought of it.
Ms. Yovanovitch, a tight smile on her face, appeared momentarily uncertain how to respond. “It’s very intimidating,” she said. She then paused, searching for words. “I can’t speak to what the president is trying to do, but the effect is to be intimidating.”
Mr. Schiff responded in a stern tone that, “Some of us here take witness intimidation very, very seriously.”
Marie L. Yovanovitch, the former ambassador to Ukraine, described in calm but strikingly personal terms on Friday “the smear campaign against me” by allies of President Trump working in tandem with corrupt Ukrainians leading to her removal from her post based on untrue allegations.Marie L. Yovanovitch, the former ambassador to Ukraine, described in calm but strikingly personal terms on Friday “the smear campaign against me” by allies of President Trump working in tandem with corrupt Ukrainians leading to her removal from her post based on untrue allegations.
In public testimony to the House Intelligence Committee leading the impeachment inquiry, Ms. Yovanovitch flatly denied the “baseless allegations” raised against her by Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney, and others working with him. She called them part of a “campaign of disinformation” that was orchestrated with Ukrainians because she was a powerful advocate of fighting corruption.In public testimony to the House Intelligence Committee leading the impeachment inquiry, Ms. Yovanovitch flatly denied the “baseless allegations” raised against her by Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney, and others working with him. She called them part of a “campaign of disinformation” that was orchestrated with Ukrainians because she was a powerful advocate of fighting corruption.
“Mr. Giuliani should have known those claims were suspect, coming as they reportedly did from individuals with questionable motives and with reason to believe that their political and financial ambitions would be stymied by our anti-corruption policy in Ukraine,” she told the House Intelligence Committee as it opened its second day of public impeachment hearings.“Mr. Giuliani should have known those claims were suspect, coming as they reportedly did from individuals with questionable motives and with reason to believe that their political and financial ambitions would be stymied by our anti-corruption policy in Ukraine,” she told the House Intelligence Committee as it opened its second day of public impeachment hearings.
She added: “If our chief representative is kneecapped, it limits our effectiveness to safeguard the vital national security interests of the United States.”She added: “If our chief representative is kneecapped, it limits our effectiveness to safeguard the vital national security interests of the United States.”
Ms. Yovanovitch went on to say that the State Department’s failure to defend her and others subjected to partisan attacks had a profoundly negative impact on the institution as a whole.Ms. Yovanovitch went on to say that the State Department’s failure to defend her and others subjected to partisan attacks had a profoundly negative impact on the institution as a whole.
“This is about far, far more than me or a couple of individuals,” she said. “As Foreign Service professionals are being denigrated and undermined, the institution is also being degraded. This will soon cause real harm, if it hasn’t already.”“This is about far, far more than me or a couple of individuals,” she said. “As Foreign Service professionals are being denigrated and undermined, the institution is also being degraded. This will soon cause real harm, if it hasn’t already.”
As the hearing was about to be gaveled to a start on Friday morning, the White House released a rough transcript of another phone call that President Trump had with Ukraine’s president in an effort to demonstrate that there was nothing untoward in that conversation.As the hearing was about to be gaveled to a start on Friday morning, the White House released a rough transcript of another phone call that President Trump had with Ukraine’s president in an effort to demonstrate that there was nothing untoward in that conversation.
Representative Devin Nunes of California, the top Republican on the committee, read the record of the conversation out loud as part of his opening statement in sort of a dramatic re-enactment of the conversation.Representative Devin Nunes of California, the top Republican on the committee, read the record of the conversation out loud as part of his opening statement in sort of a dramatic re-enactment of the conversation.
The record documented an April 21 call that Mr. Trump made from Air Force One to President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine congratulating him on his election. That call came three months before the now-famous July 25 call in which the president asked Mr. Zelensky to do him “a favor” and investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.The record documented an April 21 call that Mr. Trump made from Air Force One to President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine congratulating him on his election. That call came three months before the now-famous July 25 call in which the president asked Mr. Zelensky to do him “a favor” and investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
The record of the original call reflected just a few minutes of pleasantries. “When you’re settled in and ready, I’d like to invite you to the White House,” Mr. Trump said. “We’ll have a lot of things to talk about, but we’re with you all the way.”The record of the original call reflected just a few minutes of pleasantries. “When you’re settled in and ready, I’d like to invite you to the White House,” Mr. Trump said. “We’ll have a lot of things to talk about, but we’re with you all the way.”
“Well, thank you for the invitation,” Mr. Zelensky replied. “We accept the invitation and look forward to the visit.”“Well, thank you for the invitation,” Mr. Zelensky replied. “We accept the invitation and look forward to the visit.”
According to the record, Mr. Trump made no mention of the desired investigations that he would raise later, but the promise of a White House meeting became a point of contention in the months to come. Text messages and testimony have indicated that the White House held up scheduling the promised meeting until Ukraine agreed to investigate Democrats.According to the record, Mr. Trump made no mention of the desired investigations that he would raise later, but the promise of a White House meeting became a point of contention in the months to come. Text messages and testimony have indicated that the White House held up scheduling the promised meeting until Ukraine agreed to investigate Democrats.
The new White House record conflicted with the readout of the call that the White House put out to the media at the time. The official readout in April said that Mr. Trump “underscored the unwavering support of the United States for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” and expressed support for efforts “to root out corruption.” According to the record released on Friday, Mr. Trump made no mention of either of those points.The new White House record conflicted with the readout of the call that the White House put out to the media at the time. The official readout in April said that Mr. Trump “underscored the unwavering support of the United States for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” and expressed support for efforts “to root out corruption.” According to the record released on Friday, Mr. Trump made no mention of either of those points.
Democrats are betting that Ms. Yovanovitch — an immigrant who served under six presidents from both parties — will offer the public a compelling human story that dramatizes how Mr. Trump ran roughshod over American diplomats in pursuit of his own goals in Ukraine. In the view of Democrats, she is a sympathetic victim of bullying by Mr. Giuliani and the president, whose decision to pull her from Ukraine helped set the stage for the campaign to pressure that country’s president.Democrats are betting that Ms. Yovanovitch — an immigrant who served under six presidents from both parties — will offer the public a compelling human story that dramatizes how Mr. Trump ran roughshod over American diplomats in pursuit of his own goals in Ukraine. In the view of Democrats, she is a sympathetic victim of bullying by Mr. Giuliani and the president, whose decision to pull her from Ukraine helped set the stage for the campaign to pressure that country’s president.
Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, has described her as “someone who served the country with distinctions for decades” and who witnessed what he called the damage that Mr. Giuliani’s efforts were having on America’s foreign policy. In his remarks on Wednesday, he said that after the ouster of Ms. Yovanovitch, “the stage was set” for the rogue diplomatic efforts that Mr. Giuliani led.Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, has described her as “someone who served the country with distinctions for decades” and who witnessed what he called the damage that Mr. Giuliani’s efforts were having on America’s foreign policy. In his remarks on Wednesday, he said that after the ouster of Ms. Yovanovitch, “the stage was set” for the rogue diplomatic efforts that Mr. Giuliani led.
During her closed-door testimony, Ms. Yovanovitch displayed flashes of emotion, her voice trailing off as she described her disappointment when she realized her ambassadorship had been terminated. “Do you want to take a minute?” Daniel Goldman, the chief Democratic lawyer, asked her. “Yeah, just a minute,” she said, according to the transcript of her testimony.During her closed-door testimony, Ms. Yovanovitch displayed flashes of emotion, her voice trailing off as she described her disappointment when she realized her ambassadorship had been terminated. “Do you want to take a minute?” Daniel Goldman, the chief Democratic lawyer, asked her. “Yeah, just a minute,” she said, according to the transcript of her testimony.
Democrats are hoping she will replay that kind of reaction, and more, during Friday’s public hearing — this time in front of video cameras capturing the moments on television.Democrats are hoping she will replay that kind of reaction, and more, during Friday’s public hearing — this time in front of video cameras capturing the moments on television.
Republicans know they have to be careful when they question Ms. Yovanovitch, making sure they don’t look as if they are bullying a victim in the impeachment story. One Republican strategist compared their preparations for dealing with Ms. Yovanovitch to the way senators prepared for the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford, the professor who accused Justice Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when they were teenagers.
But Republicans have already tipped their hand about how they intend to confront Ms. Yovanovitch. They plan to argue that she was terminated in late April, long before the events at the center of the impeachment inquiry: the July 25 telephone between Mr. Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, and the decision to withhold security aid unless Mr. Zelensky announced investigations into the president’s political rivals.
“She was not there during the relevant time that this whole impeachment inquiry is to address,” Representative Mark Meadows, Republican of North Carolina, said Thursday. “She was gone.”
Republicans also plan to make the point that ambassadors like Ms. Yovanovitch serve at the pleasure of the president, and can be fired any time the president decides he wants someone else to represent him. So her ouster, they will say, was perfectly appropriate.
The most important element of Ms. Yovanovitch’s testimony may be about the effect of Mr. Giuliani’s actions on the State Department. In her closed-door interview, she described in detail how his efforts to smear her undermined the work of other career diplomats as they pursued what they believed was the administration’s foreign policy.
“Bad actors” in Ukraine and elsewhere will “see how easy it is to use fiction and innuendo to manipulate our system,” she warned in that session. “The only interests that will be served are those of our strategic adversaries, like Russia.”
Among the bad actors that Ms. Yovanovitch identified were two American businessmen, Lev Parnas, who was born in Ukraine and Igor Fruman, who was born in Belarus. They worked with Mr. Giuliani to get rid of Ms. Yovanovitch and have since been indicted in a complex scheme to violate campaign finance laws.
But Ms. Yovanovitch is likely to focus on Mr. Giuliani himself. He criticized her repeatedly in public and private, suggesting she was disloyal to Mr. Trump and prompting venomous criticism from others, including Donald Trump Jr., who tweeted a link to an item that described Ms. Yovanovitch as “an anti-Trump, Obama flunkey.” She told lawmakers privately that “the harm will come not just through the inevitable and continuing resignation and loss of many of this nation’s most loyal and talented public servants.”
Ms. Yovanovitch will make one critical connection directly to Mr. Trump: the president’s own words about her during the July 25 call with Mr. Zelensky.
During that conversation, Mr. Trump referred to Ms. Yovanovitch by saying that she was “bad news” and later reassured Mr. Zelensky that “she’s going to go through some things. I will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call.” Ms. Yovanovitch has said that she felt “threatened” by the president’s words, and still fears retaliation.
In her previous testimony, Ms. Yovanovitch described herself as “shocked” by the president’s comments about her, saying: “I was very concerned. I still am.” Democrats hope her public testimony about the president’s comments will counter a key Republican talking point, that many of the witnesses have only secondhand knowledge about what the president said or did. In the case of Ms. Yovanovitch, the president’s comments about her come directly from his own words on the call.
A new figure will enter the impeachment drama on Friday afternoon when David Holmes, the political counselor at the American Embassy in Ukraine, is scheduled to testify privately in the inquiry. Investigators want to ask him about a phone call that he overheard in July between Mr. Trump and Gordon D. Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union, who was part of a group of Trump loyalists engaged in diplomacy with Ukraine.A new figure will enter the impeachment drama on Friday afternoon when David Holmes, the political counselor at the American Embassy in Ukraine, is scheduled to testify privately in the inquiry. Investigators want to ask him about a phone call that he overheard in July between Mr. Trump and Gordon D. Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union, who was part of a group of Trump loyalists engaged in diplomacy with Ukraine.
William B. Taylor Jr., the top diplomat in Ukraine and Mr. Holmes’s boss, told lawmakers at Wednesday’s public hearing that he had recently learned that one of his aides overheard the president asking Mr. Sondland about “the investigations,” an apparent reference to Mr. Trump’s desire for investigations of his political rivals. Mr. Taylor testified that the aide — who investigators have since learned was Mr. Holmes — then heard Mr. Sondland respond that the “Ukrainians were ready to move forward.”William B. Taylor Jr., the top diplomat in Ukraine and Mr. Holmes’s boss, told lawmakers at Wednesday’s public hearing that he had recently learned that one of his aides overheard the president asking Mr. Sondland about “the investigations,” an apparent reference to Mr. Trump’s desire for investigations of his political rivals. Mr. Taylor testified that the aide — who investigators have since learned was Mr. Holmes — then heard Mr. Sondland respond that the “Ukrainians were ready to move forward.”
After the call ended, Mr. Holmes asked Mr. Sondland what the president thought about Ukraine, and the ambassador responded that, “President Trump cares more about the investigations of Biden,” according to Mr. Taylor. Republicans have argued that much of the testimony from Mr. Taylor and others has been secondhand. Democratic lawmakers are eager to hear Mr. Holmes, a Foreign Service officer for 17 years, describe the call himself.After the call ended, Mr. Holmes asked Mr. Sondland what the president thought about Ukraine, and the ambassador responded that, “President Trump cares more about the investigations of Biden,” according to Mr. Taylor. Republicans have argued that much of the testimony from Mr. Taylor and others has been secondhand. Democratic lawmakers are eager to hear Mr. Holmes, a Foreign Service officer for 17 years, describe the call himself.