EU ambassador: I was "disappointed" with Trump's Ukraine approach

Gordon Sondland. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, will tell the House committees investigating President Trump and Ukraine on Thursday that he was "disappointed" with Trump's approach to Ukraine — specifically with his request that he work with Rudy Giuliani.

"Let me be clear: Mr. Giuliani does not work for me or my Mission and I do not know what official or unofficial role, if any, he has with the State Department. ... Please know that I would not have recommended that Mr. Giuliani or any private citizen be involved in these foreign policy matters. However, given the President's explicit direction, as well as the importance we attached to arranging a White House meeting between Presidents Trump and Zelensky, we agreed to do as President Trump directed."

Highlights:

  • "[B]ased on the President's direction, we were faced with a choice: We could abandon the goal of a White House meeting for President Zelensky, which we all believed was crucial to strengthening U.S.-Ukrainian ties ... or we could do as President Trump directed and talk to Mr. Giuliani to address the President's concerns."
  • "I did not understand, until much later, that Mr. Giuliani's agenda might have also included an effort to prompt the Ukrainians to investigate Vice President Biden or his son or to involve Ukrainians, directly or indirectly, in the President's 2020 reelection campaign."
  • "On September 9, 2019, Acting Charge de Affairs/Ambassador William Taylor raised concerns about the possibility that Ukrainians could perceive a linkage between U.S. security assistance and the President's 2020 reelection campaign. Taking the issue seriously, and given the many versions of speculation that had been circulating about the security aid, I called President Trump directly."
  • "I asked the President: 'What do you want from Ukraine? The President responded, 'Nothing. There is no quid pro quo.' The President repeated: 'no quid pro quo' multiple times. This was a very short call."
  • "Let me state clearly: Inviting a foreign government to undertake investigations for the purpose of influencing an upcoming U.S. election would be wrong. Withholding foreign aid in order to pressure a foreign government to take such steps would be wrong."
  • "I did not and would not ever participate in such undertakings. In my opinion, security aid to Ukraine was in our vital national interest and should not have been delayed for any reason."

Read his statement:

Go deeper: The coming appearances in House Democrats' impeachment probe

Additional Stories

Exclusive: Mitt Romney’s Trump indictment

Photo: Axios on HBO

Sen. Mitt Romney, in an interview with “Axios on HBO," outlined a broad indictment of President Trump, criticizing his rhetoric, his abandonment of the Kurds, his plea to Ukraine and China to undermine a political opponent, his character and past personal life.

Why it matters: Romney, who has emerged as the party's most prominent Trump critic, is getting overtures to run against the president (he won’t) or lead the charge to get senators to convict Trump if the House impeaches him.

Trump's Rudy problem

Photo Illustration: Sarah Grillo. Photos by Drew Angerer, Anthony Devlin, Siavosh Hosseini/NurPhoto, and Paul Morigi via Getty Images

Amid near-daily revelations of Rudy Giuliani’s “shadow” foreign policy, senior administration officials are worried that more information could surface connecting official Trump administration policy to Giuliani's personal financial gain.

The big picture: Several people close to the president are infuriated that Giuliani exerts what they see as unwarranted influence over Trump and U.S. foreign policy, with some going so far as to blame him outright for the Ukraine mess.

Graham open to other evidence on impeachment

Photo: Axios on HBO

In an interview with "Axios on HBO," Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of President Trump's most vital allies on Capitol Hill, opened the door to changing his mind on impeachment if there turns out to be what he considers a quid pro quo.

Why it matters: Graham was a fiery House prosecutor during the 1998 impeachment trial of President Clinton. Now that Graham is in the Senate, he'll vote to acquit — or remove — Trump if he's impeached by the House.

Read more at Axios
© Copyright Axios 2019