 |
||||||||
 | ||||||||
| What we learned | ||||||||
|
On Thursday, two more witnesses testified in front of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee in this week's final public impeachment hearings. Fiona Hill, former top Russia expert on the National Security Council, confirmed
that U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland had openly spoken about a quid pro quo between the United States and Ukraine in which a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky would be contingent upon an announcement of investigations into Burisma Holdings and the 2016 U.S. presidential election. David Holmes, a U.S. State Department official stationed at the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, also understood there to be a quid pro quo. He testified that it was "the only logical conclusion you could reach."
The two issues that President Donald Trump wanted President Zelensky to investigate—purported wrongdoing by the Bidens and Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. election—seem to be evergreen talking points of the House Republican committee members despite being widely debunked. Holmes and Hill both reiterated in their testimony that the national security community has concluded that Russia was responsible for the election interference. What's more, as Hill reminded the committee, the Ukraine conspiracy theory is a narrative advanced by Russia, and anyone still trotting it out is playing right into the Russian government's interests. And what of the interests of the United States? Hill said that when she read the transcript of the July 25 call, she was "very shocked and very saddened"—not only because of what it said, but also because Trump didn't reference any of the topics staff had prepared Trump to discuss. There's another U.S. interest at stake as well: our electoral process. "Russia's security services and their proxies have geared up to repeat their interference in the 2020 election," Hill said in her opening statement. "We are running out of time to stop them." Read CAP's full coverage of the November 21 hearing ? | ||||||||
What we're reading | ||||||||
|
The New York Times Republicans Seek to Muddy Impeachment Evidence as Their Defense of Trump The New Yorker Ambassador Sondland's Revenge The Moscow Project Debunking Trump's Defenses: It Was Russia, not Ukraine, That Interfered in the 2016 Election | ||||||||
Next up... | ||||||||
|
There are currently no additional impeachment hearings scheduled by the House Intelligence Committee. Stay tuned for further details. As CAP's Max Bergmann posted in Thursday's live chat, "The House has indicated that they would wrap up by the end of the year. Then it is up to the Senate to determine the length of the trial. The Clinton impeachment hearing lasted about six weeks. Some Republicans in the Senate have indicated that this trial could also last six weeks." Here are some great ways to follow along:
| ||||||||
Subscribe today | ||||||||
| Did someone forward this to you? Sign up for InProgress here to continue receiving it. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
Support CAP | Manage Email Preferences | Privacy Policy | UnsubscribeCenter for American Progress | 1333 H Street NW, 10th Floor | Washington, D.C. xxxxxx | ||||||||
| This email was sent to [email protected]. | ||||||||
