Schiff pushed Volker to say Ukraine felt pressure from Trump

Washington Examiner ^ | October 16, 2019 | Byron York

[Mount Athos]

In a secret interview, Rep. Adam Schiff, leader of the House Democratic effort to impeach President Trump, pressed former United States special representative to Ukraine Kurt Volker to testify that Ukrainian officials felt pressured to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden's son Hunter as a result of Trump withholding U.S. military aid to Ukraine.

Volker denied that was the case, noting that Ukrainian leaders did not even know the aid was being withheld and that they believed their relationship with the U.S. was moving along satisfactorily, without them having done anything Trump mentioned in his notorious July 25 phone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

When Volker repeatedly declined to agree to Schiff's characterization of events, Schiff said, "Ambassador, you're making this much more complicated than it has to be."

The interview took place Oct. 3 in a secure room in the U.S. Capitol. While the session covered several topics, the issue of an alleged quid pro quo — U.S. military aid in exchange for a Ukrainian investigation of the Bidens and a public announcement that such an investigation was underway — was a significant part of the discussion.

"[The Ukrainians] didn't want to be drawn into investigating a Democratic candidate for president, which would mean only peril for Ukraine, is that fair to say?" Schiff asked Volker.

"That may be true," Volker said. "That may be true. They didn't express that to me, and, of course, I didn't know that was the context at the time." (Volker has said he did not know that Trump had mentioned the Bidens on the July 25 call with Zelensky until the rough transcript of the call was released on Sept. 25.)

"Part of the other context is vital military support is being withheld from the Ukraine during this period, right?" Schiff asked.

"That was not part of the context at the time," Volker said. "At least to my knowledge, they [Ukrainian leaders] were not aware of that."

Schiff asked whether Volker had discussed the withholding of aid with Ukrainian officials. Volker said he had not. The first time he talked with the Ukrainians about that was when a story appeared in the press, an article in Politico, "Trump holds up Ukraine military aid meant to confront Russia," on Aug. 28-29, well after the July 25 Trump-Zelensky phone call.

"The first conversation I had was when the diplomatic adviser to President Zelensky, Vadym Prystaiko, I believe it was, texted me a copy of the Politico article about the hold on assistance," Volker testified. "So I had had many conversations with him in the months prior to that, and this did not come up from him to me, which makes me believe that this was not on his radar until that time when he saw the article."

Volker said that he already knew about the suspension in aid, having learned on July 18, a week before the Trump-Zelensky call. Volker testified that he asked around about the suspension — why was it being done? — but was not able to find out what was going on.

Schiff began to push the quid pro quo allegation. He asked Volker whether he would agree that "no president of the United States should ever ask a foreign leader to help intervene in a U.S. election."

"I agree with that," said Volker.

"And that would be particularly egregious if it was done in the context of withholding foreign assistance?" Schiff continued.

Volker balked. "We're getting now into, you know, a conflation of these things that I didn't think was actually there."

Schiff wanted Volker to agree that "if it's inappropriate for a president to seek foreign help in a U.S. election, it would be doubly so if a president was doing that at a time when the United States was withholding military support from the country."

Again, Volker did not agree. "I can't really speak to that," he said. "My understanding of the security assistance issue is — "

Schiff interrupted. "Why can't you speak to that, ambassador? You're a career diplomat. You can understand the enormous leverage that a president would have while withholding military support from an ally at war with Russia. You can understand just how significant that would be, correct?"

Volker tried to go along without actually agreeing. "I can understand that that would be significant," he said.

Schiff persisted. "And when that suspension of aid became known to that country, to Ukraine, it would be all the more weighty to consider what the president had asked of them, wouldn't it?"

"So again, congressman, I don't believe — " Volker began.

"It's a pretty straightforward question," Schiff said.

"But I don't believe the Ukrainians were aware that the assistance was being held up — "

"They became aware of it," Schiff said.

"They became aware later, but I don't believe they were aware at the time, so there was no leverage implied," Volker said.

The two men continued to argue about the chronology of events. By the time the Ukrainians learned about the withheld aid in late August, Volker said, all sides had dropped the idea of making a statement announcing an investigation of the Bidens and events during the 2016 election. But Schiff kept pushing the notion that once the Ukrainians did learn about the withheld aid, then they would have felt tremendous pressure from Trump.

"At the point they [the Ukrainians] learned that, wouldn't that have given them added urgency to meet the president's request on the Bidens?" Schiff asked.

"I don't know the answer to that," Volker said.

Schiff pressed Volker to agree one more time. In response, Volker tried to explain that the Ukrainians did not seem to be feeling pressure from Trump and the U.S.

"Congressman, this is why I'm trying to say the context is different, because at the time they learned that, if we assume it's Aug. 29, they had just had a visit from the national security adviser, John Bolton. That's a high-level meeting already. He was recommending and working on scheduling the visit of President Zelensky to Washington. We were also working on a bilateral meeting to take place in Warsaw on the margins of a commemoration on the beginning of World War II. And in that context, I think the Ukrainians felt like things are going the right direction, and they had not done anything on — they had not done anything on an investigation, they had not done anything on a statement, and things were ramping up in terms of their engagement with the administration. So I think they were actually feeling pretty good then."

At that point, Schiff gave up. Why was Volker resisting? "Ambassador, I find it remarkable as a career diplomat that you have difficulty acknowledging that when Ukraine learned that their aid had been suspended for unknown reasons, that this wouldn't add additional urgency to a request by the president of the United States. I find that remarkable."

Later, Republican Rep. Scott Perry questioned Volker, returning to the colloquy with Schiff. Perry asked Volker whether he, Volker, had close relations with Ukrainian officials and whether, if those officials felt something was amiss, they would tell Volker.

"The folks that you dealt with in Ukraine at the very highest level, I don't know, but I'm going to ask, do you feel like they had a fair amount of trust in you?"

"Absolutely," said Volker.

"So they would confide things in you if they had a question?"

"They would confide things," Volker answered. "They would ask questions. They would ask for help. We had a very candid relationship ... "

"In your conversation with Rep. Schiff, he kind of implied and wanted you to intimate that there was an agreement based on that conversation that: If you do the investigation, then you can have a meeting [with Trump] and maybe we'll consider this military aid. If that were the case from the call, do you feel, because they had some trust in you, that they would have come to you and said, 'Hey how do we handle this? Is this what the President of the United States is asking?' Would they confide — would they ask you that?"

"Yes," said Volker. "They would have asked me exactly that, you know. How do we handle this?"

Much of the coverage of Volker's testimony focused on his opening statement, which made its way to the media. (Washington Post headline: "Volker defends Biden as 'man of integrity' in testimony to Congress.") But there was much more to the testimony than the opening statement. Among other things, it showed how Schiff, as a powerful chairman in charge of impeachment, pursues his theory of the case even when a witness gives testimony that does not support it.

Schiff has scheduled more interviews for this week and next.

[Candor7]

Schiff pushed Volker to say Ukraine felt pressure from Trump>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Why, that is the reason why Shifty holds his meetings in secret with no due process in order to violate the Civil Rights of President Trump under color of law.

Expect more such Kangaroo Court nuggets. They do not amount to a row of beans with any any more weight than the usual propaganda.

The more Schitt does, the more foolish the Dems look to we Americans.

[Flaming Conservative]

Boy, howdy! Shillue’s impression of Schiff is a scream!

[OrangeHoof]

Biden brags about threatening U.S. aid if the Ukrainians don’t fire the person investigating his son and the media keeps parroting that there’s “no evidence” that there was any wrongdoing yet the Democrats are busy trying to prove that Trump was withholding aid when both the U.S. ambassador and the Ukrainians themselves swear there was no threat.

Upside-down world.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

“Schiff said, “Ambassador, you’re making this much more complicated than it has to be.”

Schiff is just a perfect little Nazi, isn’t he?

[rightwingcrazy]

Schiff certainly doesn’t seem to object to election-time “pressure” when the objective is to get Volker to perjure himself by parroting lies about Trump.

[Moonlighter]

Kangaroo Court nuggets...do not amount to a row of beans with any any more weight than the usual propaganda

I wish I shared your confidence on this. Unless something else comes along or a witness lies or falls prey to Schifty tactics, they'll continue to try damning Trump in the court of public opinion. I don't yet have a feeling the Average voter whose political diet consists of poisoned MSM scraps is wise enough to see the forest through the trees here.

[Candor7]

Trump is winning in the Court of Pubic Opinion. Check with hs re-election campaign. The same dynamic we had in 2016 is in effect.

The harder the Dems hit our president, the more popular he becomes.

The average voter knew shit from shinola in 2016 and will again in 2020.

[Moonlighter]

The man lost the popular vote to the unsavory likes of Hillary Freakin Clinton. The affect of the opposition's shenanigans and their accomplice media can't be overlooked.

I don't yet think the good guys are ahead of this one.

[Syncro]

Yes Schiff is a real dark hearted dark soul conniving bass turd of a human being.

Every question was loaded to try to get an answer that Schiff and the press could spin to “show” that Volker and Trump did the things Schiff was implying.

Volker shot him down at every turn.

No wonder Judge Jeanine Pirro coined the phrase "Sack of Schiff"

[Syncro]

Every one subpoenaed to appear before Schiff should print out this transcript and return the subpoena with the letter and say I will not appear before you to try the same underhanded tactics with me.

[eartick]

These effin democrats lawyers will keep prodding and prodding until the gets someone to slip up. It is time to start weeding America of these clowns

[eartick]

effin A he does.

He needs to just disappear.

Poof, gone.

[MustKnowHistory]

https://youtu.be/M4ONTvw_dac

Tom Shillue as Adam Schiff

[Candor7]

The man lost the popular vote to the unsavory likes of Hillary Freakin Clinton.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Rightyoh!

She won the popular vote because of the City of New York, The City of Chicago, the City of Los Angeles, City of Boston and the City of San Francisco. The rest of the country was pretty much red. An urban vote wins the popular vote? Last I checked that counts for absolutely nothing.

You can see it here:

https://s17-us2.startpage.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https:%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fd%2Fda%2F2016_Presidential_Election_by_County.svg%2F474px-2016_Presidential_Election_by_County.svg.png&sp=00ce931153bb784e1f032d4aa5e33157

[TigersEye]

When Volker repeatedly declined to agree to Schiff's characterization of events, Schiff said, "Ambassador, you're making this much more complicated than it has to be."

Sounds like Tony Soprano doesn't he?

[SkyPilot]

Enough of the "I am outraged!" Conservative factory.

When are Schiff and his co-conspirators going to be charge with Seditious Conspiracy?

U.S. Code § 2384. Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 1, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

All our side has are words and strongly worded letters.

So far, it looks as if Barr is not going to do his job, or fulfill his oath of office as Attorney General.

I would love for the reverse to be the case.

But after years of hollow "BOOMS!", "TICK TOCKS!", and "BOMBSHELLS", I believe that nothing will happen to the coup plotters and the D.C. Criminal Class.

[zeugma]

without them having done anything Trump mentioned in his notorious July 25 phone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky

Editorializing much? It's only 'notorious' in the minds of partisan leftists.

[MadMax, the Grinning Reaper]

The left has whistleblowers. We have bagpipe blowers. Who has more power?

[OrioleFan]

Schiff reminds me of the Tim Conway skit on Carol Burnett where he's the chief Nazi interrogator questioning Lyle Waggoner. He had a little Hitler puppet.