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/2019/11/13/us/politics/impeachment-hearings-bill-taylor-george-kent.html

The article has changed 16 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
What to Expect in the Trump Impeachment Inquiry’s Public Hearings Impeachment Hearing Updates: What to Expect From Taylor, Kent and Congress
(32 minutes later)
Since Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced a formal impeachment inquiry in September, House investigators have conducted weeks of fact-finding largely in private to determine if President Trump abused the power of his office in his dealings with Ukraine. On Wednesday, the inquiry enters a new phase: public hearings. Wednesday’s is the first public impeachment hearing in more than two decades, and the event moves into the public’s direct glare a historic clash between President Trump and Democrats that has so far unfolded exclusively in private.
Who: William B. Taylor Jr., the top American diplomat in Ukraine, and George P. Kent, a senior State Department official in charge of Ukraine policy, will appear for joint testimony. Democrats say they plan to use the hearing in the vaulted, columned chambers of the Ways and Means Committee — the House’s grandest meeting room — to build their case that Mr. Trump’s dealings with Ukraine rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors, the Constitution’s threshold for impeachment.
What: The House Intelligence Committee, led by its chairman, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, will offer lawmakers from both parties a chance to question the witnesses. Broadcast live on television, the first hearing features two veteran diplomats who are expected to describe how Mr. Trump, his personal lawyer and a handful of political appointees hijacked United States foreign policy on Ukraine to achieve the president’s political goals. They will testify that Mr. Trump tried to enlist a foreign power to help him win re-election, holding back nearly $400 million in needed military aid and a White House meeting for Ukraine’s president as leverage to force Ukraine to publicly announce investigations into former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and debunked claims that Democrats conspired with Kiev to interfere in the 2016 elections.
When and Where: The proceedings start at 10 a.m. Eastern in the one of the grandest hearing rooms the House has: the vaulted, columned chambers of the Ways and Means Committee. (Democrats intentionally chose the chambers as the backdrop.) We expect the hearing to go until midafternoon. William B. Taylor Jr., the top diplomat in Ukraine, and George P. Kent, a senior State Department official, will be appear side by side at the witness table on Wednesday. Marie L. Yovanovitch, the American ambassador in Kiev who was ousted by Mr. Trump, is scheduled to appear on Friday.
How to Watch: The New York Times will stream the testimony live, and a team of reporters in Washington will provide real-time context and analysis of the events on Capitol Hill. Follow along at nytimes.com, starting a few minutes before 10 a.m. The public testimony on Wednesday starts a period of high drama that could drag on for several months, likely to be suffused with intense partisanship as lawmakers in both parties and in both chambers of Congress grapple with the consequences of potentially undoing the results of the 2016 election less than a year before voters go to the polls.
In the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday, Mr. Taylor and Mr. Kent are expected to deliver opening statements and then face 45-minute rounds of questioning by Democrats and Republicans, who will probably hand over at least some of their time to the staff investigators who have been leading the closed-door interviews. Then lawmakers will have a sort of lightning round of questions, alternating between Democrats and Republicans in five-minute increments. And they could return to the more extended questioning afterward.
The public hearings could continue for two or three more weeks, possibly to be followed by additional public hearings in front of the Judiciary Committee, the site of the show that transfixed the nation decades ago during the impeachment hearings into Presidents Richard M. Nixon and Bill Clinton.
If the Democratic majority in the House approves articles of impeachment — a momentous vote that could come just before or just after Christmas — Mr. Trump would face a trial in the Senate in January. As set out in the Constitution, the president would be removed from office only if 67 senators, or two-thirds, voted to convict him, a prospect that members of both parties consider wildly unlikely. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. would preside over the trial.
If that schedule holds, the final vote in the Senate on Mr. Trump’s fate could come near the end of January or the beginning of February, just as the first votes are cast in the Democratic presidential primary contests in Iowa and New Hampshire.
The Democratic case against the president is built around four major issues that the president’s critics say prove that Mr. Trump abused his office:The Democratic case against the president is built around four major issues that the president’s critics say prove that Mr. Trump abused his office:
Current and former diplomats and national security officials have described to investigators how Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, led a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine that circumvented career foreign service officers and established diplomatic channels in an effort to further Mr. Trump’s political agenda. Giuliani and a shadow diplomacy: Current and former diplomats and national security officials have described to investigators how Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, led a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine that circumvented career foreign service officers and established diplomatic channels in an effort to further Mr. Trump’s political agenda.
Mr. Kent told investigators that Mr. Giuliani’s influence over Mr. Trump when it came to Ukraine was “almost unmissable,” and that Mr. Giuliani led a “highly irregular” channel of policymaking on Ukraine. Mr. Kent told investigators that Mr. Giuliani’s influence over Mr. Trump when it came to Ukraine was “almost unmissable,” and he said Mr. Giuliani led a “highly irregular” channel of policymaking on Ukraine.
Congress approved nearly $400 million in security aid to help Ukraine counter Russian aggression. But witnesses have testified that the aid was abruptly frozen at the direction of the acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, and the Office of Management and Budget. They have said they were alarmed to learn that the aid would not be restarted unless Ukraine agreed to publicly announce the investigations that Mr. Trump wanted. The security aid: Congress approved nearly $400 million in security aid to help Ukraine counter Russian aggression. But witnesses have testified that the aid was abruptly frozen at the direction of the acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, and the Office of Management and Budget. They have said they were alarmed to learn that the aid would not be restarted unless Ukraine agreed to publicly announce the investigations that Mr. Trump wanted.
In gripping closed-door testimony, Mr. Taylor recalled having seen firsthand Ukraine’s need for the security aid when he traveled to the country and witnessed its soldiers facing Russian forces across a damaged bridge. He told lawmakers that he knew at that time that “more Ukrainians would undoubtedly die without the U.S. assistance.”In gripping closed-door testimony, Mr. Taylor recalled having seen firsthand Ukraine’s need for the security aid when he traveled to the country and witnessed its soldiers facing Russian forces across a damaged bridge. He told lawmakers that he knew at that time that “more Ukrainians would undoubtedly die without the U.S. assistance.”
At the heart of the Democratic case is the reconstructed transcript released by the White House of the July phone call between Mr. Trump and Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky. In the call, Mr. Trump asked Mr. Zelensky, newly elected as Ukraine’s leader, to “do us a favor” and investigate the former vice president, as well as a conspiracy theory that asserts that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 election to help Democrats, not Mr. Trump. The July 25 call: At the heart of the Democratic case is the reconstructed transcript released by the White House of the July phone call between Mr. Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. In the call, Mr. Trump asked Mr. Zelensky, who was newly elected, to “do us a favor” and investigate the former vice president, as well as a conspiracy theory that asserts that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 election to help Democrats, not Mr. Trump.
Both sides have used the call to bolster their arguments. Democrats say it is direct evidence of Mr. Trump’s culpability in the pressure campaign. Republicans note that there is no direct mention during the call of the security aid and argue it falls far short of providing proof that the president was involved in abusing his office. Mr. Trump has insisted repeatedly that the call was “perfect” and exonerates him. The call is used by both sides to bolster their arguments. Democrats say it is direct evidence of Mr. Trump’s culpability in the pressure campaign. Republicans note that there is no direct mention during the call of the security aid and argue it falls far short of providing proof that Mr. Trump was involved in abusing his office. Mr. Trump has insisted repeatedly that the call was “perfect” and exonerates him.
Among the most personal moments during Wednesday’s hearing is likely to be discussion of the ouster of Ms. Yovanovitch from her post as ambassador to Ukraine. Several witnesses have testified about a smear campaign led by Mr. Giuliani to damage Ms. Yovanovitch’s reputation and oust her. The ouster of Marie L. Yovanovitch: Among the most personal moments during Wednesday’s hearing is likely to be discussion of the ouster of Ms. Yovanovitch from her post as ambassador to Ukraine. Several witnesses have testified about a smear campaign led by Mr. Giuliani to damage Ms. Yovanovitch’s reputation and oust her.
Philip T. Reeker, the acting assistant secretary in charge of European and Eurasian Affairs, told investigators that the effort to cast Ms. Yovanovitch as a “liberal outpost” was a “fake narrative” that “really is without merit or validation.”— Michael D. Shear Philip T. Reeker, the acting assistant secretary in charge of European and Eurasian Affairs, told investigators that the effort to cast Ms. Yovanovitch as a “liberal outpost” was a “fake narrative” that “really is without merit or validation.”
Mr. Taylor and Mr. Kent have already appeared for closed-door depositions in the inquiry. You can read the transcripts of those sessions: Mr. Taylor’s testimony; Mr. Kent’s testimony. Mr. Trump repeatedly pressured Mr. Zelensky to investigate people and issues of political concern to Mr. Trump, including Mr. Biden. Here’s a timeline of events since January.
Mr. Trump repeatedly pressured Mr. Zelensky to investigate people and issues of political concern to Mr. Trump, including former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. Here’s a timeline of events since January.
A C.I.A. officer who was once detailed to the White House filed a whistle-blower complaint on Mr. Trump’s interactions with Mr. Zelensky. Read the complaint.A C.I.A. officer who was once detailed to the White House filed a whistle-blower complaint on Mr. Trump’s interactions with Mr. Zelensky. Read the complaint.
Ms. Pelosi announced in September that the House would open a formal impeachment proceeding in response to the whistle-blower’s complaint. Here’s how the impeachment process works and here’s why political influence in foreign policy matters. Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced in September that the House would open a formal impeachment proceeding in response to the whistle-blower’s complaint. Here’s how the impeachment process works, and here’s why political influence in foreign policy matters.
House committees have issued subpoenas to the White House, the Defense Department, the budget office and other agencies for documents related to the impeachment investigation. Here’s the evidence that has been collected so far.House committees have issued subpoenas to the White House, the Defense Department, the budget office and other agencies for documents related to the impeachment investigation. Here’s the evidence that has been collected so far.
Read about the Democrats’ rules to govern impeachment proceedings.Read about the Democrats’ rules to govern impeachment proceedings.