conspirator by a grand jury.... The claim that the Ukrainian controversy eclipses Watergate is unhinged from history.[1]
The House of Representatives impeached President Clinton for the federal crime of lying under oath to deny justice to a fellow American.[2] While individual Articles of Impeachment have been passed against prior presidents that do not allege criminality, no president has been impeached solely on non-criminal accusations. This impeachment not only fails to satisfy the standard of past impeachments but would create a dangerous precedent because the alleged conduct is unproven.
The Majority has said repeatedly that the facts in this impeachment inquiry are not in dispute. That is false. Not only are the facts in dispute, the Majority's primary allegations are based on presumptions that are contradicted by direct evidence. Indeed, this is the first presidential impeachment where the primary allegations have not been proven.[3] In the Nixon impeachment, the Judiciary Committee had tapes and a host of proven crimes.[4] In the Clinton impeachment, there was physical evidence and a well-founded perjury claim that even President Clinton's supporters acknowledged was a felony, leaving them to argue that some felonies are not impeachable.[5] Here, all the Majority has presented connecting the hold on foreign security assistance to a request for investigations is a presumption by Ambassador Gordon Sondland.[6] But that presumption is contradicted by more credible direct evidence. Specifically, Ambassador Kurt Volker testified that there was no "linkage" between a White House meeting and Ukrainian actions to investigate President Trump's political rival.[7] During his public testimony, in an exchange with Rep. Mike Turner, Ambassador Volker reiterated that there was no linkage between foreign security assistance and investigations.[8]
There are four facts that will never change, making it impossible for the Majority to make any convincing case for the impeachment of the President on these facts. First, the President has publicly released the transcript of the July 25 call, which shows no conditionality for any official act.[9] Second, President Zelensky and his advisors did not know the aid was on hold until it was reported publicly at the end of August.[10] Third, both President Trump and President Zelensky have said repeatedly there was no pressure, no quid pro quo, and no linkage between the aid and investigations.[11] Fourth, the foreign security assistance funds were released without Ukraine
- ↑ Id. at 17-20.
- ↑ See H. Rept. 105-830, 105th Cong. (1998).
- ↑ Turley, supra note 2, at 22.
- ↑ Id.
- ↑ See Staff of H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 105th Cong., Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment: Modern Precedents, Minority Views, at 15 (1998) ("Clinton Impeachment Report").
- ↑ See supra note 30, at 148-151 (Testimony of Gordon Sondland stating that his testimony about security assistance was a "presumption" and that nobody told him the aid was linked to investigations).
- ↑ Transcribed Interview of Ambassador Kurt Volker (Oct. 3, 2019) at 35-36; 40.
- ↑ The Impeachment Inquiry into President Donald J. Trump: Testimony of Ambassador Kurt Volker and Mr. Timothy Morrison, Hearing Before the H. Perm. Sel. Comm. on Intelligence, 116th Cong. 106-108; 166 (2019).
- ↑ The White House, Memorandum of Telephone Conversation 1 (July 25, 2019).
- ↑ See Appendix A (Intel Comm. Minority Report), at 50 (citing testimony of Ambassadors Volker and Taylor).
- ↑ See, e.g., Georgi Kantchev, Ukrainian President Denies Trump Pressured Him During July Call, Wall Street Journal (Oct. 10, 2019) (President Zelensky said "There was no blackmail."); Matthias Williams, U.S. envoy Sondland did not link Biden probe to aid: Ukraine minister, Reuters (Nov. 14, 2019) (Ukraine's Foreign Minister Vadym Prystajko said Ambassador Sondland "did not tell us... about a connection between the assistance and the
11
