Impeachment inquiry hearing with former US Ambassador to Ukraine

Our live coverage of the impeachment inquiry has ended for the day. Read up on the latest news below.

An official working on the impeachment inquiry tells CNN that State Department aide David Holmes received a subpoena prior to beginning his closed door testimony this evening.  

The subpoena read as follows:

“In light of an attempt by the State Department to direct Holmes not to appear for his scheduled deposition, and efforts to limit any testimony that does occur, the House Intelligence Committee issued a subpoena to compel his testimony this evening. As required of him, Mr. Holmes is complying with the subpoena and answering questions from both Democratic and Republican Members and staff.”

Attorney General Barr, in a fiery speech to the conservative Federalist Society, defended presidential power and slammed progressives’ “breathless attacks on the unitary executive theory.”

He accused “the left” of “waging a scorched earth no holds barred war of resistance against this administration,” and of being “engaged in the systematic shredding of norms and undermining the rule of law.” He also slammed what he called the Senate’s “unprecedented abuse of the advise and consent process.”

He said Democrats “have decided to drown the executive branch with oversight demands for testimony and documents.”  He added that while he doesn’t “deny that Congress has some implied authority,” the volume of investigations and “avalanche of subpoenas … is plainly designed to incapacitate the executive branch and indeed is touted as such.” 

He accused opponents of Trump of launching the “resistance,” saying “they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver to sabotage the functioning of the executive branch and his administration.”  

State Department aide David Holmes said in September, before the hold on Ukraine military aid was lifted, diplomat Bill Taylor told him that the US was insisting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky make a statement about specific investigations, contrary to what diplomats on the ground had been advising the Ukrainians. 

“Now they’re insisting Zelensky commit to the investigation in an interview with CNN,” Holmes testified, describing what Taylor told him. 

“I was surprised the requirement was so specific,” Holmes observed in his statement, explaining that they had advised Ukrainians they should voice commitment to adhering to the rule of law and generally needing to investigate corruption. “This was a demand that President Zelensky personally commit to a specific investigation of President Trump’s political rival on a cable news channel.” 

A few days later, the possibility of Zelensky doing an interview to announce the investigations was still a possibility. Holmes and Taylor ran into a top aide of the Ukrainian president and Taylor stressed the importance of “staying out of the US politics and said he hoped no interview was planned.” 

Holmes testified that the top aide “shrugged in resignation and did not answer, as if to indicate they had no choice. In short, everyone thought was going to be an interview.”

Watch more:

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham criticized the second hearing of the House impeachment inquiry, calling it “useless and inconsequential.”

“The second public hearing of Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Schiff’s impeachment charade was as useless and inconsequential as the first,” she said. “Zero evidence of any wrongdoing by the President was presented.”

Grisham continued:

“In fact, Ambassador Yovanovitch testified under oath that she was unaware of any criminal activity involving President Trump. She was not on the July 25 phone call and had no knowledge about the pause on aid to Ukraine. It is difficult to imagine a greater waste of time than today’s hearing, and yet unfortunately we expect more of the same partisan political theater next week from House Democrats.” 

Among those who overheard the July 26 phone call between President Trump and US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland was Suriya Jayanti, a US official in Kiev, CNN has learned.

The phone call was revealed by top US diplomat in Ukraine Bill Taylor in his testimony before the House Intelligence committee Wednesday. Taylor said one of his aides overheard the call between Trump and Sondland in which Trump asked about “investigations” at a restaurant.

That aide, State Department official David Holmes, is testifying today.

Rep. Ted Lieu, a Democrat from California, told reporters that, along with Holmes, at least two more witnesses overheard the Sondland and Trump conversation.

Rep. Jackie Speier, in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, said a second person has come forward.

A person with knowledge of the call said Jayanti also overheard the call, but it’s unclear if she’s the person who approached the committee. 

At one point, Jayanti was listed to appear for an Oct. 25 private deposition with the committees looking into impeachment, but ultimately did not meet with lawmakers for a formal deposition.

The Associated Press first reported that Jayanti also overheard the July 26 call.

Jayanti did not immediately respond to CNN’s requests for comment.

David Holmes, the aide to diplomat Bill Taylor who overheard President Trump’s conversation with European Union ambassador Gordon Sondland, said that Sondland told the President that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky would do “anything you ask him to,” and that he confirmed the Ukrainians were going to “do the investigation.”

“Sondland told Trump that Zelensky ‘loves your ass,’” Holmes said, according to a copy of his opening statement reviewed by CNN. “I then heard President Trump ask, ‘So, he’s gonna do the investigation?’ Ambassador Sondland replied that ‘He’s gonna do it,’ adding that President Zelensky will do ‘anything you ask him to.’”

Holmes explained that Sondland placed the call to Trump, and he could hear Trump because the call was so loud in the restaurant where they were with two others.

“While Ambassador Sondland’s phone was not on speakerphone, I could hear the President’s voice through the earpiece of the phone. The President’s voice was very loud and recognizable, and Ambassador Sondland held the phone away from his ear for a period of time, presumably because of the loud volume,” Holmes testified.

“Even though I did not take notes of those statements, I have a clear recollection that these statements were made,” Holmes added.

Holmes also confirmed Taylor’s testimony about the President’s thoughts on Ukraine, saying he asked Sondland “if it was true that the President did not ‘give a s—t about Ukraine.’” 

Holmes said Sondland responded Trump only cares about “big stuff.” When Holmes said that the Ukraine war was big, Sondland responded “‘big stuff’ that benefits the President, like the Biden investigation that Mr. Giuliani was pushing,” Holmes said.

WATCH MORE:

President Trump’s week was filled with equal parts history and bad news.

And the start of televised impeachment inquiry hearings — alleging Trump’s abuse of power — were not the only headache for the chief executive this week. His longtime political adviser Roger Stone was found guilty on five counts of lying to Congress, one of witness tampering and one of obstructing a congressional committee proceeding. 

The President was also handed another loss when an appeals court ruled Congress can seek his tax returns. And another court ruled he cannot sue New York state in Washington, D.C.’s federal court to stop the release of his tax returns.

The tax return issue has now been elevated to the nation’s highest court: On Wednesday, Trump asked the Supreme Court to block a subpoena for his tax returns. 

Meanwhile, Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani faces mounting questions about his role in the conversations and actions that led to the impeachment probe.

This week’s first two rounds of public testimony highlighted Giuliani’s central role — which Giuliani says was done as part of his legal defense of Trump. Giuliani has been largely silent about the situation, though he is apparently planning to release a podcast with his thoughts on the impeachment process as things continue to heat up.

A US diplomat told lawmakers behind closed doors that he did overhear the July 26 phone conversation between President Trump and Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, and that on the call Trump asked Sondland if Ukraine was going to do the investigation, according to two sources familiar with the testimony. 

Sondland replied that they were going to do it, the sources said. 

David Holmes, the counselor for political affairs at the US Embassy in Ukraine, was able to hear the call because Sondland held the phone away from his ear due to how loud Trump was talking, the sources said. 

Holmes also confirmed there were others at the table at the restaurant where he heard the call, according to the sources. 

Asked about Holmes’ testimony, Rep. Gerry Connolly told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that he was going to be “careful about what I just heard in closed session, but… I would say that the adverb used ‘allegedly’ is not accurate. It is not alleged. It happened. And it is a matter public record that Mr. Holmes heard this conversation and recognized the President’s voice loud and clear.” 

Rep. Ted Lieu, a Democrat from California, told reporters at least two more witnesses overheard a conversation between President Trump and US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland.

Lieu said the two witnesses are in addition to David Holmes, an aide to diplomat Bill Taylor who is testifying behind closed doors this evening about the conversation.

We we know: According to Taylor, who testified Wednesday, Holmes overheard Trump ask Sondland about the status of “investigations” during a cellphone conversation in a Kiev restaurant.

The conversation between Trump and Sondland took place the day after Trump spoke with the Ukrainian president by phone in July, Taylor testified.

Taylor did not name Holmes, but sources tell CNN that he is the member of the embassy staff Taylor was referencing.

In today’s episode of “The Daily DC: Impeachment Watch” podcast, CNN National Security Analyst Sam Vinograd looks at:

Vinograd is joined today by CNN senior reporter Vicky Ward and CNN’s global affairs analyst Max Boot.

Listen to the podcast here.

Former US ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony today marked the second day of public hearings in the impeachment inquiry into President Trump

Let us catch you up on the biggest takeaways:

WATCH:

Democratic Rep. Dan Kildee said “it’s possible” that the House will include witness intimidation in the articles of impeachment.

Earlier today, while ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch was testifying before the House Intelligence Committee, President Trump tweeted attacks against her. Committee Chairman Adam Schiff suggested it was witness intimidation, and when he asked Yovanovitch about the tweets, she said they were “very intimidating.”

“The President is clearly engaged in a number of activities to try to obstruct this investigation, including now potentially intimidating a witness,” Kildee said

He continued:

“So I think he ought to think carefully about how he behaves. Of course it’s almost a joke to say that anymore. But no — in no real world, except the world that Donald Trump has created and that the Republicans seem to be endorsing, in no real world is any of this OK. It’s not OK to ask a foreign government to investigate your opponent. It’s not OK to intimidate witnesses even while they’re sitting in the witness chair. It’s not OK to try to out a whistleblower because you don’t like the underlying information that he has revealed. This is, this is painful. And it’s sad.”

Before heading into diplomat David Holmes’ closed-door deposition, Rep. Mark Meadows said he wants specifics about a call Bill Taylor, the top US diplomat in the country, mentioned during his testimony.

According to Taylor’s testimony, Holmes overheard President Trump ask the US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland about the status of “investigations” during a cellphone conversation in a Kiev restaurant. Taylor did not name Holmes, but sources tell CNN that he is the member of the embassy staff Taylor was referencing.

Meadows said he specifically wants to learn more about how much others were actually able to hear on call.

Meadows said he wasn’t opposed to Holmes testifying publicly but didn’t know what the deposition would entail.

He also defended Trump on his call to Sondland.

GOP lawmakers dodged the question when asked whether it was OK for Rudy Giuliani to mount a smear campaign against former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.

Rep. Jim Jordan, who has been an active participant in the impeachment hearings, went silent at one point when asked.

Some context: Yovanovitch, who was unexpectedly removed from her position as ambassador to Ukraine by President Trump, testified that she was accused, without evidence, by Rudy Giuliani and others of trying to undermine the President and blocking efforts to investigate Democrats like former Vice President Joe Biden.

WATCH HERE:

During the hearing today, ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and at least one congressman referred to the death of a prominent anti-corruption Kateryna Handziuk, who died in 2018 following an acid attack. 

Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, a Democrat from New York, asked Yovanovitch, “Why would somebody attack her with acid? There are easier ways to kill people. Why did they do it with acid?”

“That’s what happens when you go up against corrupt people in Ukraine?” Maloney asked.

“It is something that can happen,” Yovanovitch said.

What we know about Handziuk’s death: According to the prosecutors in the case, in late July 2018, the perpetrator poured over a liter of sulfuric acid on Handziuk next to her house. She suffered severe chemical burns to 30% of her body and had to undergo over ten surgeries. Initially, a criminal case was launched under “hooliganism” offense but reclassified as “assault with the intent of intimidation” due to public pressure, Ukrainian news agencies reported at the time.  

A few weeks prior to her death, Handziuk recorded an anti-corruption message from hospital bed saying “I know I look bad now… but I’m sure that I look much better than fairness and justice in Ukraine.”

Earlier this year, then-prosecutor Yuri Lutsenko said in a televised statement that the main suspect who ordered the acid attack is a local political in a Ukrainian town of Kherson Vladislav Manger. The possible motive was a TV story accusing him of large scale corruption and other investigations into corruption in Kherson that Handziuk worked on along with others.

Manger was arrested but eventually was released on bail. He denies any involvement but is still a suspect in the case. In June 2019, a court in Dnepropetrovsk convicted five men who participated in obtaining acid and carrying out the attack.

Why they talked about this today: On April 25, 2019 — when Yovanovitch got the call telling her to leave Kiev — Yovanovitch was awarding her the “Woman of Courage” award postmortem. Handziuk’s father received it on her behalf.  

Deputy White House press secretary Hogan Gidley defended President Trump’s release of rough transcripts of his calls with the Ukrainian president, saying he did it “so that every American can see he did nothing wrong.”

Here’s what Gidley said:

“The President continues to push for transparency in light of these baseless accusations and has taken the unprecedented steps to release the transcripts of both phone calls with President [Volodymyr] Zelensky so that every American can see he did nothing wrong. It is standard operating procedure for the National Security Council to provide readouts of the President’s phone calls with foreign leaders. This one was prepared by the [National Security Council’s] Ukraine expert.”

Talking to the press this afternoon, President Trump ridiculed Democrats for their conduct during the public testimony of former US ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.

“It’s really sad when you see people not allowed to ask questions,” Trump said, seemingly referring to a moment during the testimony when Devin Nunes, the Republican ranking member of the House intelligence committee, attempted to give some of his time for opening questions to Rep. Elise Stefanik.

“They’ve taken away the Republican’s rights. And I watched today as certain very talented people who wanted to ask questions, and they weren’t even allowed to ask questions.”

Chairman Adam Schiff, however, did not allow Stefanik to ask any questions during that time.

“Under the House Resolution 660 you are not allowed to yield time except to minority counsel,” Schiff said.

Facts First: Under the House rules for these hearings, Nunes is not allowed to give his time to other members of the committee. Additionally, later on in the hearing Stefanik was still given – as all members are – five minutes to question Yovanovitch.

On October 31, the House passed the resolution governing how the impeachment hearings would be conducted. In that resolution, it lays out that “only the chair (Schiff) and ranking minority member (Nunes), or a Permanent Select Committee employee if yielded to by the chair or ranking minority member, may question witnesses during such periods of questioning.”

Both Nunes and Schiff yielded part of their time of questioning to an employee. The rules are clear that other members of the committee (e.g. Stefanik) can’t be given part of that time.

Instead, each member has five minutes of questions. So it’s incorrect to suggest that Stefanik was “not allowed to ask questions.”

Two Trump campaign sources, one inside the re-election team and one surrogate, said it was a mistake for the President to tweet about former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovich during her hearing today. 

One of the sources, a longtime Republican operative and surrogate for the campaign, offered a scathing response to Trump’s tweet, saying it made Yovanovitch more sympathetic, working against the President’s interests.

Ousted ambassador Marie Yovanovitch testified under oath that a “smear campaign” was levied against her by the President’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and his associates.

Asked moments ago in the hallway if he believed her claims of a “smear campaign,” Republican Rep. Jim Jordan shook his head.

WATCH HERE:

Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik said that while she disagrees with the tone of President Trump’s tweet attacking former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, the focus should remain on whether there are impeachable offenses, not tweets.

Stefanik went on to criticize Democrats, saying they “want to continue making this a political food fight and they are going about this in a partisan way.”

“This is a very serious matter when we’re talking about impeachment. This a constitutional matter. It’s not about tweets,” she said.

WATCH MORE:

House Intel Chairman Adam Schiff called a tweet sent by President Trump during former US ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s hearing “just appalling.”

Schiff told reporters after the hearing:

Asked if Trump’s attack could potentially be considered for an article of impeachment, Schiff said the President’s behavior is “part of a pattern to intimidate witnesses. It’s also part of a pattern to obstruct the investigation.” 

“A pattern that goes back to praising Paul Manafort for not cooperating, condemning Michael Cohen as a rat, because he was cooperating with authorities. Attacking other witnesses who come forward suggesting that we ought to treat those like the whistleblower who exposed wrongdoing in his administration was we treat traitors and spies and we used to execute traitors and spies,” Schiff said.

WATCH HERE:

House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff would not say if Former White House Russia expert Fiona Hill’s public testimony, which is scheduled for next Thursday, will be the last.

“In terms of whether Ambassador Hill will be the final testimony — I’m not prepared to say,” he told reporters.

Earlier this week, the Intelligence panel announced it would hold five impeachment hearings next week over three days, all for officials who have already appeared for closed-door depositions:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff commended former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch for showing “courage and commitment to country today.”

“I think we could all see what an incredible public servant Ambassador Yovanovitch is,” he said.

Schiff continued:

“We are so fortunate to have dedicated professionals like her serving around the world. She served in some of the most dangerous places. And has done so always with great distinction with great courage, under fire sometimes quite literally. She showed that same I think level of devotion and courage and commitment to country today. So we’re grateful to her and the other witnesses who testified as well showing country what it means to be a public servant. What it means to be a career foreign service officer. We’re enormously proud of them.”

The hearing just ended and members of the House Intelligence Committee are now headed behind closed doors for US diplomat’s David Holmes’ deposition.

Why this matters: Holmes, the counselor for political affairs at the US Embassy in Ukraine, overheard President Trump ask Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland about the status of “investigations” during a cellphone conversation in a Kiev restaurant, according to testimony Wednesday from Bill Taylor, the top US diplomat in the country.

The conversation occurred the day after Trump spoke with the Ukrainian president by phone in July, Taylor said.

Taylor did not name Holmes, but sources tell CNN that he is the member of the embassy staff Taylor was referencing.

More about Holmes: He is a career foreign service officer who arrived in Ukraine in 2017, according to a source who knows him and describes him as a “sharp guy.” He joined the foreign service in 2002, according to the American Foreign Service Association, and has previously served in Kabul, New Delhi, Kosovo, Bogota, Moscow and Kosovo.

At the end of the hearing, as ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch stood up and left the room, some people in the room clapped.

Multiple members of the House Intelligence Committee praised Yovanovitch during their questioning, thanking her for her service as a diplomat.

Yovanovitch’s career in public service spanned 33 years: She first joined the foreign service under former President Ronald Reagan.

WATCH HERE:

Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi asked former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch about “irregular channels” of diplomacy in Ukraine that another witness, diplomat Bill Taylor, brought up during his testimony earlier this week.

Taylor was referencing efforts driven by the President’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani when he mentioned irregular channels of diplomacy in Ukraine.

Yovanovitch agreed during her testimony with the point Taylor made — that she couldn’t rule out the possibility that such efforts that circumvented normal diplomatic channels could be happening in other countries as well. But she added, “I have no knowledge of that.”

Krishnamoorthi asked if she is concerned that these irregular channels of diplomacy may be at work elsewhere.

“I think it’s a possibility,” she said.

SEE IT HERE:

Asked today if he thinks he’ll be impeached, President Trump said, “Well I shouldn’t be.”

The President said that a recent statement from the foreign minister and President of Ukraine “ends the impeachment.”

“I was getting off the plane and they handed me a statement that was made by the foreign minister and president of the Ukraine and Ukraine, they came up loud and clear that there’s no linkage whatsoever. Not even a little bit … I said, ‘Oh, well that ends the impeachment.’ And you all don’t even report it,” he told reporters.

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko told reporters today that the country was unaware of US assistance linked to the 2016 and Hunter Biden investigations. 

“(US) Ambassador (to the European Union Gordon) Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigations. You should ask him,” Prystaiko told Interfax Ukraine.

President Trump’s tweet attacking former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch as her testimony was underway today does not break Twitter’s rules, a Twitter spokesperson confirmed to CNN.

Earlier today, Trump tweeted that “everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad.”  

When asked by Rep. Adam Schiff to respond to the tweet, Yovanovitch said, “It’s very intimidating.”

Mark Sandy, an official at the Office of Management and Budget, doesn’t know why the US military aid to Ukraine was withheld, but he does know that political officials came in and delayed the funding, according to a source discussing career employee.

The move took away the authority from career officials, the source said. While taking away that authority is unusual, the source said, it is not unprecedented.

Why this matters: Sandy is scheduled to appear for a closed-door deposition on Saturday.

If Sandy appears for his scheduled deposition, he would be the first OMB employee to testify. 

Sandy’s attorney, Barbara “Biz” Van Gelder, told CNN on Thursday that he would testify before lawmakers if he was subpoenaed.

The attorney said he has not received a subpoena yet. The common practice in these proceedings has been the House committees deliver the subpoena the morning of the day of scheduled testimony.

As the public testimony with Marie Yovanovitch continues, diplomat David Holmes has arrived on the Hill for his scheduled closed-door deposition in the impeachment inquiry.

Why Holmes matters: David Holmes, the counselor for political affairs at the US Embassy in Ukraine, overheard a cellphone conversation between Trump and US Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland the day after Trump spoke with the Ukrainian president by phone in July, according to testimony Wednesday from Bill Taylor, the top US diplomat in the country.

Taylor did not name Holmes, but sources tell CNN that he is the member of the embassy staff Taylor was referencing.

President Trump defended his tweets against former ambassador Marie Yovanovich as she testified on Capitol Hill, saying that he had every right to send them.

Trump admitted that he watched today’s proceedings, saying, “It’s really sad when you see people not allowed to ask questions.” He said he didn’t watch Wednesday’s proceedings due to a White House visit from Turkish President Recep Erdogan.

When asked directly if he thought his tweets and words could be intimidating, the President responded, “I don’t think so at all.”

More context: Earlier today, Trump tweeted as former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony was underway that “everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad,” which prompted a response minutes later from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who allowed Yovanovitch to react to Trump’s latest criticisms. Schiff charged that the tweet was “designed to intimidate” her and other witnesses.

WATCH HERE:

Moments ago, during a press conference at the White House to discuss healthcare, President Trump called himself the “most transparent president in history” while characterizing the impeachment hearing today as “a joke.”

“It’s really sad when you see people not allowed to ask questions,” Trump said about the hearing today of ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch. “I think it’s considered a joke. It’s a disgrace what’s happening.”

When asked if Trump’s tweets and remarks about Yovanovitch were intimidating, the President said, “I don’t think so at all.”

Trump added that he had watched some of Yovanovitch’s testimony today.

There are still a few members left to ask questions. Each gets 5 minutes.

The hearing will resume in a few minutes. Members will resume their questioning when they return.

Rep. Denny Heck, a Democrat from Washington, got emotional as he described how angry he is over President Trump’s treatment of Marie Yovanovitch, former US Ambassador to Ukraine.

First, some background: Yovanovitch was recalled from her post in May. In the July phone that’s at the center of the impeachment inquiry, President Trump disparaged her, calling her “bad news” and saying, “she’s going to go through some things.”

“I’m very angry,” Heck said at today’s hearing.

“About how it is the most powerful person on the face of the Earth would remove you from office after your stellar service and somehow feel compelled to characterize you as ‘bad news’ and then to ominously threaten that you’re ‘going to go through some things.’ So I am angry. But I’m not surprised.”

WATCH HERE:

Former US Ambassador to the Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch has the support of her family and her former foreign service colleagues inside the hearing room today. 

Here’s who’s sitting behind her:

Yovanovitch was asked today about how the smear campaign carried out against her has impacted her family.

“I really do not want to get into that, but thank you for asking,” she said.

After saying that, Yovanovitch appeared to get a bit emotional. Her mother died less than a month ago. 

The State Department did not reply when asked if any current top State Department officials attended the hearing to support Yovanovitch today.

Ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch says neither President Trump nor Secretary of State Mike Pompeo ever told her exactly why she was being pulled from her post.

Yovanovitch has testified that, amid a personal campaign against her, she was told by a superior in April to get “on the next plane home” because there was nervousness about her in the White House and State Department and possible concerns about her security.

Here’s her exchange with Rep. Joaquin Castro, a Democrat from Texas:

Castro: So I want to ask you, did the president ever tell you why he was recalling you? 
Yovanovitch: No. 
Castro: Did anybody at the White House ever tell you why you were being recalled? 
Yovanovitch: No. 
Castro: Did the President ever consult you about who the good guys and the bad guys were in the Ukraine? 
Yovanovitch:No. 
Castro: Did Secretary Pompeo ever tell you why you were being recalled? 
Yovanovitch:No. 

Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik used her five minutes for questions to go after House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and his remarks about having the whistleblower testify.

Stefanik read off headlines from several publications reporting Schiff saying that the whistleblower, whose complaint initiated to the House impeachment inquiry, would testify before committee:

“I keep can going but the chairman refused to allow us put these into the record as unanimous consent. It’s important to prevent whistleblower from retaliation and firing and want to make sure whistleblowers are able to come forward but in this case the fact we are getting criticized by Chairman Adam Schiff for statements he made early on in the process shows the due duplicity and just the abuse of power that we are continuing to see.”

The other side: Meanwhile, Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell said the whistleblower’s identity needs to be protected because of President Trump’s attacks on him or her:

“The whistleblower has an absolute right to anonymity. The whistleblower’s lawyer has said that he fears for his personal safety and will only answer questions now in writing.”

More on this: The whistleblower’s attorney responded on Saturday to House Republicans’ call for his client to testify, saying that an in-person interview is a non-starter, but the offer for lawmakers to submit written questions still stands.

“My client’s complaint has been largely corroborated. Nonetheless, I have offered to have my client respond in writing, under oath, and under penalty of perjury to Republican questions,” Andrew Bakaj said in a statement to CNN.

Tensions over the whistleblower’s identity have been building in the closed-door depositions — transcripts of which have been publicly released over the course of this week.

Two sources previously described to CNN a pattern of GOP questioning — over the course of several congressional depositions related to the probe — that appeared designed to try to identify the whistleblower through the course of asking witnesses, and putting into the deposition record, the names of various government officials involved that may fit the professional description that has been made public of the individual.

GOP Rep. Will Hurd rattled off a list of Marie Yovanovitch’s accomplishments before going into questioning.

“You’re tough as nails and you’re smart as hell,” the retiring Texas Republican told Yovanovitch during his period of questioning.

WATCH MORE:

Former US ambassador Marie Yovanovitch testified that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo did work to keep her at her post in Ukraine “for as long as he could.”

Rep. Jackie Speier, a Democrat from California, asked if Pompeo came to her aid while a “smear campaign” against her was underway.

Here’s what Yovanovitch said:

“Well, my understanding from Assistant Secretary Phil Reeker and Deputy Secretary Sullivan is that sort of the rumors about me, for lack of a better word, the smear campaign, which was behind closed doors at that point. That there were a number of discussions between the President and Secretary Pompeo and he actually did, did keep me in place for as long as he could. That’s what I was told.”

WATCH HERE:

Aides from the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee have been amplifying a moment from Marie Yovanovitch’s hearing when Chairman Adam Schiff cut off GOP Rep. Elise Stefanik’s attempt to get in a line of questioning during the ranking member Rep. Devin Nunes’ time.

Stefanik’s question was a clear violation of the rules that nonetheless created a moment Republicans are promoting.

Top House Republicans had expressed a desire to see Stefanik, considered a rising GOP star, take the opportunity provided by her presence at these public hearings to step further into the spotlight. Her performance is already starting to generate praise in conservative media as well.

A person familiar with the President’s reaction said Trump believes the young Republican lawmaker has done well, although Trump has claimed repeatedly he isn’t watching the hearings live.

Watch the moment:

Former Ukraine Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko responded to ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony on Facebook.

From his verified account, Lutsenko responded to another public post praising Yovanovitch and said she was the victim of a smear campaign. Lutsenko responded: “She lies. And I have proof.”

Some context: Lutsenko’s name came up several times during the Yovanovitch hearing, and previous hearings in the impeachment inquiry.

He has been described by witnesses and lawmakers as a “corrupt” prosecutor.

Earlier this year, he spread discredited allegations about Yovanovitch and former Vice President Joe Biden.

Ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch said her removal from her post earlier this year has been a “very painful period” in her career.

She testified that amid a personal campaign against her, she was told by a superior in April to get “on the next plane home” because there was nervousness about her in the White House and State Department and possible concerns about her security.

Here’s how Yovanovitch described the situation, after Rep. Terri Sewell, a Democrat from Alabama, asked her about it:

“There’s a question to see why the campaign to get me out of Ukraine happened. Because all the President has to do is say he wants a different ambassador. And in my line of work — perhaps in your line of work as well —all we have is our reputation. So this has been a very painful period.”

“How has it affected your family?” Sewell asked.

“I really don’t want to get into that. But thank you for asking,” Yovanovitch responded.

Watch more:

Republican Rep. Mike Conaway seemingly questioned top State Department official George Kent’s testimony earlier this week about former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, and asked whether he was paid to give “exemplary statements” about her.

Here’s how that exchange went:

Conaway: “George Kent was in here a couple days ago. He made some exemplary statements about you, really glowing. All of us would like to be the recipient of something that worthy, and I believe you are as well. Any reason on Earth that you can think of that George Kent would be saying that because of some reason other than the fact he believes it in his heart of hearts?” 

Yovanovitch: “Like, like what?” 

Conaway: “Well, I mean like somebody paid him to do it?” 

Yovanovitch: “No, absolutely not.” 

Conaway: “You agree he was sincere and bragging on you. And that’s post-recall episodes that has been much of the discussion this morning. I am glad your colleagues – I would have expected nothing different from your colleagues at state to treat you with the high regard you have earned over all these years of great service. I hope whatever you decide to do after the Georgetown fellowship that you are as successful there as you have been in the first 33 years.” 

Watch:

Democratic Rep. Jim Himes asked former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch about several passages from Trump’s July 25 call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, which took place after she was ousted from her post in May.

Himes asked Yovanovitch if, had remained the Ukraine ambassador, she would have recommended to the President that he asked the new Ukrainian President to Crowdstrike or the DNC server, which were both brought up on the call.

She responded: “No. I would repeat once again that the US Intelligence community has concluded that it was the Russians who interfered” in the 2016 election. 

Less than an hour into Friday’s testimony, President Trump tweeted from the White House that, “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad.”

But Republicans in today’s hearing aren’t going anywhere near that during their questioning.

Instead, they have heaped praise on Yovanovitch, a career foreign service officer.

“Georgetown students are lucky to have you. We are lucky to have you in foreign service, and I again want to thank you for your tremendous public service,” said Rep. Elise Stefanik, a Republican from New York, referring to Yovanovitch’s current position at Georgetown University.

“Than you so very much for long service, exemplary service,” Rep. Mike Conway said.

What this means: It’s a sign that despite Trump’s message, Republicans see Yovanovitch as a sympathetic witness whose government service is worthy of praise.

And it’s a notable difference in tone between Hill Republicans and the White House.

Still, Trump’s staunchest allies are not backing off his tweet, which Democrats have now said amounted to real-time witness intimidation.

Here’s what the White House said about it:

“The tweet was not witness intimidation, it was simply the President’s opinion, which he is entitled to. This is not a trial, it is a partisan political process  — or to put it more accurately, a totally illegitimate, charade stacked against the President. There is less due process in this hearing than any such event in the history of our country. It’s a true disgrace.”

Rep. Jim Himes, a Democrat from Connecticut, said he’s angry on behalf of all diplomats, military officers and intelligence officials following President Trump’s attack on ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.

Earlier today, as Yovanovitch was giving her opening statement, President Trump criticized her work on Twitter.

Here’s what Himes said:

“I’m angry that a woman like you would be not just dismissed but humiliated and attacked by the President of the United States. And I’m not just angry for you: I’m angry for every single foreign service officer, for every single military officer, for every intelligence officer who right now might believe that a lifetime of service and sacrifice and excellence might be ignored by the President of the United States — or worse yet — attacked in language that would embarrass a mob boss.”

He added: “Now, it’s the President’s defense — and it’s emerging from my Republican colleagues today — that this is all OK.”

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham defended President Trump’s tweet about US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, saying it was not witness intimidation.

“The tweet was not witness intimidation, it was simply the President’s opinion, which he is entitled to,” said said. “This is not a trial, it is a partisan political process — or to put it more accurately, a totally illegitimate, charade stacked against the President. There is less due process in this hearing than any such event in the history of our country. It’s a true disgrace.”

Earlier today, Trump fired off these tweets during Yovanovitch’s testimony:

Republican counsel Steve Castor suggested “that there are elements of the Ukrainian establishment that are advocating against” President Trump while questioning the former US Ambassador to Ukraine.

In response to his questions, Yovanovitch said that she didn’t have “any information to suggest” that Trump was being targeted.

Castor then brought up a Ukrainian investigative journalist’s reporting on former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort, who was sentenced to almost four years in prison for financial fraud convictions obtained by special counsel Robert Mueller.

“The way events unfolded … Mr. Manafort was, you know, subsequently left to campaign and it certainly did begin a period of interest in Manafort’s ties to Russia and so forth,” Castor said, leaving Yovanovitch open to respond:

“I think that that may have been the effect here in the United States. Obviously it was of interest to journalists and others here, that Mr. Manafort was former president [Viktor] Yanukovych’s political adviser and he was the political adviser, head of a campaign here. And so we all know that that there have been court cases and so forth where Mr. Manafort was found guilty of certain actions. But at the end of the day, President Trump won the elections.”

Watch:

The first round of questioning — which included 45 minutes for House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff and Democrats’ lawyer, and 45 minutes for ranking member Devin Nunes and the GOP lawyer — is over.

Now, each of the 22 members on the committee will get five minutes at ask ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch questions. Each member is allowed to give his or her time to another member if they’d like.

GOP lawyer Steve Castor asked former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch about comments made by a former Ukrainian official who called then-presidential candidate Trump a “clown” who is “an even bigger danger to the US than terrorism” on Twitter in 2016.

Castor pointed out that the former official, Arsen Avakov, “said some real nasty things.”

Yovanovitch responded, “Sometimes that happens in social media.” Her response generated laughs in the chamber, including from Castor. 

Earlier today, President Trump attacked Yovanovitch on Twitter during her testimony, which some House Democrats and others are now calling possible witness intimidation.

Watch more:

One of the main criticisms of the Republicans’ approach to questioning witnesses on Wednesday was the absence of any clear line of questioning that might disprove allegations Trump did something wrong in Ukraine.

But that approach continues today.

The Republican attorney, Stephen Castor, has veered from topic to topic in his questioning of former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch as he probes her work in Kiev and the circumstances surrounding her ouster.

Unlike the Democratic attorney, who sought to create a clear plot of the campaign against her, Castor has asked about topics ranging from corruption in Ukraine to the July phone call to the Ukrainian gas company Burisma to Paul Manafort, Trump’s onetime campaign chairman.

This in itself could be a strategy.

Republicans have claimed the facts of the impeachment inquiry are too complicated for the public to understand. And jumbling everything together in crowded 45-minute block doesn’t help clarify the situation.

Castor has not been aggressive in his questioning — something that could come later when members of Congress get their turn. And like Wednesday, some of his questions have drawn puzzled looks from Yovanovitch.

He did seem to focus in on an area Trump has privately vented about: perceived Ukrainian bias against him in the 2016 election. But Yovanovitch’s answers haven’t really helped him build the case.

The House Ethics Committee sent out a memo warning members of Congress against “attempts to gain unauthorized access” to Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility.

Here’s a look at part of the note:

Last month, during a closed-door impeachment inquiry deposition, about two-dozen House Republicans stormed the secure House Intelligence Committee spaces to rail against the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry.

The political stunt ratcheted up the GOP complaints about the process that delayed the scheduled deposition for five hours. (This was before the House voted to formalize the impeachment inquiry and before the public hearings were announced.)

The memo doesn’t specifically mention that incident.

Rep. Louie Gohmert, a Republican from Texas, shrugged off President Trump’s tweets.

 “The President tweets — it’s who he is. It’s how he deals with 90-plus percent of the media being against him. That’s his thing, said Gohmert, who is one of the President’s biggest supporters.

CNN asked if he agreed with House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff’s suggestion that Trump’s tweets were witness intimidation. Here’s what Gohmert said:

“Well now that’s ridiculous because it was tweeted during the testimony so the only way the witness knows is if Schiff brings it up to the witness, otherwise she doesn’t find out until after she’s testified. So, regardless of whether it’s tasteless or not, it’s not intimidation when it’s during the testimony.”

House Democrats indicated that witness tampering could be included in potential articles of impeachment after President Trump live-tweeted an attack on Marie Yovanovitch as she was testifying before House intelligence committee.

Rep. Eric Swalwell said witness tampering “will be considered, if there’s evidence of that.”

He added that “yes,” there is currently evidence of it. “Strong evidence.”

“I think the President’s conduct is despicable and an effort, as he has engaged in throughout this investigation, to prevent the truth from coming out,” Rep. David Cicilline, a member of the Judiciary committee, said.

And Rep. Mike Quigley said the tweet was “terrible.” 

Asked if it would be considered among the articles of impeachment, Quigley said: “I’m not going to weigh it right now. The President continues to obstruct.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin said he wasn’t surprised by the conduct:

“This is the President’s MO. When there’s a justice process going on, he attacks the judges, he attacks the witnesses, I mean, these are mob-style tactics,” said Raskin. “The President acts like he’s the head of a white collar organized crime family. But he’ll get his comeuppance. This is the United States of America. The rule of law still has some resiliency here. We’re showing it every day.”

You will keep hearing two names — Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman — during this testimony today. They are two associates of Rudy Giuliani who were charged in September with illegally funneling foreign money into US political campaigns.

They have pleaded not guilty, but federal prosecutors in New York are continuing their investigation. This includes looking into Giuliani’s links to the two Soviet-born businessmen, sources have told CNN.

Democrats subpoenaed both men in the impeachment inquiry, to provide documents and testify, but so far they haven’t complied with the subpoenas.

Here is we know about Parnas and Fruman:

Marie Yovanovitch said the “Ukrainian establishment hoped” her removal as ambassador would make it easier for them to do things counter to US interests.

Here’s what she told GOP lawyer Steve Castor:

“I think that, in addition, there were Americans, these two individuals who were working with mayor Giuliani, Mr. Parnas and Mr. Fruman, who have recently been indicted by the Southern District of New York, who indicated that they wanted to change out the ambassador, and I think they must have had some reason for that.”

Watch:

The Republicans’ lawyer, Steve Castor, is now asking ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch questions.

Expect Republicans to emphasize that she wasn’t in her post when the Trump-Ukraine July 25 call happened.

While she might have a compelling story to tell about her personal experience, Yovanovitch wasn’t around for any of the other events that are part of the impeachment inquiry, including Trump’s controversial phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July.

Before the hearing, CNN reported that House Republicans are planning to highlight that Yovanovitch doesn’t have firsthand knowledge of Trump’s conversations with Zelensky or his interest in having Ukraine announce investigations into his political rivals, including Biden.

She left her post in May, two months before the critical phone call with Zelensky, and before the Ukrainians learned that there was a holdup in the $391 million package of US military aid.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters she hadn’t seen President Trump’s tweet and wouldn’t weigh in on whether it could be included in articles of impeachment, although she did say that witness intimidation is a crime.

“I’m trying to keep government open, pass a trade bill, get our prescription drug bill done, and we had so much else going on,” she said. “I’m so proud of the dignity and the grace of the ambassador and her patriotism. I haven’t really paid a lot of attention to the President.”

Asked if the tweet was appropriate, Pelosi chuckled: “Appropriate and President in the same sentence? Come on. Why would we start making that judgment now?”

 “I just haven’t seen it, the tweet, but witness intimidation is a crime,” she said. “Anyway, I am so consumed in so many other things right now.”

A reporter tried to show her the tweet on his phone as she walked to her office, but she declined. “I’m sure I’ll see it,” she said.

Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking member in the House Intelligence Committee, took a dig at ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch before launching into a line of questioning.

The California Republican slammed Yovanovitch by congratulating her for her performance.

He then continued to criticize the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, noting that they “will be back down in the basement of the Capitol, doing more of these secret depositions.”

Watch more:

House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes attempted to yield his questioning time to Rep. Elise Stefanik — the only female GOP member on the committee — but the move was against the impeachment inquiry rules.

Chair Adam Schiff did not allow Stefanik to ask questions.

Here’s what this is all about: During the first round of questioning, only Schiff, Nunes or their House lawyers are allowed to ask questions.

After this 90-minute round is finished, each member will get five minutes to ask questions.

The Republican’s lawyer, Steve Castor, is now asking questions.

Watch the moment:

The committee just came back from a break. The Republicans’ attorney, Steve Castor, will now question Yovanovitch for 45 minutes.

On the same day the former US Ambassador to Ukraine delivered testimony in Washington in the ongoing impeachment inquiry, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made light of the ongoing proceedings during a speech at Rice University.

Pompeo jokingly told former Secretary of State James Baker that Pompeo was “upholding my end of the quid pro quo,” in delivering remarks at the institute that bears Baker’s name at Rice University.

Pompeo said Baker was one of the first calls he made to solicit advice on the position after President Trump nominated him to the position in 2018.

Baker, according to Pompeo, said, “Here’s the deal: You have got to come to the Baker Institute.” 

Pompeo was delivering remarks on U.S. foreign policy at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy, in Houston.

President Trump, apparently piqued by the power of former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony as he watched from the White House, tweeted his objections to “the woman” as he referred to her in his July call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Seeming to blame her for a civil war in Somalia that began before she arrived at her hardship post there, Trump tweeted “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in Somalia, how did that go?” and went on to demean her service as his ambassador in Ukraine.

It was a breathtaking moment, a reminder that this President seems incapable of restraining his urges to lash out at women who he perceives as potentially powerful critics. Particularly women as unflappable as Yovanovitch, who delivered her recitation of the facts in a firm, but sometimes soft voice—that made her all the more compelling as a witness.

In this formal impeachment proceeding, Trump’s tweets have new import beyond their slashing person effect.  

Rep. Lee Zeldin, a New York Republican who has been one of the House GOP’s point men on defending President Trump during the impeachment inquiry, said the President’s tweets criticizing Marie Yovanovitch during her testimony did not constitute witness intimidation.

“No, I think it’s about the President wanting to ensure that the entire story is getting out there for the American public. Ambassador Yovanovitch wouldn’t have even known about the tweet if not for Chairman Schiff choosing to use a partial rendition of the tweet,” he said.

Zeldin called it “wrong” for Chairman Schiff to read and ask Yovanovitch to respond to part of the President’s tweet. “If you’re going to ask Ambassador Yovanovitch to respond to a tweet that she has not read, then allow her to read the entire tweet and then ask her a question,” he said.

Asked specifically about the President’s comments about Somalia, Zeldin said he simply didn’t know enough about Yovanovitch’s time in Somalia to weigh in: 

“As far as the the first sentence I just personally, I’m not familiar with the time and position, related to her service in Somalia to substantively be able to address that I just, I don’t know offhand. What year she was there, what position she filled and how that went.”

Rep. Francis Rooney, a former ambassador and a Republican who hasn’t ruled out impeachment, disagreed with President Trump’s tweet.

“I don’t necessarily think it’s right to be harassing or bearing up on or professional diplomatic service,” he told CNN.

He said he didn’t know if it was witness intimidation but noted that Trump “has a right to” dismiss his ambassadors.

Asked about the White House blocking witnesses from coming forward, he said, “I think if you don’t have anything to hide, you ought to come testify.”

A jury has found Roger Stone guilty of lying to Congress and other charges in a case that has shed new light on President Trump’s anticipation of the release of stolen Democratic emails in 2016.

Stone, a political provocateur and a longtime associate of Trump, was found guilty of all seven counts brought by the Justice Department, a victory for special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

The verdict is happening as the House holds a second public hearing in the impeachment inquiry into President.

Watch more:

Rep. Eric Swalwell said the President “is seeking to destroy” former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch “for testifying against him” with his tweets attacking her during testimony.

Swalwell said that the House will “view that as witness intimidation not only to the ambassador but future witnesses who would come in.” 

He added: “Innocent people don’t intimidate witnesses. This is what guilty people do, and the President continues to act guilty.” 

Swalwell said Trump’s intimidation should be considered for articles of impeachment.

Watch more:

The White House is trying to have it both ways when it comes to ex-ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.

It’s also worth noting that President Trump could have fired her much earlier but instead it happened nearly two and a half years into his administration and the President had others do the job, including his personal attorney Rudy Guiliani, who played a role in her firing.

Independent Rep. Justin Amash just quote-tweeted the President attacking former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch during her public testimony.

““Expect witness tampering to be an article of impeachment,” Amash said.

Democrats are accusing President Trump of “witness intimidation,” by attacking former US Ambassador to the Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch during her testimony. 

Asked about the tweets, Yovanovitch told lawmakers she felt they were “intimidating,” and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff then raised the possibility of including the episode in an article of impeachment. (To be clear, the President’s tweet didn’t include a clear threat against Yovanovitch, though he criticized her record.) 

This isn’t the first time Trump has been accused of witness tampering.

Special counsel Robert Mueller investigated Trump’s comments and actions toward key players in the Russia investigation, including his former attorney Michael Cohen, former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former national security adviser Michael Flynn. (All three men are now convicted felons.)

Trump publicly dangled the possibility of a pardon for Manafort, and publicly threatened Cohen’s while he cooperated with investigators. Mueller’s team looked into these episodes as potential obstruction of justice, and determined that there was strong evidence of witness tampering in some cases.

“Many of the President’s acts directed at witnesses, including discouragement of cooperation with the government and suggestions of possible future pardons, took place in public view,” the Mueller report said. “That circumstance is unusual, but no principle of law excludes public acts from the reach of the obstruction laws.”

A key point to remember: To be clear — there is a big difference between a criminal investigation and an impeachment investigation. Democrats don’t need proof of a crime to impeach Trump. But they also don’t need to meet high threshold that prosecutors would need to actually prove witness intimidation in a court of law.

The bottom line is that Trump has a long history of trying to interfere with witnesses that could testify against him. It’s all over the Mueller report, in dozens of pages, and it’s playing out again today.

We’re 45 minutes into the first round of questioning during ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony.

The questions — and the conversation outside the hearing — turned to allegations of witness intimidation after Trump tweeted attacks on the former ambassador in real time.

Here’s what happened: Minutes into Yovanovitch’s testimony, after she detailed some of her work in Somalia, President Trump tweeted this:

House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff gave Yovanovitch time to respond to the attack. She said this:

“Well, I mean, I don’t think I have such powers, not Mogadishu, not Somalia, and not other places. I actually think where I have served over the years, I and others have demonstrably made things better. You know, for the US, as well as for the countries that I have served in.”

Awhile later, Schiff suggested the tweet was essentially witness intimidation. He asked Yovanovitch what kind of impact the message would have on future witnesses.

“It’s very intimidating,” Yovanovitch replied.

The committee is taking a break right now. When they come back, the Republicans will get 45 minutes to ask questions.

Watch the moment:

Two of the top anchors at Fox News said that President Trump’s Friday tweets attacking ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch raised the possibility of an additional article of impeachment being added against Trump for witness tampering.

Bret Baier, Fox’s chief political anchor, said Trump’s tweets “enabled” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who is leading the impeachment inquiry, to “characterize that tweet as intimidating the witness or tampering with the witness, which is a crime.”

“Adding, essentially, an article of impeachment real time as this hearing is going on,” Baier said.

Chris Wallace, the anchor of Fox’s flagship Sunday show, agreed with Baier, noting the attack “played out in real time.”

“It does raise the possibility of witness intimidation and witness tampering as a new charge here,” Wallace said.

Rep. Louie Gohmert, a Republican from Texas, told CNN in the hallway outside the hearing room what he thought of former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony so far.

He said Adam Schiff, chair of the House Intelligence Committee, was relying on “gossip mongers” to testify. He called President Trump’s first April call to Zelensky, the transcript of which was released today, “No big deal.”

He said of Trump, “Give the guy a break.” When asked whether he found Yovanovitch to be a credible witness, Gohmert said:

“I don’t find her testimony relevant — to impeachment, to remove a president. How she felt, that’s not an impeachable offense and it’s irrelevant. If we had a real hearing, getting real evidence this would not even come into court.”

Some context: Yovanovitch testified today that she was unexpectedly removed from her post as ambassador to Ukraine because of unfounded claims that she tried to undermine the President and blocked efforts to investigate Democrats like former Vice President Joe Biden.

Rep. Jim Jordan brushed off President Trump’s tweets attacking Yovanovitch, blaming his frustration with Democrats.

“Look, the President has been frustrated with this relentless attack on him by the Democrats that started even before he was President. I think the American people can relate to the frustration. Democrats started in July 2016 with their crazy investigation and now they move into this, so I think that’s what drives that.”

He rejected the notion that Trump’s tweets amount to witness tampering.

“The witness is testifying. She wouldn’t even know about the quote if Mr. Schiff hadn’t read the tweet,” Jordan said.

CNN legal analyst Elie Honig said President Trump’s tweet attacking former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch as she testified today was “textbook” witness intimidation.

Honig, a former federal and state prosecutor, said Trump “tweeted out a direct personal attack on this witness clearly related to her testimony while she was testifying.”

He went on to say there are questions whether a sitting president can be prosecuted, adding “the question is what is Adam Schiff going to do.”

Watch: Yovanovitch says President’s attacks are ‘very intimidating’

Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, a House Intelligence member, says Trump’s tweet shows that former ambassador Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony is “getting under his skin.”

Some background: As Yovanovitch testified this morning, Trump tweeted attacks against her, saying, “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad.” He specifically pointed to her work in Somalia — which she described in her opening statement. (Remember: The White House said President Trump would watch Rep. Devin Nunes’ opening statement — but not any of the rest of today’s hearing.)

Rep. Peter Welch, a Democrat from Vermont who is on the Intelligence Committee, told CNN that the most significant fact today “is the intimidation by the President.” 

As Yovanovitch testified, President Trump tweeted several attacks against her.

Many Members didn’t notice Trump’s tweets and learned of them when staff passed out copies, Welch said. “We were totally focused on the witness.” 

Welch said the tweets were “absolutely” witness intimidation. “That’s a pretty shocking action by the president.”

He also said the tweets “raise the question of obstruction of justice.”

Ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch said she was troubled by the misinformation disseminated about her by Fox News and other right-wing media entities.

Daniel Goldman, the attorney who led the questioning of Yovanovitch for the Democrats, showed Yovanovitch a tweet from President Trump attacking her, tagging Fox host Sean Hannity, and citing Fox contributor John Solomon.

Goldman showed her another tweet from Donald Trump Jr. which cited the right-wing website The Daily Wire.

Yovanovitch said she was aware of the tweets from the President, testifying, “I was worried.”

“What were you worried about?” asked Goldman.

More context: For months, Fox and other right-wing media organizations have pushed misinformation about Yovanovitch. Asked about some of the allegations peddled by right-wing media, Yovanovitch said they were wholly not true.

Watch the moment:

A powerful moment in today’s hearing came when House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff questioned Marie Yovanovitch on the effect of President Trump’s tweets and messages.

“It’s very intimidating,” Yovanovitch replied.

The line of questioning could be building up Democrats’ case for a possible article of impeachment: obstruction of justice.

While Trump’s alleged abuse of power is still the main line of investigation for Democrats, the questioning that has emerged also underscores that Trump’s actions since then could also be in play.

White House stonewalling on administration witnesses has already frustrated Democrats, and they have argued the attempts to limit information could undercut their constitutional responsibilities.

In today’s hearing, Democrats sought to portray Trump as cowing possible witnesses from appearing. And they suggested he was using threats to keep them from talking. 

“What we saw today witness intimidation in real time by the President United States,” Schiff said. “Once again going after this dedicated and respected career public servant in an effort to not only chill her but to chill others who may come forward.”

“We take this kind of witness intimidation and obstruction of inquiry very seriously,” Schiff said.

They highlighted a line from Trump’s July phone call with Ukraine’s president when he mentioned Yovanovitch.

Trump said she was “going to go through some things,” which she told the committee appeared menacing.

“It sounded like a threat,” she said.

Later, she stopped short of saying what Trump was attempting to do. But she was clear on its impact.

Democrats who are watching ousted US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony right now say that her story, delivery and focus on the overall disruption to US foreign policy caused by Giuliani and associates has been devastating for the President.

These comments come from members who don’t serve on the committee but are glued to their own televisions today.

“Like her, I’m not shocked that corrupt interests in Ukraine wanted her gone. What’s extraordinary is that the president of the United States came under their influence and fired an ambassador on their behalf,” Malinowski added.

Maryland’s Rep. Jamie Raskin similarly said that Yovanovitch “is a devastating witness for Trump, Giuliani and the back channel shadow government. The administration looks increasingly lawless.”

GOP intel member Rep. Elise Stefanik says she disagrees with Trump’s tweet attacking Marie Yovanovitch.

“I disagree with the tweet. I think Ambassador Yovanovitch is a public servant, like many of our public servants in the foreign service,” she said.

Some background: As Yovanovitch testified this morning, Trump tweeted attacks against her, saying, “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad.” He specifically pointed to her work in Somalia — which she described in her opening statement. (Remember: The White House said President Trump would watch Rep. Devin Nunes’ opening statement — but not any of the rest of today’s hearing.)

GOP Rep. Mike Conaway told CNN that he was unmoved by former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s public testimony this morning.

“I don’t think it sets a precedent,” he said of the circumstances surrounding her ouster. “She serves at the pleasure of the President — and he didn’t trust her.”

Florida Rep. Ted Yoho said that, while he may not have enlisted Giuliani, he was skeptical of Yovanovitch’s testimony that she was smeared falsely.

President Trump has publicly described former Ukrainian prosecutor general Viktor Shokin as a “tough prosecutor.” He has argued that Joe Biden was acting corruptly when he pushed as vice president for Shokin to be fired.

Facts First: But both George Kent, deputy assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, now Marie Yovanovitch, former US ambassador to Ukraine, have testified that Shokin was corrupt. (Kent himself used the word “corrupt”; Yovanovitch endorsed that description when she was asked if Shokin was corrupt.)

Yovanovitch testified today that Biden was acting in accordance with “official US policy” in his dealings with Ukraine. Kent had said much the same thing.

Yovanovitch also agreed when Democratic counsel Daniel Goldman asked her if Shokin getting fired would increase the chances of corrupt Ukrainian companies being investigated. And she agreed that this could have potentially included Burisma, the company where Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son, sat on the board of directors.

During her testimony, former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch dismissed several conspiracy theories against her that may have contributed to her firing, specifically the notion that she created a list of protected individuals from corruption investigations.

Earlier this year, Yuriy Lutsenko, the former Ukrainian Prosecutor General, claimed that Yovanovitch had created a “Do Not Prosecute” list of protected individuals, obstructing investigations into corruption.

Facts First: The State Department released a statement saying that these claims were false and Lutsenko later retracted his statement.

As Yovanovitch noted during the hearing, when this claim came forward through an interview with Lutsenko, the State Department called the claim an “outright fabrication.” Later, Lutsenko himself walked the allegation against Yovanovitch back.

After President Trump tweeted attacks on ex-ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch as she was testifying, House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff suggested it could be witness intimidation.

“Ambassador, you’ve shown the courage to come forward today and testify. Notwithstanding the fact that you were urged by the White House or State Department not to, notwithstanding the fact that as you testified earlier the President implicitly threatened you in that call record, and now the President — in realtime — is attacking you. What effect do you think that has on other witnesses willingness to come forward and expose wrongdoing?”

Yovanovitch answered: “It’s very intimidating.”

“It’s designed to intimidate, is it not?” Schiff asked.

“I mean, I can’t speak to what the President is trying to do, but I think the effect is trying to be intimidating,” she said.

While the hearing was on a brief recess, Schiff told reporters it was “intimidation in real time by the President of the United States.”

Some background: As Yovanovitch testified this morning, Trump tweeted attacks against her, saying, “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad.” He specifically pointed to her work in Somalia — which she described in her opening statement. (Remember: The White House said President Trump would watch Rep. Devin Nunes’ opening statement — but not any of the rest of today’s hearing.)

The Democrats’ attorney, Daniel Goldman, brought up Fox News in a series of questions about articles with allegations about Ukraine and former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.

He said the allegations were that she “bad-mouthed the President and had given the prosecutor general a do not prosecute list,” as well as allegations about Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election, the Bidens and Burisma.

Goldman went on to display this tweet from President Trump.

Goldman then quoted a tweeted from Donald Trump Jr.’s: “We need more ⁦@RichardGrenell’s and less of these jokers as ambassadors.”

Yovanovitch said the articles appeared to be promoted by Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. She went on to say she was aware of the tweets, and “was worried.”

 “These attacks were, you know, being repeated by the President himself and his son,” she said. 

Goldman then asked if she was aware the allegations received attention on Fox News. She said she was.

Asked if anyone in the State Department raised concerns about the allegations, she said, “No. I mean, people thought it was ridiculous.”

The hearing is in recess for just a few minutes.

Marie Yovanovitch, the former US envoy to Ukraine, offered a powerful and impassioned defense of the work the US foreign service in the face of attacks from the President of the United States and his allies and minimal public defense from the secretary of state. 

Contrasting the “perception that diplomats lead a comfortable life throwing dinner parties in fancy homes,” Yovanovitch described her own tenure in the foreign service: moving 13 times, serving in five hardship posts, getting caught in crossfire in Russia. 

She also offered a cutting criticism of the State Department’s failure to defend her against smears, including from President Trump. 

“I remain disappointed that the Department’s leadership and others have declined to acknowledge that the attacks against me and others are dangerously wrong, she said. “This is about far more than me or a couple of individuals. As Foreign Service professionals are being denigrated and undermined, the institution is also being degraded. This will soon cause real harm, if it hasn’t already.”

She continued: “It is the responsibility of the Department’s leaders to stand up for the institution and the individuals who make that institution the most effective diplomatic force in the world,” Yovanovitch continued.   

“I count myself lucky to be a Foreign Service Officer, fortunate to serve with the best America has to offer, blessed to serve the American people for the last 33 years,” she said.

Yovanovitch said the attacks led to a “crisis” at the State Department.

“Moreover, the attacks are leading to a crisis in the State Department as the policy process is visibly unravelling, leadership vacancies go unfilled, and senior and midlevel officers ponder an uncertain future and head for the doors. The crisis has moved from the impact on individuals to an impact on the institution. The State Department is being hollowed out from within at a competitive and complex time on the world stage. This is not a time to undercut our diplomats,” she said.

Watch below:

On the rumor that there was Ukrainian interference in the 2016 US presidential election, which has been widely debunked, Yovanovitch echoed these conclusions saying there was “nothing hard” linking Ukraine to election interference.

Asked who was responsible for interfering and meddling in the 2016 election, Yovanovitch said:

As former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch testified this morning, President Trump tweeted attacks against her, saying, “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad.”

He specifically pointed to her work in Somalia. (Remember: The White House said President Trump would watch Rep. Devin Nunes’ opening statement — but not any of the rest of today’s hearing.)

House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff just gave her an opportunity to respond. Here’s what she said:

“Well, I mean, I don’t think I have such powers, not Mogadishu, not Somalia, and not other places. I actually think where I have served over the years, I and others have demonstrably made things better. You know, for the US, as well as for the countries that I have served in.”

House Democrats are trying to use Trump’s tweets against him. They displayed one of his tweets on a screen in the hearing room, a tweet where he posted about an article in The Hill that included allegations against Yovanovitch. The series of articles have been widely discredited in recent months. 

Democratic staff lawyer Dan Goldman used that tweet, and another about the same topic from Donald Trump Jr., to show how Yovanovitch’s reputation was attacked before she was ultiamtely removed from Ukraine. Witnesses have said that the false allegations in The Hill, which were also pushed by Rudy GIulinai, were apparently the driving force behind Trump’s decision to end her ambassadorship.

“People thought it was ridiculous,” Yovanoavitch said of the allegations against her.

In a tweet sent during questioning of Yovanovitch, Trump said “the new Ukrainian President spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him.”

Facts First: Volodymyr Zelensky did say Yovanovitch’s attitude was “far from the best” — but spoke about her only after Trump brought her up.

Additionally, according to the transcript of the call released by the White House, Zelensky noted that Trump was the one who first told him she was “a bad ambassador.”

Zelensky said, “It was great that you were the first one who told me that she was a bad ambassador because I agree with you 100%.”

Here’s Trump’s tweet:

Marie Yovanovitch was read parts of the transcript from Trump’s July 25 call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky by House Intel Majority attorney Dan Goldman. Asked what she thought about Trump saying “she’s going to be going through some things,” she said it sounded like a threat.

Goldman followed up and asked, “Did you feel threatened?”

“I did,” Yovanovitch said.

Watch more:

Trump’s defenders have noted that the President has the power to appoint and remove ambassadors however he pleases, as laid out in the Constitution. Trump himself touted the “US President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors” in a tweet posted while Yovanovitch testified. 

But Democratic staff lawyer Dan Goldman, who is doing the questioning, asked Yovanovitch about whether she had ever seen any president remove an ambassador “without cause, based on allegations that the State Department knew to be false” during her decades-long career in the foreign service. 

Yovanovitch testified that she had never heard of that happening before.

See the moment:

Yovanovitch described how she felt when she learned what was said about her during President Trump’s July 25 call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

She said she was “shocked. Absolutely shocked. And devastated, frankly.”

She continued:

Watch her response:

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch described to lawmakers the moment that she received a call from a State Department official asking her to return to the US because there were “great concerns.”

Yovanovitch was in the middle of an event for an anti-corruption activist when she received the call.

She told members of Congress that the director general of the State Department said she would give her another call to provide more details

At 1 a.m., Yovanovitch received another call from the director general who said she had to “come home immediately.” The director urged her to “get on the next plane.”

Watch below:

President Trump tweeted, “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad” as the former US ambassador to Ukraine gives her testimony.

Remember: The White House said President Trump would watch Rep. Devin Nunes’ opening statement — but not any of the rest of today’s hearing.

Asked by Chairman Adam Schiff how Trump firing her has been received by her colleagues, the former US ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch said this:

She added she believes it’s “a fair statement” to say that this affected the morale of other ambassadors and those serving at US embassies around the world.

Watch:

In this first round of questioning, only House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff, ranking member Devin Nunes and their respective House lawyers are allowed to ask questions.

Democrats’ questioner is Daniel Goldman, a former federal prosecutor with the Southern District of New York who joined the committee in March and led the questioning in the closed-door depositions.

Republican questioner is Steve Castor, the chief investigative counsel for the House Oversight panel who has been detailed over to the House Intelligence Committee.

Republican Rep. Devin Nunes said the Democrats’ whole case relies on rumors, “beginning with second-hand and third-hand information cited by the whistleblower.”

Facts First: The inspector general for the intelligence committee said the first whistleblower had “direct knowledge of certain alleged conduct” along with information the whistleblower was told by others.

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, speaking to lawmakers, said she didn’t understand why President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani was attacking her and going after her.

“I do not understand Mr. Giuliani’s motives for attacking me, nor can I offer an opinion on whether he believed the allegations he spread about me. Clearly, no one at the State Department did,” she said.

Yovanovitch said she had “minimal contacts” with Giuliani and only met him three times.

The career diplomat was abruptly pulled from Kiev this spring after a personal order from Trump. He made the decision after a months-long public campaign against Yovanovitch, led by Giuliani and others in the right-wing media.

Watch:

The White House released a rough transcript of President Trump’s first call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The call, which occurred on April 21, came just after Zelensky was elected president. It doesn’t contain any mentions of the Bidens or the 2016 election, as a later July call did.

By releasing the rough transcript of Trump’s first call with Zelensky, the White House hopes to show that there was nothing untoward in the US-Ukraine relationship. But nobody had accused Trump of doing anything wrong in that initial, congratulatory call.

The transcript also raises a few questions that deserve further scrutiny, like why Trump promised to send a “very high level” delegation to Zelensky’s inauguration, even though Pence’s planned participation was later scrapped.

Former US ambassador to Ukraine Yovanovitch called the “smear campaign” that the President’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani and his associates led against her — which led to her ouster — “a campaign of disinformation against a sitting ambassador using unofficial back channels.” 

She added: “These events should concern everyone in this room.” 

Watch more:

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch broke down — and rebutted — a number of attacks and claims that have been made against her.

Here’s are the bullet points from her opening statement:

Watch:

In her opening statement, former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch talked about the importance of US security support for Ukraine.

On US relations with the country, Yovanovitch said, “We see the potential in Ukraine. Russia sees, by contrast, sees the risk.” 

On US relations with the country, she laid out how the Ukrainians “match our objectives.” 

“The US is the most powerful country in the history of the world, in large part because of our values. And our values have made possible the network of alliances and partnerships that buttresses our own strength,” she said.

Yovanovitch talked about the “hot war” currently going on between Ukraine and Russia.

“Now Ukraine is a battleground for great power competition with a hot war for the control of territory in a hybrid war to control Ukraine’s leadership,” she said. 

She noted that the US has provided “significant security assistance” since the war broke out in 2014 — and talked about the consequences if Russia defeats Ukraine.

“If Russia prevails, and Ukraine falls to Russian dominion, we can expect to see other attempts by Russia to expand its territory and its influence.” 

See the moment:

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch is detailing her career in public service.

Here’s how she has described her personal history and her years as a diplomat:

Watch more:

Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik pushed to Chairman Adam Schiff to answer why has “continue to prohibit witnesses from answering Republican questions as you’ve done in closed hearings.”

(Stefanik posed the same question at Wednesday’s testimony, the first public hearing in the impeachment inquiry.)

Schiff shut her down, saying he would not recognize her. Rep. Jim Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, tried to intervene, but Schiff stopped him.

The chairman went on to make a direct request to President Trump, asking him to release “the thousands of other records that he has instructed the State Department not to release.”

“We would ask the President to stop obstructing the impeachment inquiry and while we’re grateful he has released a single document, he has nonetheless obstructed witnesses and their testimony and the production of thousands and thousands of other records. And finally, I would say this, Mr. President, I hope you’ll explain to the country today why it was after this call and while the vice president was making plans to attend the inauguration that you instructed the vice president not to attend Zelensky’s inauguration,” Schiff said.

Watch the moment:

Former US ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch is now giving her opening statement.

She began:

We will pull out the highlights, but you can also read her entire opening statement here.

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who was ousted earlier this year, was just sworn in.

She’ll be the third impeachment inquiry witness to testify publicly

Watch her introduction:

The White House says President Trump is watching Rep. Devin Nunes’ opening statement — but he won’t watch the rest of today’s hearing.

“The President will be watching Congressman Nunes’ opening statement, but the rest of the day he will be working hard for the American people,” press secretary Stephanie Grisham said.

In his statement, Nunes read the transcript of Trump’s first phone call with the Ukrainian president, which was released as the hearing was getting underway.

On Wednesday, the White House and Trump insisted he had no time to watch the first public impeachment hearing. 

Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, just finished reading a White House transcript of an earlier Trump-Ukraine call aloud.

Moments ago, the White House released the transcript of the first phone call between President Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

This call was on April 21, two months before the July 25 call that’s at the center of the impeachment inquiry.

Watch Nunes read the full transcript aloud:

In his opening statement, Rep. Devin Nunes echoed a familiar Republican talking point that the case that the Democrats are making to impeach Trump is not based on information from people who directly dealt with the President.

Nunes said this about what Americans watched this week in the public hearings:

“They saw us sit through hours of hearsay testimony about conversations that two diplomats who had never spoken to the president heard secondhand, thirdhand and fourth hand from other people. In other words, rumors.”

Remember: The reason we have not yet heard from witnesses who spoke to the President firsthand, such as acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and former national security adviser John Bolton, is because the White House has so far blocked their testimonies.

Watch below:

Republican Rep. Devin Nunes just claimed that Alexandra Chalupa, a former staffer for the Democratic National Committee “worked with Ukrainian embassy officials to spread dirt on the Trump Campaign.”

Fact First: Chalupa denied the allegations in a 2017 statement to CNN.

“During the 2016 US election, I was a part-time consultant for the DNC running an ethnic engagement program,” Chalupa told CNN. “I was not an opposition researcher for the DNC, and the DNC never asked me to go to the Ukrainian Embassy to collect information.

Multiple representatives from the Clinton campaign and the DNC have denied the charges, as has the Ukrainian embassy. “I ran the opposition press program for the Clinton campaign and I don’t know what the hell they’re talking about,” said Zac Petkanas, a former Clinton staffer.

Republicans, though, have seized on the fact that Chalupa did meet with representatives from the Ukrainian Embassy during the election, meetings that Chalupa says were about an “Immigrant Heritage Month women’s networking event” she helped organize in June.   

House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes, a Republican from California, used part of his opening statement to criticize the Democrats and how they’ve run the impeachment inquiry.

He mentioned the first the first public hearing, which happened on Wednesday.

“I’m glad that on Wednesday, after the Democrats staged six weeks of secret depositions in the basement of the Capitol — like some kind of strange cult — the American people finally got to see this farce for themselves,” Nunes said.

Remember: While the hearings were behind closed doors, both Republican and Democratic members of the committee were allowed to attend.

He also accused Democrats of using Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky as an “excise” to being impeachment proceedings.

“So Americans can rightly suspect that his phone call with President Zelensky was used as an excuse for the Democrats to fulfill their Watergate fantasies,” he said.

Watch the moment:

Adam Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said President Trump considered former US Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch “an obstacle to the furtherance of the President’s personal and political agenda.”

“For that she was smeared and cast aside. The powers of the presidency are immense, but they are not absolute and cannot be used for a corrupt purpose. The American people expect their President to use the authority they grant him in the service of the nation, not to destroy others to advance his personal or political interests.”

Schiff claimed the Yovanovitch’s ouster “helped set stage for an irregular channel that could pursue the two investigations that mattered so much to the President, the 2016 conspiracy theory, and most important, an investigation into the 2020 political opponent he apparently feared most, Joe Biden.”

“And the President’s scheme might have worked but for the fact that the man who would succeed Ambassador Yovanovitch, whom we heard from on Wednesday, acting Ambassador Taylor, would eventually discover the effort to press Ukraine into conducting these investigations and would push back hard, but for the fact that someone blew the whistle,” the California Democrat said.

Watch more:

In his opening statement, Chairman Adam Schiff referenced a quote from witness George Kent who talked about “pissing off” corrupt people during his public testimony earlier this week.

Here’s what Schiff said:

“As George Kent told this committee on Wednesday, ‘you can’t promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing off corrupt people.’ And Ambassador Yovanovitch did not just piss off corrupt Ukrainians, like the corrupt former prosecutor general Yuriy Lutsenko, but certain Americans like Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump’s personal attorney, and two individuals now indicted who worked with him, Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas. Lutsenko, Giuliani, Fruman, Parnas and others who would come to include the President’s own son Don Jr. promoted a smear campaign against her based on false allegations.”

Watch:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff spoke about former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch in his opening remarks.

Watch more:

The White House just released the transcript of the first phone call between President Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

This call was on April 21, two months before the July 25 call that’s at the center of the impeachment inquiry.

The House Intelligence Committee’s hearing just started.

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch — who was ousted earlier this year — is scheduled to testify.

Chairman Adam Schiff and ranking member Devin Nunes will give opening statements. Yovanovitch will give her opening statement after she is sworn in.

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch just entered the House room where she’ll testify publicly.

Yovanovitch was recalled from her post in May. In the July 25 phone call that’s at the heart of the impeachment inquiry, President Trump disparaged her, calling her “bad news” and saying, “she’s going to go through some things.”

People are starting to file into the hearing room for the second hearing in the impeachment inquiry into President Trump.

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch will testify this morning before the House Intelligence Committee.

Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer said yesterday that, while the President is going through a personally difficult time with the impeachment inquiry, he ultimately will be cleared because “he didn’t do anything wrong.” 

The North Dakota conservative freshman is a close ally and fierce defender of Trump. They met Thursday at the White House and speak regularly on the phone about impeachment and other issues. 

A reporter pressed Cramer on why he doesn’t want to hear testimony from Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney or former National Security Adviser John Bolton, both who were close to the events in question but who have resisted testifying.  

Remember: If the House voted to impeach President Trump, it will go to the Senate, which will hold a trial.

Republicans seeking to rebut Wednesday’s hearings with two career diplomats cast aside the event with yawns: They claimed it was boring.

Today’s proceedings could inject more emotion into the impeachment saga. If there is a human face to the Ukraine scandal, it would be Yovanovitch, who was ousted from her post in Kiev after President Trump’s allies launched a campaign to discredit her.

During her closed-door testimony, Yovanovitch recounted the shock she felt at being told to take the first plane home because Trump wanted her out. At one moment she became emotional, and had to leave the room as she recalled her “dismay and disappointment” at the situation.

“Do you want to take a minute?” the Democrats’ attorney, Daniel Goldman, asked her.
“Yeah, just a minute. I’m just going to exit it for one minute,” she said.

When the proceedings began again, Goldman said “we understand this is a difficult and emotional topic, and we thank you for your honest recollection and answers.”

We’re not sure if Yovanovitch will display similar emotion today. She is regarded as a serious career diplomat — one of the highest ranking women in the foreign service — and people who know her say she is tough.

Democrats hope even without moments like the one in the closed hearing, she will come across as the victim of an unfounded smear effort ultimately designed to surface dirt on Trump’s political rivals.

Other potential “victims” of the crimes Democrats are alleging against Trump are more problematic. Even career officials have questioned the propriety of Hunter Biden’s role in Ukraine, even as there remains no evidence of wrongdoing.

That makes Yovanovitch the most compelling voice for what effect Trump’s actions had – and the most personal.

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who was ousted from her post earlier this year, just arrived on Capitol Hill for her testimony.

The hearing, in front of the House Intelligence Committee, will begin at 9 a.m. ET.

Former US Ambassador to the Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who was ousted in April, is scheduled to testify this morning.

She is a career diplomat who was abruptly pulled from Kiev last spring after a personal order from President Trump. He made the decision after a months-long public campaign against Yovanovitch, led by his attorney Rudy Giuliani and others in the right-wing media.

But prepare for Republican pushback: While she might have a compelling story to tell about her personal experience, Yovanovitch wasn’t around for any of the other events that are part of the impeachment inquiry — including Trump’s controversial phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July.

CNN reported that House Republicans are planning to highlight that Yovanovitch doesn’t have firsthand knowledge of Trump’s conversations with Zelensky or his interest in having Ukraine announce investigations into his political rivals, including Biden.

She left her post in May — two months before the critical phone call with Zelensky — and before the Ukrainians learned that there was a holdup in the $391 million package of US military aid.

Today’s impeachment inquiry hearing with Former US Ambassador to the Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch kicks off at 9 a.m. ET.

The format will largely follow that of Wednesday’s hearing — the first public one in the impeachment inquiry.

Here’s a rundown of how we expect this morning to play out:

The next round of public impeachment hearings is scheduled for this morning, with former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch preparing to take center stage.

She is a career diplomat who was abruptly pulled from Kiev last spring after a personal order from President Trump. He made the decision after a months-long public campaign against Yovanovitch, led by his attorney Rudy Giuliani and others in the right-wing media.

Yovanovitch testified behind closed doors last month, but Friday’s public hearing will be different. It’s her first opportunity to tell her side of the story directly to the American people.

Remember: This will be testimony from someone who was under attack. It’s not in dispute that Yovanovitch’s career suffered because of decisions made by Trump and Giuliani.

The former New York City mayor trumpeted discredited allegations against Yovanovitch in his many television appearances, on social media and surely in his conversations with Trump. She blamed these “‘unfounded and false claims’” for her ouster as ambassador, a significant blow to her career, as a lifelong diplomat who had served in many US posts overseas.

Democrats might try to portray her as a sympathetic victim of Giuliani’s schemes. In her private testimony, she said she felt “threatened” and “concerned” by Trump’s comments and actions.

Diplomats Bill Taylor and George Kent testified Wednesday in the first public hearing in the impeachment inquiry into President Trump.

The diplomats testified for nearly six hours before the House Intelligence Committee.

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony today before the committee will be the second public hearing of the impeachment investigation.

Here are the biggest takeaways from Wednesday’s hearing:

A US diplomat who overheard President Trump ask the US Ambassador to the European Union about the status of “investigations” during a cellphone conversation in a Kiev restaurant is set to appear before the House impeachment inquiry behind closed doors today.

David Holmes, the counselor for political affairs at the US Embassy in Ukraine, overheard the conversation between Trump and Gordon Sondland the day after Trump spoke with the Ukrainian president by phone in July, according to testimony Wednesday from Bill Taylor, the top US diplomat in the country.

Taylor did not name Holmes, but sources tell CNN that he is the member of the embassy staff Taylor was referencing.

About Holmes: Holmes is a career foreign service officer who arrived in Ukraine in 2017, according to a source who knows him and describes him as a “sharp guy.” He joined the foreign service in 2002, according to the American Foreign Service Association, and has previously served in Kabul, New Delhi, Kosovo, Bogota, Moscow and Kosovo.

Holmes has also served as a special assistant for South and Central Asia to former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Bill Burns and spent time on the National Security Council staff at the White House as director for Afghanistan from 2011 to 2012.

As political counselor, his main job is to determine what is going on in Ukrainian politics.

The former US ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, testified behind closed doors on Oct. 11 as part of the Democratic-run impeachment inquiry, giving critical information about her time in Ukraine and abrupt removal earlier this year.

In a 10-page statement obtained by The New York Times and The Washington Post, Yovanovitch defended her tenure and decried the “concerted campaign” to recall her from Ukraine, which she said is tied directly to President Donald Trump.

Here’s a breakdown of three crucial lines from her statement:

Victim of “unfounded and false claims”

Trump pressured State Department to remove her

State Department “hollowed out from within”

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch will appear today before the House Intelligence Committee for the second public hearing of the impeachment investigation.

The hearings before the committee look much different than the other major hearings of the last few years, and although there may be slight alterations for each hearing, the impeachment resolution passed last month lays out a baseline structure.

Here’s how it’ll work:

Ambassador Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch will testify today at the second public hearing in the impeachment inquiry into President Trump.

Yovanovitch – “someone who has never been hungry for the spotlight,” as one former State Department official described her – has increasingly found herself there as new developments in the Ukraine controversy have come to light.

But the former top US diplomat in Ukraine, maligned as “bad news” by President Trump and and known by her diplomatic peers as “one of the best,” will share her perspective publicly today on Capitol Hill as part of the impeachment inquiry.

Since being unexpectedly removed from her post in Kiev in May, Yovanovitch has become increasingly ensnared at the center of the widening scandal.

“I would imagine for her this is pretty much worse than her worst nightmare in that not only are you being publicly criticized and condemned by your head of state but also the idea of all of this public attention. She’s a pretty reserved person,” the official told CNN.

Trump personally ordered Yovanovitch’s removal, according to The Wall Street Journal. She was accused without evidence by Rudy Giuliani – a former New York mayor and Trump’s personal attorney – and others of trying to undermine the President and blocking efforts to investigate Democrats like former Vice President Joe Biden.

Trump has twice disparaged Yovanovitch – once in early October at the White House and another time in his July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

“The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that,” Trump said to Zelensky, according to a rough White House transcript.

Diplomatic support: The diplomatic community has rallied behind Yovanovitch since the contents of Trump’s call were disclosed, and some former diplomats have also called for the State Department and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to lend their public support to the career foreign service officer.

Retired US Ambassador Nicholas Burns called for “the higher levels of the State Department” to “come out and defend her.”

“They should say she was a good ambassador, she did what was asked. She did what her constitutional duty asked her to do, represent the United States ably and honorably,” Burns told CNN. “She deserves an apology, a public apology.”