Excerpts from Joint Deposition Gordon Sondland United States Ambassador to the European Union Conducted on October 17, 2019 House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence House Committee on Oversight and Reform House Committee on Foreign Affairs
“
You know, this whole thing was sort of a continuum, starting at the May 23rd meeting, ending up at the end of the line when the transcript of the call came out. And as I said to counsel, it started as talk to Rudy, then others talk to Rudy. Corruption was mentioned. Then, as time went on
—and, again, I can’t nail down the dates—then let’s get the Ukrainians to give a statement about corruption. And then, no, corruption isn’t enough, we need to talk about the 2016 election
and the Burisma investigations. And it was always described to me as ongoing investigations that had been stopped by the previous administration and they wanted them started up again.
That’s how it was always described. And then finally at some point I made the Biden
-Burisma connectio
n, and then the transcript was released. So I can’t tell you on that continuum when, what dates, but that’s kind of what happened.” “
It kept
—
it kept getting more insidious as [the] timeline went on, and back in July, it was all about just corruption.
”
2
During an Oval Office meeting on May 23, 2019, with Ambassador Sondland, Ambassador
Volker, and Secretary Perry, President Trump “just kept saying: Talk to Rudy, talk to Rudy.” (Page 61
-62)
Q: When President Trump told you to
—
you and the others, I understand, everyone at
that meeting, and we’ll get to that meeting in more detail—
but when he told you to discuss with Rudy Giuliani concerns about Ukraine, did you know at that point what he was referring to? A:
He didn’t even—he wasn’t even specific about what he wanted us to talk to
Giuliani about. He just kept saying: Talk to Rudy, talk to Rudy. Q:
Right, I understand that, and I understand he wasn’t specific. But when he said
that, did you know what he was talking about? A:
I didn’t
, other than he said: Ukraine is a problem.
State Department officials were
“fully aware of
the
issues”
with
Mr. Giuliani, but “there
was very little they could do about it if the President decided he wanted his lawyer
involved.” (Page 356
-358)
Q: Did you ever discuss Rudy Giuliani with Secretary Pompeo? A: Only in general terms. Q: And what did you discuss? A:
That he’s involved in affairs. And Pompeo rolled his eyes and said: Yes, it’s
something we have to deal with. Q: What about his counselor, Ulrich Brechbuhl? You said you had lots of conversations with Mr. Brechbuhl? A: On and off, yes. Q: Did you discuss the linkage between the security assistance, the White House meeting, and the investigations with him? A:
I don’t believe I did, but I don’t recall.
Q: What about Rudy Giuliani, did you discuss Giuliani with Brechbuhl? A: I may have. Again,
people usually smiled when they heard Rudy’s name because
he was always swirling around somewhere. Q: Yeah, but, I mean, he was causing serious issues in the U.S. relationship with Ukraine. Did you raise those concerns with
—
A: Listen, the State Department was fully aware of the issues, and there was very little they could do about it if the President decided he wanted his lawyer involved. Q: And does that include Secretary Pompeo and his counselor, Ulrich Brechbuhl? A: My speculation is yes, that they hit a brick wall when it came to getting rid of Mr. Giuliani.
Mr. Giuliani
’s demands “kept getting more insidious”
as Ambassador Sondland “
became aware that there might be a link between the White House visit and aid to the Ukraine that was being held up
.”
(Page 91-92, 240, 253-254)
Q: When did you first get an inkling of what Mr. Giuliani was interested in?
3 A: You know, this whole thing was sort of a continuum, starting at the May
23rd meeting, ending up at the end of the line when the transcript of the call came out. And as I said to counsel, it started as talk to Rudy, then others talk to Rudy. Corruption was mentioned. Then, as time went on
—and, again, I can’t nail down
the dates
—
t
hen let’s get the Ukrainians to give a statement about corruption. And then, no, corruption isn’t enough, we need to talk about the 2016 election and the
Burisma investigations. And it was always described to me as ongoing investigations that had been stopped by the previous administration and they
wanted them started up again. That’s how it was always described. And then
finally at some point I made the Biden-Burisma connection, and then the
transcript was released. So I can’t tell you on that continu
um when, what dates,
but that’s kind of what happened. …
Because the first time I recall hearing about 2016 and Burisma was during the
negotiations of the press statement. Again, unless there’s some text that I’ve
completely have [sic] forgotten about,
that’s when I first remember getting into
those issues. It was always just about corruption prior to that. It kept
—
it kept getting more insidious as [the] timeline went on, and back in July, it was all about just corruption.
…
The continuum was, first of all, an unconditional phone call and an unconditional invitation to the White House, and then I believe the next part of the continuum was some kind of a commitment to investigate corruption generally. And then the next part of the continuum was talking about the Burisma and the 2016 election, which as I recall, was heavily discussed during the negotiation of the short-lived press statement, which only lasted a few days, and then it died. And then at the end of that continuum I became aware that there might be a link between the
White House visit and aid to the Ukraine that was being held up when I couldn’t
get a straight answer as to why the aid was being held up, both Senator Johnson and Ambassador Taylor raised the possibility that there might be a link. And then the aid was released, and then this whole thing blew up.
That’s the best I can
recall the sort of progression.
With respect to the
“demands” made by
President Trump and Rudy Giuliani to investigate the 2016 election and Burisma
, “
those conditions would have to be complied with prior to getting a meeting
.”
(Page 280, 282-283)
Q:
There were demands, weren’t there, that an investigation take place of 2016 or
Burisma? Ultimately those were demands, were they not? A: Ultimately, yes. Q:
And it’s fair to say that you had to navigate those demands, you had to
accommodate what the President and his lawyer wanted, if you were going to set up this meeting you thought very important? A:
I think that’s fair. …