Nov 25, 2019

Report: WH review finds Mulvaney sought to justify blocking Ukraine aid

Mick Mulvaney. Photo: Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

A confidential internal review found White House acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney asked budget office officials for an "after-the-fact justification" for withholding aid to Ukraine, the Washington Post first reported Sunday.

Why it matters: The issue of blocking almost $400 million in military aid to Ukraine is central to the impeachment inquiry, as House investigators examine allegations that President Trump ordered the move to press for Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son. Trump denies any wrongdoing.

Details: The WashPost and New York Times report that the records review by the White House Counsel’s Office discovered that Mulvaney asked in an August email after Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky "whether there was a legal justification" for the move and for how long the military aid could be withheld.

  • The office examined hundreds of documents as part of its investigation, launched after House Democrats announced in September the impeachment inquiry, according to the Post. Per the news outlet:
"One person briefed on the records examination said White House lawyers are expressing concern that the review has turned up some unflattering exchanges and facts that could at a minimum embarrass the president. It’s unclear whether the Mulvaney discussions or other records pose any legal problems for Trump in the impeachment inquiry, but some fear they could pose political problems if revealed publicly."

What they're saying: Rachel Semmel, a budget office spokesperson, said in a statement to the WashPost and Times, "To be clear, there was a legal consensus at every step of the way that the money could be withheld in order to conduct the policy review. OMB works closely with agencies on executing the budget. Routine practices and procedures were followed."

The big picture: Trump has said he ordered withholding the aid to Ukraine so that European nations would contribute. He maintains there was no quid pro quo in his request to Zelensky to open an investigation into the Bidens.

  • Fiona Hill, Trump's former top Russia adviser, testified during last Thursday's impeachment hearing that Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the EU, had a "deal" with Mulvaney to engage in a quid pro quo with Ukraine using a coveted White House visit.
  • A lawyer for Mulvaney issued a statement casting doubt on Hill's testimony, which he called "speculative."

Go deeper:

Go deeper

Mulvaney denies Fiona Hill testimony tying him to Ukraine scheme

Photo: Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post via Getty Images

A lawyer for White House acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney released a statement Thursday casting doubt on the testimony of former top Russia adviser Fiona Hill, who told investigators that EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland had a "deal" with Mulvaney to engage in a quid pro quo with Ukraine using a coveted White House visit.

Why it matters: Sondland testified that he kept Mulvaney and a number of other top administration officials apprised of his efforts to push Ukraine to announce investigations into the Bidens and the 2016 election. Mulvaney himself admitted at a press conference in October that Trump conditioned military assistance to Ukraine on the announcement of the 2016 investigation, before later walking it back.

Go deeperArrowNov 21, 2019

House panel accuses OMB of "pattern of abuse" with Ukraine aid freeze

House Budget Chair John Yarmuth. Photo: Caroline Brehman/CQ Roll Call

House Democrats accused the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on Tuesday of engaging in a "pattern of abuse" by unlawfully freezing nearly $400 million in Ukraine aid, an allegation now at the heart of the impeachment inquiry, Politico reports.

Driving the news: A report released by the House Budget and Appropriations committees outlines a timeline of the aid being withheld, with the first official OMB action to halt the aid coming on the evening of July 25 — hours after President Trump's now-infamous phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Go deeperArrowNov 26, 2019

Why the missing testimony from the impeachment inquiry matters

As impeachment moves into its next phase, House Democrats lack testimony from major players in the Trump administration about allegations that the president withheld military aid and a coveted White House meeting to pressure Ukraine into investigating his domestic political rivals.

Go deeperArrowDec 5, 2019