[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 187 (Thursday, November 21, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6729-S6730]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                              Impeachment

  Madam President, now, on some more legislative, Senatorial, 
governmental subjects, the Ambassador to the European Union, Gordon 
Sondland, provided some of the most significant testimony yesterday in 
the House impeachment inquiry to date.
  Ambassador Sondland asserted a ``quid pro quo,'' linking the offer of 
a White House meeting--an official act--in exchange for Ukrainian 
officials' announcing an investigation into Burisma and the 2016 
elections. President Trump tried to rebut that quid pro quo by saying 
he told Sondland on the phone there was no quid pro quo. Donald Trump 
is not known for telling the truth, particularly when his own self-
interest is at stake. So it doesn't stand up very well compared to 
Sondland's words.
  Sondland went on to testify to his understanding that President 
Trump's suspension of military aid to Ukraine was also conditioned on 
the announcement of these same investigations. Those investigations, of 
course, had nothing to do with national security or any other interests 
of the United States. On the contrary, they were solely in President 
Trump's personal, political interests.
  Ambassador Sondland also testified that Secretary Pompeo, Secretary 
Perry, Chief of Staff Mulvaney, and other senior advisers to those 
individuals were well aware of these activities and the connection 
between White House policy and requests from the President to have 
Ukraine announce investigations that would be politically advantageous 
to President Trump.
  Let me repeat: Those individuals I just mentioned--Pompeo, Perry, 
Mulvaney, and a few of their senior advisers--were identified by 
Ambassador Sondland as having information and knowledge of the events 
that are central to this impeachment inquiry. All of them are currently 
refusing to testify, are defying subpoenas from the House of 
Representatives, and, in some cases, are challenging those subpoenas in 
court.
  This morning, I would strongly urge the courts that have jurisdiction 
over these cases to quickly resolve them. The individuals named in 
these subpoenas are fact witnesses in the pending House impeachment 
inquiry. In addition, these officials and others are withholding 
evidence in the form of documents that are, unquestionably, material to 
the impeachment inquiry. Ambassador Sondland's testimony demonstrated 
even more pointedly why it is so essential that the witnesses who have 
been summoned must comply and why the courts should promptly enforce 
House subpoenas in the pending cases.
  When I hear the courts say that in 5 weeks or in 6 weeks, they will 
have court hearings or decisions--I have never practiced in these 
Washington courts; I have a law degree, but I am not a practicing 
lawyer--I don't understand, and I think Americans don't understand why 
the courts take so long when there is such an important issue before 
them. All of the judges have a responsibility to make decisions quickly 
and soon so that if they agree that these people should be compelled to 
testify--and I don't know what the decisions will be--that their 
testimony would be received in a timely manner.
  We have two groups of people at the moment. One group is testifying 
under oath in the House inquiry that there was a ``quid pro quo'' and 
substantial wrongdoing. Another group is denying any wrongdoing but is 
refusing to comply with subpoenas or to testify under oath. If these 
individuals feel they have exculpatory evidence to provide or that the 
testimony provided to the House is incorrect, they should testify under 
oath. Otherwise, the American people will rightly wonder why they 
refuse to do so.
  Let me just repeat what I said in the last few days: If Donald Trump 
tweets away at how wrong these witnesses are, let him come before the 
committee, under oath, and testify to what he tweets. Speaker Pelosi 
has said she would welcome President Trump's coming and testifying. 
President Trump has not been silent on these issues. He has been 
tweeting away--ridiculing the witnesses and saying what they have said 
is wrong. Well, if he is right, has nothing to hide, and wants to 
convince the American people and the House of Representatives, let him 
come under oath and tell his side of the story. When he doesn't come 
under oath--and he can do it tomorrow or in the next few days--the 
American people will ask: Mr. President, what are you hiding? What are 
you not telling the truth about?

[[Page S6730]]