Ukraine call: officials listened in with growing dread
As soon as President Trump put down the receiver in the White House residence, alarm bells rang.
As soon as President Trump put down the receiver in the White House residence, alarm bells rang among the dozen or so officials tuned into the call.
In the situation room of the West Wing, national security staff and intelligence agents had been listening. To the east, in Foggy Bottom, an aide to Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, had also tuned in. Many listening had never wanted the July 25 call to take place.
In the weeks leading up to it, officials working on the Ukraine file had become concerned by an apparent shadow diplomatic effort by Mr Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, to dig for dirt in Ukraine on the president’s political opponents. Mysteriously, the US ambassador to Ukraine was ordered back early and on July 18 the White House told national security agencies that $391 million in military aid to the country had been suspended.
Were the president to speak to his Ukrainian counterpart, officials feared that what they believed to be his intentions would become explicit and he would push Volodymyr Zelensky for dirt on his most likely rival, Joe Biden. The call went ahead and officials took notes and combined them with voice recognition files to make a transcript. They had little doubt it was evidence of abuse of power.
A scramble to conceal the evidence began. Records were removed from the usual electronic file and hidden in a system normally used for classified material with national security implications. One member of the national security council staff characterised the system as holding 0.1 per cent of all council files. The few who needed to see the transcript were given a hand-delivered printed copy. Word reached the ears of an official who would become the whistleblower.
On August 9, having gathered evidence for two weeks, the CIA analyst with expertise in Ukraine who was seconded to the White House brought his concerns to the CIA general counsel, who told the White House.
Concerned the matter would be swept under the carpet, the whistleblower filed a complaint with the intelligence ombudsman, addressed to the bipartisan senators in charge of the intelligence committee, with the understanding that under law the transcript would be provided to them. It was not.
While the ombudsman found the complaint “credible”, it was taken on to the White House, not Congress, on August 26, remaining unknown to senators or the public. Two days later Congress first learned that aid to Ukraine had been suspended. On September 9 a congressional inquiry was opened into the reasons for the suspension.
The same day, the ombudsman informed them of the complaint but kept the details secret, a breach of law that prompted congressional Democrats to issue a subpoena.
On September 18, The Washington Post broke the story that the complaint involved a promise made by Mr Trump to a foreign leader. A day later it emerged that the leader was from Ukraine. At that point the administration dams burst. Detailed accounts emerged, alleging that Mr Trump had asked Mr Zelensky for dirt on Mr Biden in exchange for military aid. On September 22, Mr Trump admitted he had sought dirt and, a day later, disclosed it was he who had suspended military aid.
Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic Speaker of the House, fielded many calls from her party to open an impeachment inquiry. Mr Trump ordered the transcript released. He was stunned when Ms Pelosi announced impeachment proceedings before the transcript even became public.
After the transcript landed, two months since the call took place, the number of Democrats supporting impeachment soared over the House majority needed to impeach. On Thursday, Congress received the whistleblower’s complaint, which they promptly made public.
The Times
Food to eat for better sleep — and what’s keeping you awake
Studies suggest cottage cheese and kiwi fruit can improve your slumber but you might want to swap camomile tea for a camomile bath.
‘Votes in pants’, threats: beauty quest turns ugly
The Miss Pacific Islands beauty contest has ended in uproar and death threats after judges were banned from flying home because of a police investigation into claims of pageant fixing.