web analytics



Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.


Call For Free 15/M Consultation



Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "Giuliani, Rudolph W"

Trump Fires Berman After Tensions Rose Over Inquiries

Westlake Legal Group trump-fires-berman-after-tensions-rose-over-inquiries Trump Fires Berman After Tensions Rose Over Inquiries United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Politics and Government Manhattan (NYC) Justice Department Giuliani, Rudolph W Cohen, Michael D (1966- ) Berman, Geoffrey S Barr, William P

President Trump on Saturday personally fired the United States Attorney in Manhattan, Geoffrey S. Berman, whose office has pursued one case after another that has rankled the president and his allies, putting his former personal lawyer in prison and investigating his current one.

It was the culmination of an extraordinary clash after years of tension between the White House and New York federal prosecutors.

In a statement, Attorney General William P. Barr said Mr. Berman, who had refused to step down from his position on Friday night, had “chosen public spectacle over public service.”

“Because you have declared that you have no intention of resigning, I have asked the President to remove you as of today, and he has done so,” the statement read. Mr. Barr said Mr. Berman’s top deputy, Audrey Strauss, would become the acting United States Attorney.

A spokesman for the office said Mr. Berman would not immediately comment. The dismissal of Mr. Berman came after his office brought a series of highly sensitive cases that worried and angered Mr. Trump and others in his inner circle.

First, there was the arrest and prosecution in 2018 of Michael D. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s longtime legal fixer. Then, there was the indictment last year of a state-owned bank in Turkey with political connections that had drawn the president’s attention. More recently, the Manhattan prosecutors launched an inquiry into Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer and one of his most ardent supporters.

These simmering tensions finally erupted Friday night in the most public fashion possible as Mr. Barr suddenly announced that Mr. Berman was stepping down — only to discover two hours later that Mr. Berman had made his own announcement: that he was going nowhere.

Given the number of sore spots between the feuding agencies, it remained unclear precisely what prompted Mr. Barr to seek Mr. Berman’s removal well after nightfall at the start of a summer weekend. At least two of the politically sensitive cases — involving the Turkish bank and Mr. Giuliani — remain ongoing.

Throughout the day on Saturday, many current and former employees of the Southern District of New York, as the Manhattan prosecutors’ office is formally known, marveled at just how sour relations with their colleagues in Washington had gotten. Some worried openly that the move threatened the independence of federal prosecutors.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_173591163_60d3f989-ca0f-4119-a895-c287fd841ce9-articleLarge Trump Fires Berman After Tensions Rose Over Inquiries United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Politics and Government Manhattan (NYC) Justice Department Giuliani, Rudolph W Cohen, Michael D (1966- ) Berman, Geoffrey S Barr, William P
Credit…Doug Mills/The New York Times

“While there have always been turf battles between the Southern District and the Justice Department in Washington, and occasionally sharp elbows, to take someone out suddenly while they’re investigating the president’s lawyer, it is just unprecedented in modern times,” said David Massey, a defense attorney, who served as a Southern District prosecutor for nearly a decade.

A spokesman for the office said Mr. Berman would not immediately comment.

The struggle over Mr. Berman came amid a broader purge of administration officials, one that has intensified in the months since the Republican-led Senate acquitted Mr. Trump at an impeachment trial. Since the beginning of the year, the president has fired or forced out inspectors general with independent oversight over executive branch agencies and other key figures from the trial.

But the attempt to remove Mr. Berman unfolded with particularly dizzying speed and seemed to take even several of the participants aback.

On Friday, Mr. Barr came to New York to meet with senior New York Police Department officials and, after nearly a month of public protests, to talk with them about “policing issues that have been at the forefront of national conversation and debate,” according to a Justice Department news release.

When he later met with Mr. Berman, according to two people familiar with the conversation, Mr. Barr suggested that Mr. Berman could take over the civil division of the Justice Department if he agreed to leave his position in Manhattan.

But Mr. Berman declined, and Mr. Barr quickly moved to fire him, announcing his decision in a highly unusual late-night Justice Department news release. Hours later, Mr. Berman issued a counterstatement denying he was leaving.

“I have not resigned, and have no intention of resigning, my position,” Mr. Berman’s statement said. He added that he had learned of Mr. Barr’s actions only from the news release.

In one sign that Mr. Barr’s efforts may have been hastily arranged, even the man poised to take Mr. Berman’s place, Jay Clayton, the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, appeared to be caught off guard.

Mr. Clayton, who is friendly with Mr. Trump and has golfed with the president at his club in Bedminster, N.J., had recently signaled to his friends that he wanted to return to his home in New York City and was interested in Mr. Berman’s job.

Still, Mr. Clayton sent an email to his staff on Thursday saying that he looked forward to seeing them in person, once work-at-home restrictions that had been put in place because of the coronavirus could be lifted. The email offered no indication that Mr. Clayton was planning to leave the S.E.C., according to a person briefed on it.

Just after midnight on Saturday, Mr. Clayton sent another email to his employees, telling them about his new position. “Pending confirmation,” he wrote, “I will remain fully committed to the work of the commission and the supportive community we have built,” according to a copy reviewed by The New York Times.

Mr. Clayton could not be reached for comment.

Before Mr. Barr released his statement, Mr. Berman pointedly showed up to work on Saturday, arriving at his office in Lower Manhattan carrying a brown leather briefcase and clad in a blue suit. He was met outside the squat gray concrete building by a handful of photographers and television crews. “I’m just here to do my job,” he said, before walking inside.

Under Mr. Trump, the Justice Department has long believed that the Southern District was out of control. In no small part that was because prosecutors delayed in warning their colleagues in Washington that they were naming name Mr. Trump — as “Individual-1” — in court documents in the Cohen prosecution.

When Mr. Barr became attorney general, officials in the deputy attorney general’s office, which oversees regional prosecutors, asked him to rein in Mr. Berman, who they believed was exacerbating the Southern District’s propensity for autonomy. The office has embraced its nickname the “Sovereign District” of New York because of its tradition of independence.

One particular point of contention was the question of how Mr. Berman and his staff should investigate Halkbank, a Turkish state-owned bank that the office indicted last year, according to one department and two current lawyers.

In a new book, John Bolton, Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, wrote that Mr. Trump had promised the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in 2018 that he would intervene in the investigation of the bank, which had been accused of violating sanctions against Iran.

Then there was the inquiry into Mr. Giuliani, which has focused on whether he violated laws on lobbying for foreign entities in his efforts to dig up dirt in Ukraine on the president’s political rivals. That probe began after Mr. Berman’s office brought indictments against two of Mr. Giuliani’s close associates.

Mr. Trump has told advisers he was pleased with the move to dismiss Mr. Berman, and a person close to the president described it as a long time coming.

Mr. Trump has been dissatisfied with Mr. Berman, despite choosing him for the post himself, going back to 2018. That year, he told the acting attorney general at the time, Matthew G. Whitaker, that he was frustrated that Mr. Berman had been recused from the case against Mr. Cohen and wanted him to somehow undo it.

A Republican who contributed to the president’s campaign and worked at the same law firm as Mr. Giuliani, Mr. Berman maintains that the Justice Department cannot fire him because of the way he came into his job.

Credit…Anna Moneymaker/The New York Times

Last year, Mr. Barr considered replacing Mr. Berman with Edward O’Callaghan, a top Justice Department official and a former Southern District prosecutor, according to people familiar with the matter. The plan fell through, however, in part because of the complex legal issues around how Mr. Berman was appointed.

In another potential issue, ousting Mr. Berman last year could have looked like retaliation after his office secured an indictment against the two associates of Mr. Giuliani, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Mr. Barr’s attempt to fire Mr. Berman got pushback on Saturday from an unexpected source: Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and a close ally of Mr. Trump.

Mr. Graham, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee — the body that would approve Mr. Clayton’s nomination — suggested in a statement that he would allow New York’s two Democratic senators to thwart the nomination through a procedural maneuver. He complimented Mr. Clayton but noted that he had not heard from the administration about any formal plans to name him.

Senator Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader, urged Mr. Clayton to withdraw his name from consideration for the post and called for an investigation into the decision to dismiss Mr. Berman.

The move to push Mr. Berman out echoed Mr. Barr’s decision earlier this year to remove Jessie K. Liu from her role as the U.S. attorney in Washington, after Mr. Trump’s allies complained to the president and the attorney general that she was not sufficiently loyal.

Benjamin Weiser and Deborah Solomon contributed reporting.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump’s Aggressive Advocacy of Malaria Drug for Treating Coronavirus Divides Medical Community

Westlake Legal Group trumps-aggressive-advocacy-of-malaria-drug-for-treating-coronavirus-divides-medical-community Trump’s Aggressive Advocacy of Malaria Drug for Treating Coronavirus Divides Medical Community United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Hydroxychloroquine (Drug) Giuliani, Rudolph W Food and Drug Administration Fauci, Anthony S Drugs (Pharmaceuticals) Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)
Westlake Legal Group 06dc-virus-drug-facebookJumbo Trump’s Aggressive Advocacy of Malaria Drug for Treating Coronavirus Divides Medical Community United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Hydroxychloroquine (Drug) Giuliani, Rudolph W Food and Drug Administration Fauci, Anthony S Drugs (Pharmaceuticals) Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

WASHINGTON — President Trump made a rare appearance in the Situation Room on Sunday as his pandemic task force was meeting, determined to talk about the anti-malaria medicine that he has aggressively promoted lately as a treatment for the coronavirus.

Once again, according to a person briefed on the session, the experts warned against overselling a drug yet to be proved a safe remedy, particularly for heart patients. “Yes, the heart stuff,” Mr. Trump acknowledged. Then he headed out to the cameras to promote it anyway. “So what do I know?” he conceded to reporters at his daily briefing. “I’m not a doctor. But I have common sense.”

Day after day, the salesman turned president has encouraged coronavirus patients to try hydroxychloroquine with all of the enthusiasm of a real estate developer. The passing reference he makes to the possible dangers is usually overwhelmed by the full-throated endorsement. “What do you have to lose?” he asked five times on Sunday.

Bolstered by his trade adviser, a television doctor, Larry Ellison of Oracle and Rudolph W. Giuliani, a former New York mayor, Mr. Trump has seized on the drug as a miracle cure for the virus that has killed thousands and paralyzed American life. Along the way, he has prompted an international debate about a drug that many doctors in New York and elsewhere have been trying in desperation even without conclusive scientific studies.

Mr. Trump may ultimately be right, and physicians report anecdotal evidence that has provided hope. But it remains far from certain, and the president’s assertiveness in pressing the case over the advice of advisers like Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the government’s top infectious disease specialist, has driven a wedge inside his coronavirus task force and has raised questions about his motives.

If hydroxychloroquine becomes an accepted treatment, several pharmaceutical companies stand to profit, including shareholders and senior executives with connections to the president. Mr. Trump himself has a small personal financial interest in Sanofi, the French drugmaker that makes Plaquenil, the brand-name version of hydroxychloroquine.

“I certainly understand why the president is pushing it,” said Dr. Joshua Rosenberg, the medical director at Brooklyn Hospital Center. “He’s the president of the United States. He has to project hope. And when you are in a situation without hope, things go very badly. So I’m not faulting him for pushing it even if there isn’t a lot of science behind it, because it is, at this point, the best, most available option for use.”

A senior physician at Wyckoff Heights Medical Center in Brooklyn, where doctors are not providing the drug, however, said the current demand was worrisome for patients on it chronically for rheumatic diseases. At St. Barnabas Hospital in the Bronx, another doctor said his staff was giving it to coronavirus patients but criticized the president and Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo for “cheerleading” the drug without proof. “False hope can be bad, too,” he said.

The professional organization that published a positive French study cited by Mr. Trump’s allies changed its mind in recent days. The International Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy said, “The article does not meet the society’s expected standard.” Some hospitals in Sweden stopped providing hydroxychloroquine to treat the coronavirus after reports of adverse side effects, according to Swedish news media.

But Mr. Cuomo told reporters on Monday that he would ask Mr. Trump to increase the federal supply of hydroxychloroquine to New York pharmacies, allowing the state to lift a limit on purchases. “There has been anecdotal evidence that it is promising,” Mr. Cuomo said, while noting the lack of a formal study.

#styln-briefing-block { font-family: nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif; background-color: #F3F3F3; padding: 20px; margin: 0 auto; border-radius: 5px; color: #121212; box-sizing: border-box; width: calc(100% – 40px); } #styln-briefing-block a { color: #121212; } #styln-briefing-block a.briefing-block-link { color: #121212; border-bottom: 1px solid #cccccc; font-size: 0.9375rem; line-height: 1.375rem; } #styln-briefing-block a.briefing-block-link:hover { border-bottom: none; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-bullet::before { content: ‘•’; margin-right: 7px; color: #333; font-size: 12px; margin-left: -13px; top: -2px; position: relative; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-bullet:not(:last-child) { margin-bottom: 0.75em; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-header { font-weight: 700; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 16px; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-header a { text-decoration: none; color: #333; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-footer { font-size: 14px; margin-top: 1.25em; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-briefinglinks { padding-top: 1em; margin-top: 1.75em; border-top: 1px solid #E2E2E3; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-briefinglinks a { font-weight: bold; margin-right: 6px; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-footer a { border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-footer a:hover { border-bottom: 1px solid transparent; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-header { border-bottom: none; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-lb-items { display: grid; grid-template-columns: auto 1fr; grid-column-gap: 20px; grid-row-gap: 15px; line-height: 1.2; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-update-time a { color: #999; font-size: 12px; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-update-time.active a { color: #D0021B; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-footer-meta { display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-footer-ts { color: #999; font-size: 11px; } @media only screen and (min-width: 600px) { #styln-briefing-block { padding: 30px; width: calc(100% – 40px); max-width: 600px; } #styln-briefing-block a.briefing-block-link { font-size: 1.0625rem; line-height: 1.5rem; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-bullet::before { content: ‘•’; margin-right: 10px; color: #333; font-size: 12px; margin-left: -15px; top: -2px; position: relative; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-header { font-size: 17px; } #styln-briefing-block .briefing-block-update-time a { font-size: 13px; } } @media only screen and (min-width: 1024px) { #styln-briefing-block { width: 100%; }

Mr. Trump first expressed interest in hydroxychloroquine a few weeks ago, telling associates that Mr. Ellison, a billionaire and a founder of Oracle, had discussed it with him. At the time, Dr. Mehmet Oz, the host of television’s “The Doctor Oz Show,” was in touch with Mr. Trump’s advisers about expediting approval to use the drug for the coronavirus.

Mr. Giuliani has urged Mr. Trump to embrace the drug, based in part on the advice of Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, a self-described simple country doctor who has become a hit on conservative media after administering a cocktail of hydroxychloroquine, the antibiotic azithromycin and zinc sulfate.

In an interview on Monday, Mr. Giuliani denied any financial stake and said he spoke with Mr. Trump only after the president had already promoted the drug publicly. Mr. Giuliani said he turned to the issue after researching former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in Ukraine, a project that led to the president’s impeachment.

“When I finished Biden, I immediately switched to coronavirus and I have been doing an enormous amount of research on it,” he said. As it happened, Dr. Zelenko was born in Ukraine, and when they first spoke, Mr. Giuliani accidentally called him “Dr. Zelensky,” mixing up his name with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

Mr. Giuliani said he brought a prosecutor’s experience to his research. “One of the things that a good litigator becomes, is you kind of become an instant expert on stuff, and then you forget about it,” he said. “I don’t claim to be a doctor. I just repeat what they said.”

The Food and Drug Administration, which has approved hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for malaria and lupus, issued an emergency order late last month allowing doctors to administer it to coronavirus patients if they saw fit. Mr. Trump said the federal government would distribute 29 million doses and that he had called Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India requesting more.

Dr. Fauci made his concern clear last week. “I think we’ve got to be careful that we don’t make that majestic leap to assume that this is a knockout drug,” he said on Friday on Fox News. “We still need to do the kinds of studies that definitively prove whether any intervention, not just this one, any intervention is truly safe and effective.”

The same day, Laura Ingraham, a Fox host, visited Mr. Trump at the White House with two doctors who had been on her program promoting hydroxychloroquine, one of whom made a presentation on its virtues, according to an official, confirming a Washington Post report.

The next day, Peter Navarro, the president’s trade adviser, who has been assigned to expedite production of medical equipment and become an advocate of the drug, upbraided Dr. Fauci at a White House task force meeting, according to people informed about the discussion.

Mr. Navarro arrived at the meeting armed with a thick sheaf of papers recounting research. When the issue was raised, according to a person informed about the meeting, confirming a report by Axios, Mr. Navarro picked it up off a chair, dropped it on the table and started handing out copies.

Mr. Navarro, who earned a doctorate in economics from Harvard, defended his position on Monday despite his lack of medical credentials. “Doctors disagree about things all the time. My qualifications in terms of looking at the science is that I’m a social scientist,” he said on CNN. “I have a Ph.D. And I understand how to read statistical studies, whether it’s in medicine, the law, economics or whatever.”

Mr. Trump made clear on Sunday whose side he took in Mr. Navarro’s confrontation with Dr. Fauci. At his briefing after the meeting, he said it was wrong to wait for the kind of study Dr. Fauci wanted. “We don’t have time,” the president said. “We don’t have two hours because there are people dying right now.”

Some associates of Mr. Trump’s have financial interests in the issue. Sanofi’s largest shareholders include Fisher Asset Management, the mutual fund company run by Ken Fisher, a major donor to Republicans, including Mr. Trump. A spokesman for Mr. Fisher declined to comment.

Another investor in both Sanofi and Mylan, another pharmaceutical firm, is Invesco, the fund previously run by Wilbur Ross, the commerce secretary. Mr. Ross said in a statement Monday that he “was not aware that Invesco has any investments in companies producing” the drug, “nor do I have any involvement in the decision to explore this as a treatment.”

As of last year, Mr. Trump reported that his three family trusts each had investments in a Dodge & Cox mutual fund, whose largest holding was in Sanofi.

Several generic drugmakers are gearing up to produce hydroxychloroquine pills, including Amneal Pharmaceuticals, whose co-founder Chirag Patel is a member of Trump National Golf Course Bedminster in New Jersey and has golfed with Mr. Trump at least twice since he became president, according to a person who saw them.

Mr. Patel, whose company is based in Bridgewater, N.J., did not respond to a request for comment. Amneal announced last month that it would increase production of the drug and donate millions of pills to New York and other states. Other generic drugmakers are ramping up production, including Mylan and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries.

Roberto Mignone, a Teva board member, reached out to the team of Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser, through Nitin Saigal, who used to work for Mr. Mignone and is a friend of Mr. Kushner’s, according to people informed about the discussions.

Mr. Kushner’s team referred him to the White House task force and Mr. Mignone asked for help getting India to ease export restrictions, which have since been relaxed, allowing Teva to bring more pills into the United States. Mr. Mignone, who is also a vice chairman of NYU Langone Health, which is running a clinical study of hydroxychloroquine, confirmed on Monday that he has spoken with the administration about getting more medicine into the country.

Dr. Daniel H. Sterman, the critical care director at NYU Langone Health, said doctors there are using hydroxychloroquine, but data about its effectiveness remained “weak and unsubstantiated” pending the study. “We do not know whether our patients are benefiting from hydroxychloroquine treatment at the present time,” he said.

New York City’s Health and Hospitals Corporation, which runs its public hospitals, is advising but not requiring doctors to use hydroxychloroquine based on a trial showing a decreased cough and fever with mild side effects in two patients, Dr. Mitchell Katz, who oversees the hospital system, said by email on Monday.

Dr. Roy M. Gulick, the chief of infectious diseases at Weill Cornell Medicine, said hydroxychloroquine was given on a case-by-case basis. “We explain the pros and cons and explain that we don’t know if it works or not,” he said.

Doctors at Northwell Health and Mount Sinai Health System are using it as well. At the Mount Sinai South Nassau County branch on Long Island, doctors have employed a regimen of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin “pretty much since day one” with mixed results, said Dr. Adhi Sharma, its chief medical officer.

“We’ve been throwing the kitchen sink at these patients,” he said. “I can’t tell whether someone got better on their own or because of the medication.”

Peter Baker and Katie Rogers reported from Washington, and David Enrich and Maggie Haberman from New York. Reporting was contributed by Kenneth P. Vogel from Washington, and Jesse Drucker, Sheri Fink, Joseph Goldstein, Jesse McKinley, William K. Rashbaum, Brian M. Rosenthal, Michael Rothfeld and Michael Schwirtz from New York.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Milken Had Key Allies in Pardon Bid: Trump’s Inner Circle

Westlake Legal Group 00milken01-facebookJumbo Milken Had Key Allies in Pardon Bid: Trump’s Inner Circle Securities and Commodities Violations Mnuchin, Steven T Milken, Michael R Milken Institute High Net Worth Individuals Giuliani, Rudolph W Drexel Burnham Lambert Inc Amnesties, Commutations and Pardons Adelson, Sheldon G

Michael Milken, a symbol of 1980s greed who went to prison for securities fraud and conspiracy, was at home in Encino, Calif., on Feb. 18 when he got a phone call from the White House. President Trump was on the line with good news: Mr. Milken had been pardoned.

Mr. Milken hung up, got in his car and drove to the home of his 96-year-old mother, Ferne Milken, according to Geoffrey Moore, Mr. Milken’s spokesman. When he shared the news, his mother burst into tears.

The presidential pardon “was a complete surprise,” Mr. Moore said. During the phone call, Mr. Trump claimed that the pardon was his idea and was based entirely on Mr. Milken’s philanthropic work, Mr. Moore said.

In fact, the pardon was the climax of a decades-long campaign on Mr. Milken’s behalf. And it was hardly a spontaneous gesture by a president acting alone. In announcing the pardon, the White House took the unusual step of releasing the names of 33 people who it said had provided “widespread and longstanding support” for pardoning Mr. Milken.

Mr. Milken appears to have benefited from the help of people — including Rudolph W. Giuliani, now the president’s personal lawyer, and Steven Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary — who have close relationships with Mr. Trump and Mr. Milken.

Among them was the billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. Mr. Adelson and his wife, Miriam, are Mr. Trump’s largest donors by far, having given his campaigns more than $35 million, and plan to give even more to help him get re-elected. Both Mr. Adelson and his wife are on the White House list of Milken pardon supporters.

Mr. Adelson has a long history with Mr. Milken. During the 1980s, Mr. Milken’s firm helped raise money to finance the construction of Mr. Adelson’s Sands Exposition Center in Las Vegas. More recently, Mr. Adelson gave $20 million to Ariel University, the Israeli school in the heart of the occupied West Bank, where the main campus is named after the Milken family. (Mr. Adelson “contacted no one” on Mr. Milken’s behalf, a spokesman for Mr. Adelson said.)

Only two of the people on the White House list appear to have no financial or personal ties to either Mr. Milken or Mr. Trump.

“We haven’t seen the fruits of the process so totally captured by the rich and well-connected as we do here,” said Margaret Love, the head of the pardon office in the Justice Department during parts of the George Bush and Bill Clinton administrations.

After he was released from prison in 1993, Mr. Milken sought to transform his image from Wall Street felon to generous philanthropist. He remained enormously wealthy from his days as a pioneering financier, and he bankrolled a wide range of charitable endeavors, including medical research. His medical expertise and connections have made him a go-to person for prominent people battling cancer. He also created the Milken Institute, a think tank that hosts conferences that have become a see-and-be-seen gatherings for the world’s most famous business, political and academic leaders.

At the same time, he and his associates sought a presidential pardon, courting Democrats and Republicans.

President Clinton reportedly came close to pardoning Mr. Milken in the waning days of his presidency, but didn’t after an outcry from Justice Department officials.

During the George W. Bush administration, Mr. Milken submitted a formal petition for a pardon with the Justice Department. President Bush denied it on the last full day of his term in January 2009.

Mr. Bush later wrote in his autobiography that he had been “disgusted” by the jockeying for pardons by people with connections who pulled strings for their friends and wealthy benefactors. “I came to see massive injustice in the system,” Mr. Bush wrote, without naming any individuals. “If you had connections to the president, you could insert your case into the last-minute frenzy.”

When Mr. Trump was elected, the efforts to win a pardon for Mr. Milken gained new traction. There was a confluence of Trump backers who were supporters of Mr. Milken, and Mr. Milken had relationships with people close to Mr. Trump. Some urged the president to pardon Mr. Milken.

“Milken and I are good friends now, and I believe Milken is an excellent candidate for a pardon,” Mr. Giuliani told the Fox News host Sean Hannity on Nov. 10, 2016, less than 48 hours after Mr. Trump’s electoral triumph.

“Wow,” Mr. Hannity said.

The endorsement was notable in part because Mr. Giuliani, as the United States attorney for Manhattan in the 1980s, had presided over the investigation of Mr. Milken. The two men later became close, bonding over Mr. Milken’s financial support for research into prostate cancer, which both men had battled.

Mr. Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary, also supported a pardon, according to people familiar with the effort. Mr. Mnuchin has known Mr. Milken for years, and he flew last year on Mr. Milken’s private jet. Mr. Mnuchin has been a speaker at the Milken Institute’s conference. He also spoke at a Milken-sponsored event at the Hamptons home of the billionaire real estate magnate Richard LeFrak, a longtime friend of Mr. Trump’s whom the White House identified as supporting the pardon.

Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law and adviser, also supported a presidential pardon. Mr. Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, have had prominent speaking platforms at Milken Institute gatherings.

This time Mr. Milken didn’t file a petition with the Justice Department, and his supporters also bypassed it, going directly to the White House.

When Mr. Trump announced the pardon on Feb. 18, the White House played down Mr. Milken’s crimes, calling the federal charges against him “novel” and asserting that he pleaded guilty in 1990 only to spare his younger brother, Lowell Milken, from prosecution. Mr. Milken’s spokesman has made similar claims in the past. The White House declined to comment on the record.

To bolster the case for the pardon, the White House emphasized the list of people who had supported clemency. Some of the people on the list hadn’t realized their names would be made public although they supported the pardon, according to people familiar with their thinking.

In addition to Mr. Mnuchin and Mr. Giuliani, the list included other members of the Trump administration, major Trump donors and people who did business with Mr. Milken.

During his heyday at Drexel, Mr. Milken raised billions of dollars for others on the list, including Ray Irani when he ran Occidental Petroleum and the media magnate Rupert Murdoch, another prostate cancer survivor with whom Mr. Milken remains close. Mr. Murdoch, whose company owns Fox News, is one of Mr. Trump’s confidantes.

Nearly everyone on the list has converged at the Milken Institute’s annual conferences, a networking opportunity that rivals the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

The Fox Business anchor Maria Bartiromo broadcast her show live from the event in 2015, and in 2017 she interviewed Mr. Mnuchin there. Ms. Bartiromo, whom Mr. Trump has praised as “fantastic,” was included on the list.

Ms. Bartiromo said on air the day after the pardon was announced that she had spoken to Mr. Trump and lobbied him to pardon Mr. Milken.

Nelson Peltz, the activist investor and an early client of Mr. Milken, raised more than $10 million for the president’s re-election campaign at an event this month at his Palm Beach, Fla., estate.

Other Trump donors on the list include Robert Kraft, the New England Patriots owner; the billionaire hedge fund manager John Paulson; and several prominent real estate developers.

Two others — Joshua Harris, a founder of the buyout firm Apollo Global Management, and Gary Winnick, a co-founder of Pacific Capital Group — both worked for Mr. Milken at Drexel Burnham Lambert in the 1980s.

One of the few Milken supporters named by the White House who have no significant financial or personal ties to Mr. Milken or Mr. Trump is David Bahnsen, an investment adviser, who wrote an unsolicited letter seeking a Milken pardon to the White House in 2017.

But even he has White House connections. Mr. Trump’s top economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, is “one of my best friends,” Mr. Bahnsen said.

Maggie Haberman and Karen Yourish contributed reporting.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Beyond the Partisan Fight, a Wealth of Evidence About Trump and Ukraine

Westlake Legal Group 04dc-evidence1-facebookJumbo Beyond the Partisan Fight, a Wealth of Evidence About Trump and Ukraine Zelensky, Volodymyr Yovanovitch, Marie L United States Politics and Government United States International Relations Ukraine Trump, Donald J Trump-Ukraine Whistle-Blower Complaint and Impeachment Inquiry Shokin, Viktor Russian Interference in 2016 US Elections and Ties to Trump Associates Presidential Election of 2020 Presidential Election of 2016 Parnas, Lev impeachment Giuliani, Rudolph W Fruman, Igor Burisma Holdings Ltd Biden, Joseph R Jr Biden, Hunter

WASHINGTON — When all the partisan posturing, parliamentary wrangling and legalistic arguing are stripped away, the impeachment process that dominated Washington for months produced a set of facts that is largely beyond dispute: The president of the United States pressured a foreign government to take actions aimed at his political opponents.

As the Senate moved toward acquitting President Trump on Wednesday, even some Republicans stopped trying to defend his actions or dispute the evidence, focusing instead on the idea that his conduct did not deserve removal from office, especially in an election year.

Mr. Trump’s “behavior was shameful and wrong,” and “his personal interests do not take precedence over those of this great nation,” Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, said on Monday. She went on to declare that she would nonetheless vote to acquit.

Mr. Trump’s public statements, plus testimony and documents introduced during the impeachment process and revelations independent from the congressional inquiry, establish a narrative of the president’s involvement in the effort led by Rudolph W. Giuliani, his personal lawyer, to persuade Ukraine to publicly commit to investigating two topics.

One centered on purported efforts by Ukrainians to undercut Mr. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. The other was the overlap between former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s anti-corruption efforts in Ukraine and his son Hunter Biden’s position on the board of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company widely associated with accusations of corruption.

There are still unanswered questions about the details of Mr. Trump’s involvement, and additional information could emerge later.

But a review of thousands of documents and dozens of interviews reveals how Mr. Trump developed a bitter grudge against Ukraine and then became personally involved in pressuring its leaders. Evidence of Mr. Trump’s role comes from a variety of sources.

Some of the clearest evidence comes from Mr. Trump’s own statements, both in his phone conversation with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on July 25 and in public remarks he later made.

A reconstructed transcript of the call, made public by the White House in October, makes clear that Mr. Trump asked the Ukrainian president to pursue investigations into the Bidens and into one element of his belief that Ukraine worked against his election in 2016: a debunked conspiracy theory that Ukraine rather than Russia was behind the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, and that Ukraine had possession of a server that would shed light on the theory.

I would like you to do us a favor though,” Mr. Trump said, asking Mr. Zelensky’s government to work with Attorney General William P. Barr and Mr. Giuliani to pursue the investigations.

“I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say CrowdStrike,” Mr. Trump said, referring to an American cybersecurity firm and the debunked theory about Ukraine’s involvement in the hack of the Democratic Party. “The server, they say Ukraine has it.”

He went on to bring up the Bidens.

“There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that, so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great,” Mr. Trump said, according to the reconstructed transcript. “Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution, so if you can look into it.”

What Mr. Trump first said in private to Mr. Zelensky, he later said in public. In early October, answering questions from reporters outside the White House, Mr. Trump repeated and expanded on his calls for foreign help in investigating the Bidens.

“I would say that President Zelensky, if it were me, I would recommend that they start an investigation into the Bidens,” Mr. Trump said. “Because nobody has any doubt that they weren’t crooked.”

He also suggested that Ukraine was not the only country that should dig into Hunter Biden’s international business dealings.

“China should start an investigation into the Bidens, because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine,” Mr. Trump said.

Mr. Trump has defended himself by saying that there was nothing wrong with asking another government for help in fighting corruption.

Mr. Trump removed a United States diplomat from her post after Mr. Giuliani and his associates accused her of opposing him politically and impeding their push for the investigations. And the president directed other government officials to work with Mr. Giuliani as he sought a public commitment from Mr. Zelensky to pursue those investigations.

In conversations with Mr. Trump in early 2019, Mr. Giuliani claimed that the United States ambassador to Kyiv, Marie L. Yovanovitch, a widely respected 33-year career diplomat, was hindering efforts to gather evidence from Ukrainians to defend the president and to target his rivals.

Mr. Trump connected Mr. Giuliani with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in late March to discuss the allegations, according to an interview with Mr. Giuliani and emails showing at least two telephone calls between the men, including one arranged with guidance from Mr. Trump’s personal assistant.

Mr. Trump ordered the recall of Ms. Yovanovitch in late April. Later, during the July phone call with Mr. Zelensky, Mr. Trump called her “bad news” and said, “she’s going to go through some things.”

Mr. Trump and Mr. Pompeo “relied on” Mr. Giuliani’s claims in their decision to oust Ms. Yovanovitch, Mr. Giuliani said.

In early May, Mr. Trump asked John R. Bolton, his national security adviser at the time, to call Mr. Zelensky to ensure he would meet with Mr. Giuliani, according to Mr. Bolton’s unpublished book manuscript. Mr. Trump and Mr. Giuliani denied Mr. Bolton’s account.

When Mr. Giuliani failed in his efforts to meet with Mr. Zelensky to press for the investigations, Mr. Trump enlisted an ad hoc team to work with Mr. Giuliani. The team included Gordon D. Sondland, the United States ambassador to the European Union; Kurt D. Volker, then the State Department’s special envoy for Ukraine; and Rick Perry, then the energy secretary.

When the three government officials sought to convince Mr. Trump that Mr. Zelensky deserved the full support of the United States, the president responded with anger toward the Ukrainians during a late May meeting. “They’re terrible people,” Mr. Trump said, according to Mr. Volker’s testimony. “They’re all corrupt, and they tried to take me down.”

If they wanted to engage further with Ukraine, Mr. Trump told them, they would need to coordinate with Mr. Giuliani. “He just kept saying: ‘Talk to Rudy, talk to Rudy,’” Mr. Sondland later testified.

Over the next few months, according to extensive evidence introduced in the House impeachment inquiry, Mr. Sondland and Mr. Volker would work to convince the Ukrainians that in order for Mr. Zelensky to be granted a key request — a high-profile Oval Office meeting signaling United States support for his government in its conflict with Russia — he would have to commit to the investigations sought by Mr. Trump.

The White House meeting was not the only leverage used by Mr. Trump’s team in pressuring the Ukrainians.

In late June, Mr. Trump told top aides to look into the military assistance the United States provides to Ukraine, setting in motion a process that led him to order the withholding of $391 million in congressionally approved aid that Ukraine needed for its grinding war against Russian-backed separatists.

Mr. Trump’s order distressed officials in the White House, the Pentagon and the State Department, and eventually Kyiv, where at least some officials were aware of the aid freeze as early as July 25, according to officials in Ukraine and the United States. The freeze was not made public until the end of August.

The senior members of Mr. Trump’s national security team tried in August to persuade him to release the aid, but he refused.

Mr. Sondland eventually told Ukrainian officials that the release of the assistance would be dependent on Mr. Zelensky publicly committing to an investigation of Burisma, according to testimony in impeachment proceedings from Mr. Sondland and William B. Taylor Jr., who served as the top American diplomat in Kyiv after Ms. Yovanovitch’s recall.

The aid was released in September, after the freeze was made public and congressional Republicans lobbied Mr. Trump to release the money — and after Mr. Trump became aware of a whistle-blower complaint detailing key elements of the pressure campaign. Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, later told a news briefing that the aid had been withheld as part of the pressure campaign — and then tried to walk back his comments.

Mr. Trump’s defense has been that he wanted to make sure the aid would not be squandered by corruption in Ukraine, and that the money was released without Mr. Zelensky agreeing to the investigations.

Mr. Trump’s grievances with Ukraine date from his 2016 campaign but were channeled into action by Mr. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor who in April 2018 became part of the legal team defending the president against the special counsel’s investigation. Mr. Giuliani has repeatedly cited attorney-client privilege in refusing to divulge details of their conversations about Ukraine.

But in interviews, public statements and material gathered by House impeachment investigators, Mr. Giuliani has acknowledged that his Ukraine-related efforts were initiated and pursued with Mr. Trump’s knowledge and consent.

That was something he made explicit in a letter that he sent Mr. Zelensky in May 2019. In the letter, Mr. Giuliani sought a meeting with Mr. Zelensky during a planned trip to Kyiv, where, he told The New York Times at the time, he intended to press the Ukrainians to carry out the investigations sought by Mr. Trump. Mr. Giuliani canceled the trip, and the meeting with Mr. Zelensky never happened.

Mr. Giuliani’s initial interest was in undermining the special counsel’s investigation by raising questions about some of the events on its periphery. He sought to cast doubt on the authenticity of a ledger showing off-the-books payments from a Russia-aligned Ukrainian party earmarked for Paul Manafort, who served as Mr. Trump’s campaign chairman in 2016. Mr. Giuliani also questioned the motivations of the Ukrainians who disseminated it and their relationships with officials at the United States Embassy in Kyiv, who, he argued, were aligned with Hillary Clinton and out to get Mr. Trump.

Mr. Giuliani enlisted two Soviet-born American businessmen, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, to help him connect early last year with Ukrainian prosecutors who could be of assistance. Those prosecutors made unsubstantiated claims about the Bidens’ work in Ukraine that Mr. Trump and Mr. Giuliani would embrace in subsequent months, as the president ramped up his re-election campaign and the former vice president made clear he would seek the Democratic nomination to challenge him.

Even after Democrats began impeachment proceedings, Mr. Giuliani continued trying to collect information from Ukrainians who he argued would prove that Mr. Trump was justified in calling for Ukraine to investigate the Bidens and the ledger.

In December, Mr. Giuliani told an associate that he briefed Mr. Trump before traveling to Budapest and Kyiv to film interviews with former Ukrainian officials. As soon as Mr. Giuliani returned from the trip, Mr. Trump reportedly asked him what he had collected. “More than you can imagine,” he replied.

Mr. Giuliani has told his associates that he played the videos of his interviews for an appreciative Mr. Trump.

Ben Protess contributed reporting from New York.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Diplomat at Center of Trump Impeachment Retires From State Department

Westlake Legal Group 31dc-ambassador-facebookJumbo Diplomat at Center of Trump Impeachment Retires From State Department Yovanovitch, Marie L Ukraine Trump, Donald J Trump-Ukraine Whistle-Blower Complaint and Impeachment Inquiry Pompeo, Mike Giuliani, Rudolph W Foreign Service (US) Diplomatic Service, Embassies and Consulates Biden, Joseph R Jr

WASHINGTON — The American ambassador whose abrupt recall from Ukraine helped lead to President Trump’s impeachment has retired from the State Department, a person familiar with her plans confirmed on Friday.

Marie L. Yovanovitch, a career diplomat, had been expected to leave the Foreign Service after she was ordered back to Washington from Kyiv, Ukraine, ahead of schedule last spring, accused of being disloyal to Mr. Trump.

But documents and testimony later showed that she was the target of a smear campaign for, in part, refusing to grant visas to former Ukrainian officials who were investigating Mr. Trump’s political rivals.

On a July 25 telephone call with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, Mr. Trump described Ms. Yovanovitch as “bad news” and said, ominously, “She’s going to go through some things.”

She possibly already had: Text messages between Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani and his associates that were released publicly earlier this month indicated that Ms. Yovanovitch was under surveillance while still in Kyiv — a claim that the State Department and Ukraine security officials are investigating.

State Department officials have suggested that Ms. Yovanovitch was pulled from Kyiv because of concerns about her security. But Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has refused to publicly support her, or clarify why she was recalled to the United States, setting off an internal revolt of diplomats who have rallied to her defense.

Ms. Yovanovitch was a star witness for House Democrats in their impeachment inquiry. She described being “shocked, appalled, devastated” upon learning of what the president said about her to Mr. Zelensky.

The Senate is all but assured to acquit Mr. Trump in a vote scheduled for Wednesday that will end his impeachment trial.

At its heart was whether Mr. Trump could be held liable for appearing to withhold $391 million in security aid from Ukraine — money that Congress had already approved — until Mr. Zelensky announced an investigation into a company that had employed Hunter Biden, the son of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who is seeking the Democratic nomination to run against Mr. Trump.

Ms. Yovanovitch’s retirement from the State Department, after 33 years of service, was first reported on Friday by NPR. She could not be immediately reached for comment, and the State Department did not return calls and messages seeking comment Friday night.

Since returning to Washington last spring, Ms. Yovanovitch has been assigned to a fellowship at Georgetown University’s Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, and she is scheduled to receive an award in February from the university’s School of Foreign Service for “Excellence in the Conduct of Diplomacy.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Giuliani Sought Help for Client in Meeting With Ukrainian Official

Westlake Legal Group 31Klitschko-facebookJumbo Giuliani Sought Help for Client in Meeting With Ukrainian Official Zelensky, Volodymyr United States International Relations United States Defense and Military Forces United States Ukraine Trump, Donald J Trump-Ukraine Whistle-Blower Complaint and Impeachment Inquiry Russian Interference in 2016 US Elections and Ties to Trump Associates Poroshenko, Petro Olekseyevich KIEV, Ukraine impeachment Giuliani, Rudolph W Foreign Aid Corruption (Institutional)

KYIV, Ukraine — When Rudolph W. Giuliani met with a top aide to Ukraine’s president last summer, he discussed the prospect of a coveted White House meeting for the president while seeking Ukraine’s commitment to certain investigations that could benefit President Trump politically.

Mr. Giuliani also threw in a request of his own: help the mayor of Kyiv keep his job.

The mayor, Vitaliy Klitschko, a professional boxer turned politician and longtime friend and former client of Mr. Giuliani’s, was on the verge of being fired from his duties overseeing Kyiv’s $2 billion budget.

Firing Mr. Klitschko would have fit with President Volodymyr Zelensky’s campaign promise to fight Ukraine’s entrenched interests and allowed him to replace a political adversary with a loyalist in one of the country’s most important posts.

But despite the fact that Mr. Zelensky’s cabinet approved Mr. Klitschko’s removal, he remains there today, leaving his adversaries in the murky and lucrative world of Ukrainian municipal politics to wonder whether Mr. Trump’s personal attorney may have tipped the scales in his favor.

“The coincidence in timing between Klitschko’s meeting with Giuliani and the developments in the governance of Kyiv was striking,” said Oleksandr Tkachenko, a member of the Ukrainian Parliament whom Mr. Zelensky had been expected to nominate as Mr. Klitschko’s replacement.

Mr. Giuliani’s effort to help his friend and former client, first reported in The Washington Post, shed fresh light on the former New York mayor’s mingling of personal, business and political interests with his role as personal attorney to the president of the United States.

In an interview with The New York Times, Mr. Giuliani acknowledged discussing Mr. Klitschko’s position in a meeting with a senior aide to Mr. Zelensky, Andriy Yermak, in Madrid on Aug. 2.

“I said, ‘I don’t know, I’m from the outside, but he seems like one of the good guys,’” Mr. Giuliani said, recalling the conversation. “‘And I’m speaking, speaking, speaking as a personal friend, not as a representative of the government or anything else.’”

In the same meeting, Mr. Giuliani discussed a possible Oval Office visit by Mr. Zelensky that the Ukrainian president had been seeking, and asked for a commitment by his government to pursue investigations into former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., his son, and Ukrainians who disseminated damaging information about Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign.

The meeting took place at a time when Ukraine’s new president was looking to cement support from the United States, his country’s most powerful ally in the conflict against Russia, and to build a relationship with Mr. Trump.

Mr. Giuliani said that he made it clear that he was relating his personal view of Mr. Klitschko, not that of the administration. “I gave it as my opinion — not the government — and based on our personal relationships,” he said.

Mr. Yermak also acknowledged that the two discussed Mr. Klitschko’s fate.

“Giuliani asked for my opinion about Vitaliy Klitschko as a mayor,” Mr. Yermak said in a statement in response to an inquiry from The Times. “He immediately issued the disclaimer that I should not see his question as an attempt to influence me.”

Mr. Yermak said he told Mr. Giuliani that he had long known Mr. Klitschko and that he had the support of Kyiv’s citizens.

“That was the end of our conversation about Klitschko,” Mr. Yermak said. “As a result I reject any speculation that Mr. Giuliani in any way sought to influence my opinion or to make me accept some narrative regarding Mayor Vitaliy Klitschko.”

Given the complex and opaque nature of Ukrainian politics, it is not clear whether Mr. Giuliani’s intervention was the decisive force allowing the mayor to keep his job.

But it is clear that he tried.

Mr. Klitschko, a former heavyweight world boxing champion, first hired Mr. Giuliani as a consultant for his unsuccessful run for mayor of Kyiv in 2008.

Since 2014, Mr. Klitschko has held dual roles: both the largely ceremonial, elected position of Kyiv mayor and the powerful position of head of Kyiv’s city-state administration, an appointment made by the Ukrainian president. The latter position gives him oversight of matters such as the city budget, building permits and transportation funds, making him one of the most powerful people in the country.

Mr. Klitschko supported Mr. Zelensky’s opponent, the incumbent Petro O. Poroshenko, in last spring’s presidential election in Ukraine. Mr. Zelensky’s landslide victory appeared to augur Mr. Klitschko’s political demise.

Mr. Zelensky, a comedian, had frequently lampooned Mr. Klitschko on his Saturday Night Live-style variety show, portraying him as a dunderheaded member of Ukraine’s shadowy, corrupt elite. In one skit, Mr. Zelensky played a translator to a boxing-belt-wearing Mr. Klitschko, who is unable to string together an intelligible sentence.

After taking power in May, Mr. Zelensky had no way to remove Mr. Klitschko as mayor but could strip him of the more influential post as head of the Kyiv administration. Ukrainian politicians and analysts expected him to do so.

A confidante of Mr. Klitschko’s, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was concerned about harm to his business if he spoke publicly, said that by the end of July, “it was clear that only outside interference, say the president of the United States or anyone on his behalf,” could save Mr. Klitschko from dismissal. As the power struggle escalated, Mr. Klitschko flew to New York to meet with Mr. Giuliani.

On July 30, in an apparent prelude to the dismissal, Mr. Zelensky’s chief of staff, Andriy Bohdan, called a news conference and accused Mr. Klitschko of allowing corruption to flourish in Kyiv. Without offering evidence, Mr. Bohdan said he had been offered a $20 million bribe for Mr. Klitschko to remain head of the Kyiv administration.

The next day, Mr. Klitschko posted photographs on Facebook of his meeting with Mr. Giuliani, his “old friend and one of the most authoritative mayors in the world.” The two discussed “the situation in Ukraine,” he said, “future cooperation between the United States and Ukraine,” and the topic of “local self-rule” — an apparent reference to Mr. Klitschko’s battle to hold on to power at home.

Upon returning to Kyiv, Mr. Klitschko told his aides that his American allies would help him keep his job, according to several people who heard him make the comments in staff meetings and who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are still involved in municipal politics and were afraid to be identified when discussing issues related to Mr. Klitschko.

“That’s ridiculous,” Mr. Klitschko said in a statement on Friday. Asked about the meeting with Mr. Giuliani, Mr. Klitschko said, “I did not ask anyone for any assistance.”

Mr. Klitschko said he had never had a business relationship with Mr. Giuliani, a claim contradicted by Mr. Giuliani, who consulted for the former boxer’s 2008 campaign. Mr. Giuliani said that he had not formally represented Mr. Klitschko in years, “even though I still advise him.”

But two days later, Mr. Giuliani was speaking about Mr. Klitschko to Mr. Yermak in Madrid.

On Sept. 4, Mr. Zelensky’s cabinet approved the dismissal of Mr. Klitschko as head of the Kyiv administration.

But on Sept. 6, Mr. Giuliani fired off a tweet: “Reducing the power of Mayor Klitschko of Kiev was a very bad sign particularly based on the advice of an aide to the President of Ukraine who has the reputation of being a fixer. The former champion is very much admired and respected in the US.”

The tweet came as Mr. Zelensky was scrambling to stabilize his relationship with Mr. Trump after finding out that American military aid to Kyiv had been halted for unexplained reasons.

The last step needed to make the dismissal official was Mr. Zelensky’s signature on the dismissal — a formality, it seemed, since it was Mr. Zelensky’s office that had sought approval for the firing in the first place.

But the signature never came.

Asked by reporters in October, Mr. Zelensky said that he was still thinking about whether or not to sign.

“When a controversial issue arises, he tries to balance various interests,” a Kyiv political analyst, Volodymyr Fesenko, said of Mr. Zelensky’s unexpected reprieve. “He decided not to make a sudden move.”

Aside from any influence Mr. Giuliani may have had, Mr. Fesenko points to a power struggle within different factions in Mr. Zelensky’s administration as another factor, along with Mr. Zelensky’s own dwindling political capital amid intense criticism from domestic political opponents that he was too soft on Russia.

Through a spokeswoman, Mr. Klitschko declined to comment on the Madrid meeting between Mr. Giuliani and Mr. Yermak, or on why Mr. Zelensky decided to keep him in office. He described Mr. Giuliani as “a big friend of Ukraine and one of the most successful mayors of the world.”

Mr. Giuliani himself became a fraught figure in Ukraine as the impeachment investigation unfolded on Capitol Hill.

“Starting in late September, the Giuliani issue became very toxic,” Mr. Fesenko said. “It seemed Klitschko’s team stopped pushing the relationship with Giuliani.”

Ronen Bergman and Anton Troianovski reported from Kyiv, and Kenneth P. Vogel from Washington.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

3 Takeaways from Today’s Trump Impeachment Trial

Westlake Legal Group 31dc-takeaways-facebookJumbo 3 Takeaways from Today's Trump Impeachment Trial Zelensky, Volodymyr Trump, Donald J Trump-Ukraine Whistle-Blower Complaint and Impeachment Inquiry Senate Schiff, Adam B Russian Interference in 2016 US Elections and Ties to Trump Associates Rubio, Marco Republican Party Putin, Vladimir V Presidential Election of 2020 Portman, Rob Murkowski, Lisa Kelly, John F (1950- ) impeachment House of Representatives Giuliani, Rudolph W Democratic Party Cipollone, Pat A Bolton, John R

WASHINGTON — After 10 days of arguments and deliberations, the Senate voted against hearing from new witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial, signaling a vote to acquit him would likely come in the coming days.

House impeachment managers and President Trump’s defense team made their final arguments for and against hearing from new witnesses as the Senate trial entered its final stages on Friday before the evening vote. Not long before the session started, Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, announced that she would vote against a measure to hear new witnesses erasing any doubt that the Republicans would have the support to end the trial without considering new material.

Here are five key takeaways from the afternoon.

In a nearly party-line vote, the Senate decided not to hear testimony from witnesses or review evidence before it moves to vote on whether Mr. Trump should be removed from office.

The 51-49 outcome was not surprising and paved the way for the Senate to acquit Mr. Trump. Senate leaders are negotiating over the next steps to end the trial.

Many of the arguments from the House managers over the past two weeks have been centered on the importance of hearing from witnesses, like Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, John R. Bolton, who has firsthand accounts of Mr. Trump’s actions regarding Ukraine.

Two Republican senators, Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah, voted in favor of hearing witnesses, as they had signaled ahead of the trial.

Democrats have said that a trial without witnesses and documents is not a fair one. Republicans said that they did not need to hear any additional information and that the Democrats brought a weak case.

The top Democrat in the Senate, Chuck Schumer of New York, said the trial was a sham and a tragedy.

“To not allow a witness, a document — no witnesses, no documents — in an impeachment trial is a perfidy,” Mr. Schumer said after the vote. “America will remember this day, unfortunately, where the Senate did not live up to its responsibilities.”

In the hours before the vote, House impeachment managers made their final plea, citing a New York Times report that published about an hour before the trial started.

The report, which draws from new details from an upcoming book by Mr. Bolton, shows that Mr. Trump had a direct role in the Ukraine pressure campaign earlier than previously known, and senior White House advisers were aware of it.

“Yet another reason why we want to hear from witnesses,” said Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and the lead manager.

In the book, Mr. Bolton describes a meeting in early May at which Mr. Trump instructed him to call President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to press him to meet with Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani. According to the book, one of Mr. Trump’s defense lawyers for the impeachment trial, Pat Cipollone, was also in the meeting, which took place months before Mr. Trump and Mr. Zelensky spoke by phone on July 25. That conversation ultimately set the impeachment proceedings in motion.

The fight over witnesses had largely been an argument about hearing testimony from Mr. Bolton, particularly as details about what he knows of Mr. Trump’s motives and his efforts to pressure Ukraine emerged in the past week.

Mr. Trump blocked Mr. Bolton from testifying in the House impeachment inquiry, but Mr. Bolton has said he would comply with a subpoena to testify during the Senate trial.

Even before the Senate trial resumed on Friday, some Republican senators announced their plans to vote to acquit Mr. Trump, and there was noticeably less note-taking in the Senate chamber compared with previous days of the trial.

“Can anyone doubt that at least half of the country would view his removal as illegitimate — as nothing short of a coup d’état?” Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, wrote in a statement on Friday.

His decision, he said, was made out of concern of further dividing the country.

Mr. Rubio added that if the president was removed from office, it would be a victory for President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

“It is difficult to conceive of any scheme Putin could undertake that would undermine confidence in our democracy more than removal would,” he wrote.

Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio, said that he did find some of Mr. Trump’s actions “wrong and inappropriate,” but he wanted to leave it to voters decide on a verdict in November.

“Our country is already too deeply divided and we should be working to heal wounds, not create new ones,” Mr. Portman said in a statement.

“It seems it was half a trial,” said John F. Kelly, Mr. Trump’s former chief of staff, hours before the Senate officially voted.

“If I was advising the United States Senate, I would say, ‘If you don’t respond to 75 percent of the American voters and have witnesses, it’s a job only half-done,’” Mr. Kelly said, ahead of delivering a speech in New Jersey on Friday. “You open yourself up forever as a Senate that shirks its responsibilities.”

Mr. Kelly appeared to be referring to a recent national poll from Quinnipiac University, which found that 75 percent of independents think witnesses should testify. The independent vote is expected to be a critical one in November.

A retired four-star Marine general, Mr. Kelly was well-liked in the Senate — he was confirmed with bipartisan support to be Mr. Trump’s first homeland security secretary — which made his criticism on Friday even more pointed. He was later drafted to be the president’s chief of staff with the hope he would bring order to a White House defined by chaos.

Earlier this week, Mr. Kelly said he believed Mr. Bolton’s account of the president’s dealings with Ukraine, which the president has denied.

“If John Bolton says that in the book, I believe John Bolton,” he said on Tuesday.

Mr. Kelly and Mr. Bolton overlapped at the White House for much of 2018 but were not always in lock step. On Friday, Mr. Kelly described Mr. Bolton as “an honest and an honorable guy,” and “a copious note-taker.”

Senators will vote at 4 p.m. on Wednesday to render a verdict in President Trump’s impeachment trial. But before then, they will vote on procedural motions on Friday and return at 11 a.m. on Monday to give closing arguments, senators said. They will also have a chance to give floor speeches on Tuesday before the Wednesday vote.

“I’d rather conclude it right away,” said Senator Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri. But the rules allowed for more time, and Democrats insisted, he added.

“It gives everybody the flexibility if they need to go somewhere over the weekend,” said Senator Mike Braun, Republican of Indiana.

The schedule means Mr. Trump would deliver the State of the Union address Tuesday night with his all but certain acquittal pending.

For the four senators running for the Democratic nomination to face Mr. Trump in November, it will be a busy few days as they rush to Iowa ahead of the caucuses there on Monday before needing to return to Washington for the closing phase of the trial.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Hotel Patrons Relish Impeachment Finale

Westlake Legal Group merlin_164582592_5e2a5601-6dc8-4ec2-b4fd-6e9bf05000bf-facebookJumbo Trump Hotel Patrons Relish Impeachment Finale United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Trump-Ukraine Whistle-Blower Complaint and Impeachment Inquiry Trump Organization Trump National Doral Miami (Doral, Fla) Trump International Hotel (Washington, DC) Presidential Election of 2020 Parnas, Lev Mar-a-Lago (Palm Beach, Fla) Hyde, Robert F Giuliani, Rudolph W Conflicts of Interest

WASHINGTON — The big-screen televisions beamed constant impeachment updates into the sprawling lobby of the Trump International Hotel near the White House on Friday afternoon, with Fox News declaring “high stakes vote looms on impeachment witnesses.”

But among the guests at this venue, which played a key supporting role in the impeachment drama, there was little question how this chapter would soon be ending: an acquittal of the hotel owner and commander in chief.

“They knew they did not have a case,” said Robert F. Hyde, a long-shot Republican congressional candidate and Trump hotel regular, who was suspected of having put Marie L. Yovanovitch under surveillance while she was the United States ambassador to Ukraine.

He was sitting at the bar, eating a chopped wedge salad and sipping on both a Diet Coke and a cup of coffee. “There is no treason, no bribery,” he said. “No abuse of power.”

Business was brisk on Friday, with a collection of more than two dozen Marines and their families assembled in the lobby, as well as business executives in town to make pitches to the federal government, and an assortment of other fans of President Trump.

Spending at the hotel by political groups has continued uninterrupted during the impeachment proceedings, including by the Republican National Committee, which has paid more than $440,000 to the hotel since Mr. Trump was elected. America First Action, a super PAC that supports Mr. Trump’s causes, has spent another $505,000 at the hotel since 2017.

“NEVER SETTLE,” read the screen on the cash register, the slogan of the Trump Hotels brand, and in a way a motto for Mr. Trump himself throughout the impeachment saga.

The hotel was the regular gathering place for many of the key players in the tale.

Lev Parnas, who pressured officials in Ukraine to investigate the Biden family, called it “our BLT office on the second floor,” referring to the BLT Prime steakhouse on the mezzanine overlooking the hotel lobby, which Mr. Trump frequents for dinner.

“It was like a breeding ground at the Trump hotel,” Mr. Parnas told Rachel Maddow recently.

Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer and the architect of the pressure campaign, dines so frequently at BLT Prime that he has a regular table with a nameplate reading, “Rudolph W. Giuliani, Private Office.” He was there Thursday night, chatting with a lobbyist for the medical marijuana industry.

One of Mr. Trump’s most ardent congressional supporters, Representative Matt Gaetz, Republican of Florida, as well as Corey Lewandowski, the president’s former political aide, were spotted at the hotel lobby earlier this week.

Kurt D. Volker, the former United States special envoy to Ukraine, scheduled so many meetings at the Trump’s hotel with figures at the center of the impeachment inquiry — including Mr. Parnas and Andriy Yermak, a close adviser to President Volodymyr Zelensky — that investigators asked why he picked the venue so frequently.

“Because I was guessing that’s where Rudy was going to be staying, so that would be the easiest thing to do,” Mr. Volker said.

Mr. Hyde had his own moment of fame at Trump International, after he suggested to Mr. Parnas here that he had Ms. Yovanovitch under surveillance, something he now says he made up.

Mr. Hyde, who says he is running for a House seat in Connecticut, still hangs at the hotel when he is in Washington, as it offers him an opportunity to network with key players in the Trump administration, or at least the circle of people trying to influence Mr. Trump.

He walked up the hotel manager, Mickael Damelincourt, on Friday to say hello and do a quick fist bump, and greeted one of the bartenders by her first name, before ordering his lunch.

Mr. Hyde was wearing a jersey from Trump National Doral in Miami, a hotel and golf resort where Mr. Hyde said he is a member, a status that also gets him into Mar-a-Lago, the Trump family private club in Palm Beach, Fla., where he can also network.

He was passing out stickers and buttons from his congressional campaign, which continues even though Republican Party leaders in Connecticut have urged him to drop out. Nearby, a waiter took out a small blow torch to ignite a piece of rosemary that hangs above a $22 candied-bacon bar snack.

Patrons at the bar glanced up occasionally at the continued impeachment debate on Friday afternoon. (CNN was on the television on the left, and Fox News on the right.) But there was supreme confidence that this chapter of the Trump era was drawing to a close.

“It needs to be over with — done,” said Melissa Butler, from Columbia, S.C., who said she voted for Mr. Trump and intends to support him again, as she nibbled on a plate of tuna tartar and sipped on a glass of white wine. “It is ridiculous that they brought this up in the first place.”

As the Senate prepared to vote on the question of witnesses will be called, the hotel bar was packed with dozens of patrons, drinks in hand.

“Need popcorn,” said a woman at the bar who declined to be named as the votes were being counted. “Waste of time and taxpayer money.”

The Trump family has announced that it may sell the Washington hotel, which opened in late 2016 and quickly became one of the top sources of revenue for the Trump Organization. A company executive did not respond on Friday when asked how the bidding process was going or if a sale was still being considered.

Litigation continues over several lawsuits claiming that Mr. Trump is violating the Constitution’s emoluments clause that prohibits payments to the president from foreign governments or domestic government entities.

But politically connected business has hardly slowed down.

Jonathan Lubecky said he still comes to peruse the lobby and look for people of influence he can grab to press his cause, medical marijuana. That is how he ended up on Thursday speaking with Mr. Giuliani, who he was sitting at his regular table.

“I just go in and I get a drink and see who is there in the lobby that is a target of opportunity to talk to,” Mr. Lubecky said.

Big moneymaking events also continued to be scheduled at the Trump hotel, including gatherings of Texas, Florida and Oklahoma bankers, Texas truckers, as well as pipeline contractors, two doctors’ groups and a Greek-American association, according to a list compiled by 1100 Pennsylvania, a newsletter that tracks activity at the hotel.

“The hotel continues — it is going to roll on — until the president no longer has the hotel or the hotel no longer has the presidency,” said Zach Everson, who runs the 1100 Pennsylvania site. “The end of the impeachment saga means nothing here.”

Mr. Trump, at least, will not likely be at his Washington hotel this weekend. He flew out Friday afternoon for Mar-a-Lago, giving reporters a thumbs up as he left the White House.

Kenneth P. Vogel contributed reporting.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Told Bolton to Help His Ukraine Pressure Campaign, Book Says

Westlake Legal Group 31dc-bolton1-facebookJumbo Trump Told Bolton to Help His Ukraine Pressure Campaign, Book Says Zelensky, Volodymyr United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Trump-Ukraine Whistle-Blower Complaint and Impeachment Inquiry The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir (Book) Mulvaney, Mick Manuscripts Kent, George P Giuliani, Rudolph W Cipollone, Pat A Bolton, John R

WASHINGTON — More than two months before he asked Ukraine’s president to investigate his political opponents, President Trump directed John R. Bolton, then his national security adviser, to help with his pressure campaign to extract damaging information on Democrats from Ukrainian officials, according to an unpublished manuscript by Mr. Bolton.

Mr. Trump gave the instruction, Mr. Bolton wrote, during an Oval Office conversation in early May that included the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, the president’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani and the White House counsel, Pat A. Cipollone, who is now leading the president’s impeachment defense.

Mr. Trump told Mr. Bolton to call Volodymyr Zelensky, who had recently won election as president of Ukraine, to ensure Mr. Zelensky would meet with Mr. Giuliani, who was planning a trip to Ukraine to discuss the investigations that the president sought, in Mr. Bolton’s account. Mr. Bolton never made the call, he wrote.

The previously undisclosed directive that Mr. Bolton describes would be the earliest known instance of Mr. Trump seeking to harness the power of the United States government to advance his pressure campaign against Ukraine, as he later did on the July call with Mr. Zelensky that triggered a whistle-blower complaint and impeachment proceedings. House Democrats have accused him of abusing his authority and are arguing their case before senators in the impeachment trial of Mr. Trump, whose lawyers have said he did nothing wrong.

The account in Mr. Bolton’s manuscript portrays the most senior White House advisers as early witnesses in the effort that they have sought to distance the president from. And disclosure of the meeting underscores the kind of information Democrats were looking for in seeking testimony from his top advisers in their impeachment investigation, including Mr. Bolton and Mr. Mulvaney, only to be blocked by the White House.

In a statement after this article was published, Mr. Trump denied the discussion that Mr. Bolton described.

“I never instructed John Bolton to set up a meeting for Rudy Giuliani, one of the greatest corruption fighters in America and by far the greatest mayor in the history of N.Y.C., to meet with President Zelensky,” Mr. Trump said. “That meeting never happened.”

In a brief interview, Mr. Giuliani denied that the conversation took place and said those discussions with the president were always kept separate. He was adamant that Mr. Cipollone and Mr. Mulvaney were never involved in meetings related to Ukraine.

“It is absolutely, categorically untrue,” he said.

Neither Mr. Bolton nor a representative for Mr. Mulvaney responded to requests for comment.

Mr. Bolton described the roughly 10-minute conversation in drafts of his book, a memoir of his time as national security adviser that is to go on sale in March. Over several pages, Mr. Bolton laid out Mr. Trump’s fixation on Ukraine and the president’s belief, based on a mix of scattershot events, assertions and outright conspiracy theories, that Ukraine tried to undermine his chances of winning the presidency in 2016.

As he began to realize the extent and aims of the pressure campaign, Mr. Bolton began to object, he wrote in the book, affirming the testimony of a former National Security Council aide, Fiona Hill, who had said that Mr. Bolton warned that Mr. Giuliani was “a hand grenade who’s going to blow everybody up.”

Mr. Trump also repeatedly made national security decisions contrary to American interests, Mr. Bolton wrote, describing a pervasive sense of alarm among top advisers about the president’s choices. Mr. Bolton expressed concern to others in the administration that the president was effectively granting favors to autocratic leaders like Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey and Xi Jinping of China.

The New York Times reported this week on another revelation from Mr. Bolton’s book draft: that Mr. Trump told him in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter. That account undercuts a key element of the White House impeachment defense — that the aid holdup was separate from his requests for inquiries. Mr. Trump has denied the conversation took place.

Since that Times article, people who have reviewed the draft have further described its contents, including details of the May meeting. Mr. Bolton’s manuscript was sent to the White House for a standard review process in late December.

Its revelations galvanized the debate over whether to call witnesses in the impeachment trial, but late on Thursday, Republicans appeared to have secured enough votes to keep any new testimony out of Mr. Trump’s trial and to move toward a quick acquittal in the third presidential impeachment trial in American history.

The White House has sought to block the release of the book, contending that it contains classified information. The government reviews books by former officials who had access to secrets so they can excise the manuscripts of any classified information. Officials including Mr. Trump have described Mr. Bolton, who was often at odds with Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Mulvaney, as a disgruntled former official with an ax to grind.

Mr. Bolton has angered Democrats — and some Republicans — for remaining quiet during the House investigation, then announcing that he would comply with any subpoena to testify in the Senate and signaling that he is eager to share his story. Administration officials should “feel they’re able to speak their minds without retribution,” he said at a closed-door lunch in Austin, Texas, on Thursday, the NBC affiliate KXAN reported, citing unnamed sources.

“The idea that somehow testifying to what you think is true is destructive to the system of government we have — I think, is very nearly the reverse, the exact reverse of the truth,” Mr. Bolton added.

The Oval Office conversation that Mr. Bolton described came as the president and Mr. Giuliani were increasingly focusing on pushing the Ukrainian government to commit to investigations that could help Mr. Trump politically. At various points, Mr. Trump, Mr. Giuliani and their associates pressed Ukrainian officials under Mr. Zelensky and his predecessor to provide potentially damaging information on the president’s rivals, including Mr. Biden and Ukrainians who Mr. Trump’s allies believed tried to help Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Mr. Giuliani had just successfully campaigned to have the American ambassador to Ukraine, Marie L. Yovanovitch, recalled, convinced that she was part of an effort to protect Mr. Trump’s political rivals from scrutiny. Mr. Giuliani had argued she was impeding the investigations.

At the time of the Oval Office conversation Mr. Bolton wrote about, Mr. Giuliani was planning a trip to Kyiv to push the incoming government to commit to the investigations. Mr. Giuliani asserted that the president had been wronged by the Justice Department’s Russia investigation and told associates that the inquiry could be partly discredited by proving that parts of it originated with suspect documents produced and disseminated in Ukraine to undermine his onetime campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, whose work in Ukraine became a central focus of the Russia inquiry.

Mr. Giuliani, a private consultant with a range of international clients, had said none were involved in the Ukraine effort, Mr. Bolton wrote, adding that he was skeptical and wanted to avoid involvement. At the time, Mr. Giuliani was working closely with two Soviet-born businessmen from Florida, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, to carry out the shadow Ukraine effort.

After pushing out Ms. Yovanovitch, Mr. Giuliani turned his attention to other American diplomats responsible for Ukraine policy. During the Oval Office conversation, he also mentioned a State Department official with the last name of Kent, whom Mr. Bolton wrote he did not know. Mr. Giuliani said he was hostile to Mr. Trump and sympathetic to George Soros, the billionaire philanthropist who has long been a target of the far right.

George P. Kent, a top State Department official who oversees Ukraine policy, went on to be a key witness in House Democrats’ impeachment investigation, testifying that claims by Mr. Giuliani’s allies of Mr. Soros’ wide influence in Ukraine were used to smear Ms. Yovanovitch.

Mr. Bolton left the Oval Office after 10 minutes and returned to his office, he wrote. Shortly after, two aides came into his office, saying Mr. Trump had sent them out of a separate meeting on trade to ask about Mr. Kent, Mr. Bolton wrote.

The conversation that Mr. Bolton describes was separate from another one that Mr. Bolton wrote about, where he observed Mr. Mulvaney and Mr. Trump talking on the phone with Mr. Giuliani about Ukraine matters. Mr. Mulvaney has told associates he would leave the room when Mr. Trump and Mr. Giuliani were talking to preserve their attorney-client privilege, and his lawyer said earlier this week that Mr. Mulvaney was never in meetings with Mr. Giuliani and has “no recollection” of the first discussion.

Around the time of the May discussion, The Times revealed Mr. Giuliani’s efforts and his planned trip to Ukraine. Mr. Giuliani said at the time that Mr. Trump was aware of his efforts in Ukraine, but said nothing else about any involvement of Mr. Trump or other members of the administration. The disclosure created consternation in the White House and Mr. Giuliani canceled his trip.

A day after the Times article was published, Mr. Giuliani wrote a letter to Mr. Zelensky, saying he was representing Mr. Trump as a “private citizen” and, with Mr. Trump’s “knowledge and consent,” hoped to arrange a meeting with Mr. Zelensky in the ensuing days. That letter was among the evidence admitted during the House impeachment inquiry.

Peter Baker and Kenneth P. Vogel contributed reporting.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

5 Takeaways on Trump and Ukraine From John Bolton’s Book

Westlake Legal Group merlin_159739359_6b15a34e-ad49-4273-b292-b394f791de22-facebookJumbo 5 Takeaways on Trump and Ukraine From John Bolton’s Book Yovanovitch, Marie L United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Trump-Ukraine Whistle-Blower Complaint and Impeachment Inquiry State Department Senate Pompeo, Mike House of Representatives Giuliani, Rudolph W Esper, Mark T Bolton, John R Barr, William P

WASHINGTON — President Trump directly tied the withholding of almost $400 million in American security aid to investigations that he sought from Ukrainian officials, according to an unpublished manuscript of a book that John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, wrote about his time in the White House.

The firsthand account of the link between the aid and investigations, which is based on meetings and conversations Mr. Bolton had with Mr. Trump, undercuts a key component of the president’s impeachment defense: that the decision to freeze the aid was independent from his requests that Ukraine announce politically motivated investigations into former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter.

In their opening arguments on Saturday in Mr. Trump’s trial, the president’s lawyers asserted that Mr. Trump had legitimate concerns about corruption in Ukraine and whether other countries were offering enough help for its war against Russian-backed separatists, which his lawyers said explained his reluctance to release the aid. They also said that Democrats had no direct evidence of the quid pro quo they allege at the heart of their impeachment case.

Multiple people described Mr. Bolton’s account. A draft of the manuscript, which offers a glimpse into how Mr. Bolton might testify in the trial if he were called to, was sent to the White House in recent weeks for a standard review process.

Here are five takeaways.

During a conversation in August with Mr. Trump, Mr. Bolton mentioned his concern over the delay of the $391 million in congressionally appropriated assistance to Ukraine as a deadline neared to send the money.

Mr. Trump replied that he preferred sending no assistance to Ukraine until officials had turned over all materials they had about the Russia investigation related to Mr. Biden and supporters of Hillary Clinton in Ukraine, referencing unfounded theories and other assertions that Rudolph W. Giuliani, his personal lawyer, had promoted about any Ukrainian efforts to damage Mr. Trump politically.

The president often hits at multiple opponents in his harangues, and he frequently lumps together the law enforcement officials who investigated his campaign’s ties to Russia with Democrats and other perceived enemies, as he appeared to do with Mr. Bolton.

According to Mr. Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper joined him in pressing Mr. Trump to release the aid in the weeks leading up to the August meeting.

Mr. Trump repeatedly set aside their overtures by mentioning assorted grievances he had about Ukraine, some related to efforts by some Ukrainians who backed Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election and others related to conspiracies and unsupported accusations about, among other things, a hacked server at the Democratic National Committee.

Mr. Bolton wrote that Mr. Pompeo privately acknowledged to him last spring that Mr. Giuliani’s claims about Marie L. Yovanovitch, then the American ambassador to Ukraine, had no basis, including allegations that she was bad-mouthing Mr. Trump. Mr. Pompeo suggested to Mr. Bolton that Mr. Giuliani may have wanted Ms. Yovanovitch out because she might have been targeting his business clients in her anti-corruption efforts. Yet Mr. Pompeo still went through with Mr. Trump’s order to recall Ms. Yovanovitch last May.

Mr. Pompeo lashed out at a National Public Radio host on Friday and Saturday after she asked him in an interview about Ms. Yovanovitch’s removal.

Mr. Bolton also wrote that he had concerns about Mr. Giuliani. He said he warned White House lawyers last year that Mr. Giuliani might have been using his work representing the president as leverage to help his private clients.

Among other names Mr. Bolton referenced in the manuscript: Attorney General William P. Barr. Mr. Bolton wrote that he raised concerns with Mr. Barr about Mr. Giuliani’s influence on the president after Mr. Trump’s July 25 call with Ukraine’s president. That call was a critical piece of the whistle-blower complaint that prompted the impeachment inquiry. Mr. Barr on Sunday denied Mr. Bolton’s account through a spokeswoman.

Mr. Bolton, who released a statement this month saying he would appear at Mr. Trump’s trial if he is subpoenaed, is prepared to testify before the Senate, according to his associates. He believes that he has relevant insight to present before senators vote on whether to remove Mr. Trump. He is also concerned, his associates said, that if his account of Mr. Trump’s Ukraine dealings comes out after the trial, he will be accused of withholding potentially incriminating material in order to increase his book sales.

Mr. Trump and the White House, however, do not want Mr. Bolton to appear.

The White House had already ordered Mr. Bolton and other key officials not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry. The manuscript has intensified concern among advisers that they need to use a restraining order to block Mr. Bolton from testifying, according to two people familiar with their concerns. It was unclear whether they would be successful in doing so.

The revelations from the draft of Mr. Bolton’s book could complicate the impeachment trial. A handful of moderate Republican senators who have signaled an openness to calling witnesses did not appear persuaded by the case that the Democratic House managers made last week at the trial, which The Times reported on Friday was heading as early as this week toward a vote on Mr. Trump’s acquittal.

Mr. Bolton’s revelations could unearth support among that group and a handful of other senators who have indicated they might be open to hearing from him. Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee said Friday he planned to wait until after Mr. Trump’s lawyers presented and after senators asked the lawyers questions to decide on whether to support new testimony and evidence.

At least one senator who will vote on impeachment was mentioned by name in the draft of the book: Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin. Mr. Bolton said Mr. Johnson was at a meeting last May with Mr. Trump in which the president railed about Ukraine trying to damage him politically.

If the Senate does vote to hear from Mr. Bolton, the trial could stretch deep into February.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com