Thread by @moscow_project

.@RepJerryNadler outlines Rudy Giuliani's efforts pursuing Trump's corrupt goals in Ukraine, going back to before Zelensky took office last spring:

@RepJerryNadler The first step was getting rid of the main threat to their work in Ukraine: U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, whose anti-corruption stances stood in the way of Trump's goals.

@RepJerryNadler In order to remove Yovanovitch, Giuliani was more than happy to team up with corrupt Ukrainian officials to smear a decorated and respected public servant.

@RepJerryNadler Shokin, Giuliani, and Lutsenko—all were working toward the same goal of fostering, not fighting, corruption in Ukraine.

@RepJerryNadler Giuliani and his corrupt compatriots laundered their smear campaign through The Hill, where it was written into conspiracy theory-laced op-eds that worked their wau up to the president.

@RepJerryNadler Giuliani's smear campaign only escalated from there, as the State Department continually refused to defend its ambassador—and as Giuliani continued his apparent coordination with the White House.

@RepJerryNadler Removing Yovanovitch was merely a means to an end, which was promoting conspiracy theories—at least one of which originated in Russia—that Trump believed would help him personally.

@RepJerryNadler The second conspiracy theory goes after one of Trump's personal opponents. There's no doubt he thought this would help him, leaving only the question: What did the president know, and when did he know it? (Spoiler alert: He knew everything all along.) themoscowproject.org/dispatch/trump…

@RepJerryNadler Trump and Zelensky's relationship was initially fairly positive—if characterized by Trump's usual lies and distortions ...

@RepJerryNadler ... but within days, it took a turn as Trump's cronies in Ukraine, led by Giuliani, began trying to weaponize the relationship against Trump's political opponents.

@RepJerryNadler Those efforts became increasingly pronounced over the next few weeks, as both Trump and Giuliani began publicly calling on Ukraine to investigate Trump's political opponents.

@RepJerryNadler As Giuliani was increasing his public pressure, Trump denied that he knew what Giuliani was up to on his behalf.
That's not at all how Giuliani represented their relationship—and the records sure seem to back up Giuliani's portrayal that Trump was in on it all along.

@RepJerryNadler For example: The "Three Amigos" attended Zelensky's inauguration, and tried to convince Trump he was on the level.
Trump refused to believe them—because it's not what Giuliani was telling him.

@RepJerryNadler And Trump was also explicitly telling them to "talk to Rudy" about their work in Ukraine, as clear a signal as any that he and Giuliani were on the same page every step of the way.

@RepJerryNadler That's also clearly how National Security Adviser John Bolton understood it when he said Giuliani was a "hand grenade" who would blow everybody up.

@RepJerryNadler And, while Giuliani was publicly pressing for investigations, and while Trump was instructing his staff to talk to Rudy, Trump was out in public saying he would gladly accept foreign interference in the 2020 election.
The messages could not have been clearer.

@RepJerryNadler On July 25, Trump was on the phone with Zelensky demanding a favor.
That same day, his administration was enacting the hold he wanted on assistance Ukraine needed to combat Russian aggression—despite bipartisan consensus that that aid was in the U.S.'s national interest.

@RepJerryNadler Trump signed off on hundreds of millions of dollars to Ukraine *twice* in 2018.
Suddenly, in July 2019, he considered it a priority to suspend aid to Ukraine—and only Ukraine—despite his own administration's urgings.
And now, we know why.

@RepJerryNadler Trump's own administration tried to convince him to reauthorize funding.
The DOD warned them that, as the GAO later concluded, continuing the hold might be illegal.
He didn't budge.

@RepJerryNadler Contrary to what Trump's defenders claim, Trump withholding aid meant it did not all get released in time—and certainly didn't get released in time to prevent Putin from seeing it as a sign of weakness in the relationship between Trump and Ukraine.

@RepJerryNadler The fact that aid to Ukraine was being withheld became public on August 28.
That was *months* after both the administration and Congress initially cleared it—and certainly long enough for Ukraine to realize it was being withheld.

@RepJerryNadler On June 18, DOD announced it would be sending the aid to Ukraine.
The next day, OMB officials began to enact the hold Trump wanted—and Trump began going on tv to talk about the conspiracy theories he wanted investigated.

@RepJerryNadler Other government departments asked about why the White House was holding the aid.
OMB officials expected Congress to "become unhinged" over the hold.
They did it anyway.

@RepJerryNadler What we know about internal discussions regarding the aid comes from public reporting and emails released under FOIA.
The Senate owes it to the American people to subpoena the records the White House has so far refused to release so we know the full story.

@RepJerryNadler Official after official asked why aid was being withhold. OMB was the only agency that was supporting it, but would only give vague answers about corruption, never explaining what they actually meant—because doing so would reveal the president's scheme.

@RepJerryNadler The White House circumvented the process they could have used to legitimately hold aid to Ukraine.
They rerouted the hold through political appointees with no relevant experience.
And in their internal discussions, they basically agreed not to tell anybody what was going on.

@RepJerryNadler OMB officials wouldn't even explain that they were the ones holding aid—they kept "kicking the can down the road," inserting footnotes that claimed they were still waiting for the resolution of an interagency process that had concluded *months* beforehand.

@RepJerryNadler Trump's own cabinet—his National Security Adviser, his Secretary of State, and his Secretary of Defense—tried to convince him that the interagency process had cleared aid to Ukraine.
He refused to listen—because it had nothing to do with why he was holding aid.

@RepJerryNadler Trump's defenders like to claim Ukraine never knew about the hold.
That's a blatant lie.
The evidence shows that Ukraine knew full well—and may have known as early as July 25, the day of Trump's call with Zelensky.

@RepJerryNadler The aid wasn't the only piece of the quid pro quo; it was also about a White House meeting for Zelensky—which still hasn't happened.

@RepJerryNadler Everybody enacting Trump's policy on the ground in Ukraine understood what was going on: It was a quid pro quo, exchanging a White House meeting for investigations of Trump's political opponents.

@RepJerryNadler Everyone in Ukraine knew they had to talk to Giuliani to make any progress with Trump, because everyone in Ukraine knew that Giuliani was speaking and working on behalf of the president by demanding a quid pro quo.

@RepJerryNadler If anybody involved didn't understand the quid pro quo, they did after July 10, when Gordon Sondland explicitly outlined the quid pro quo for Ukrainian officials.

@RepJerryNadler Bolton ended the meeting, but Sondland would not be deterred: He called a second meeting so he could be perfectly clear that Zelensky would only get a meeting if he announced Trump's desired investigations.

@RepJerryNadler The July 10 meeting makes Bolton a crucial fact witness in the Ukraine investigation.
There is *no* excuse for the Senate not to call him to testify—unless they prefer to cover up for Trump.

@RepJerryNadler It's not just Bolton.
Numerous White House officials were, as Sondland said, "in the loop."
It is the Senate's duty to call them as witnesses.
americanprogressaction.org/issues/democra…

@RepJerryNadler And there's no question that Zelensky understood what was being demanded of him in exchange for a White House meeting.

We put the text conversations between Sondland, Volker, Taylor, and Ukrainian officials in context.
There is no doubt about what they show: a quid pro quo. themoscowproject.org/dispatch/timel…

On the July 25 call, Trump could have sought to strengthen the U.S.'s relationship with Ukraine or asked about real corruption issues. Instead, he was only looking out for himself.

Instead, he demanded a favor from Zelensky. Two investigations—the first into a debunked Russian conspiracy theory about the 2016 election ...

... and the second into Joe Biden, alleging that a completely above-board effort to clean up a corrupt top prosecutor in Ukraine was actually a corrupt abuse of his power.

Trump's invocation of Giuliani on the call is evidence of corrupt intent hiding in plain sight—and the Ukrainian president clearly understood.

"Zelensky fully understood at the time of this July 25th call that if he yielded to President Trump's demand for phony investigations, he would get the white house meeting in the oval office that he desperately sought. This for that."
Or, in Latin: quid pro quo.

Trump insists the July 25 call was "perfect."
So why did his White House release a readout that didn't reflect *anything* he and Zelensky discussed?

Trump says the July 25 call was "perfect."
It's anything but.
"It is direct evidence that President Donald Trump corruptly abused his power and solicited foreign interference in the 2020 election."