another relevant set of facts here is the effort of some ukrainian officials to oppose president trump sto candidacy i the 2016 election. some of these ukrainian politicians initiallyf remaine in government when president zelensky took over. witnesses testified that these ukrainian efforts in 2016 colored how president trump viewed ukraine. it s also important to note that presidentto zelensky was a relatively unknown quantity for u.s. policy u makers. ambassador yovanovitch called him an untried politician. dr. hill testified that there were concerns within the national security council about zelensky s relationship with a controversial oligarch in ukraine. although president zelensky ran a reform platform, president zelensky appointed the oligarch s lawyer as his chief of staff. both ambassador volker and senator ron johnson noted that
quid pro quo. because president zelensky would be the target of any alleged quid pro quo scheme, his statementsem denying any pressu carry p significant weight.gn he is, in fact, the supposed victim here. other seniorer ukrainian government officials confirmed president zelensky s statements. foreign minister said on september 21st, i know what the conversation was about and i thinkut there was no pressure. danyluk, who was then secretary of ukraine s defense council told ambassador bill taylor on the night of the call that the ukrainian government was not disturbed by anything on the call. president trump, t of course, h always said that he did not
ukraine s long profound history of endemic corruption. several witnesses in the inquiry have testified about these problems. ambassador marie yovanovitch said for example ukraine s corruption is f not just prevalt butst frankly is the system. witnesses testified to having firsthand knowledge that president trump isg deeply skeptical of ukraine due to its corruption dating back years and that that skepticism contributed to president trump s initial hesitancy to meet with president zelensky. ambassador volker testified so i know he had a very deep-rooted skeptical view and my understanding at the time was that even though he agreed in the meeting that we had with him say, okay, i ll invite them, he didn t really want to do it, volker said. that s why the meeting kept getting delayed.
that s not mero saying that. that is professor turley. let me start with the best direct evidence of any potential quid pro quo or impeachable scheme. this is president trump s phone call with zelensky for which the national security council and the white house situation room staff prepared a call summary. according to testimony from tim morrison at the nsc the summary was accurate and complete. lieutenant colonel alexander vindman testified that any omissions were not significant and any editing was not done maliciously. president trump has declassified and released the call summary so the american people can assess it and review it for themselves. i llve make a few points that sm to have gone under noticed. the call summary reflects absolutely no pressure or