Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

White House official says Trump made a quid pro quo “demand” of Ukraine’s president

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman’s full testimony to the House Democrat-led impeachment inquiry is bad news for Trump.

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, director for European Affairs at the National Security Council, arrives at the US Capitol on November 7, 2019 in Washington, DC.
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, director for European Affairs at the National Security Council, arrives at the US Capitol on November 7, 2019 in Washington, DC.
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, director for European Affairs at the National Security Council, arrives at the US Capitol on November 7, 2019 in Washington, DC.
Mark Wilson/Getty Images

The White House’s top Ukraine expert told the House Democrat-led impeachment inquiry that President Donald Trump made a “demand” of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and his son in exchange for a meeting.

Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the director for European affairs on the National Security Council, wrote in his opening statement last month that he was “concerned” about Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. And now that the House Intelligence Committee has released the full transcript of his closed-door deposition, it’s clear why Vindman felt that way.

“It was a demand for [Zelensky] to fulfill his — fulfill this particular prerequisite in order to get the meeting,” Vindman said, describing what Trump said on the call. “The demand was, in order to get the White House meeting, they had to deliver an investigation.”

That investigation Trump wanted the Ukrainian president to open, Vindman noted, was into the Ukrainian gas company Burisma. Hunter Biden — Joe’s son — sat on that firm’s board, and Trump believes in the debunked conspiracy theory that Joe Biden used his power as vice president to stop a previous corruption probe into Burisma in order to benefit his son.

Other witnesses have testified that Trump and other US officials knew very well that Zelensky wanted a meeting with the president at the White House. That meeting would help solidify ties between the US and Ukraine, which Kyiv wants strengthened due to Russia’s invasion of the country.

But Vindman, who was on the July 25 call, testified that Trump was only willing to give the Ukrainians that meeting if Zelensky’s administration agreed to open an investigation into Burisma, a probe that would impact the Bidens.

That’s a clear quid pro quo: Look into my domestic political rival, and you can have your much-desired meeting.

“Was there any doubt in your mind as to what the President, our President, was asking for as a deliverable?” Vindman was asked. “There was no doubt,” he replied.

Perhaps even worse, though, Vindman also provided new information about details that were left out of the White House’s readout of the July 25 call.

The July 25 Trump-Zelensky call was worse than we thought

The White House released a readout of the Trump-Zelensky call in September that clearly shows Trump pressuring Ukraine to look into the Bidens and Democrats in exchange for the meeting and further US military aid.

In the readout, Zelensky asks Trump for an increase in military aid — specifically, to purchase more Javelin anti-tank missiles, which are useful in Ukraine’s ongoing conflict with Russian-backed separatists in its east. Trump responds by saying, “I would like you to do us a favor though.” He then goes on to discuss the Bidens and his belief that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 election.

That was damning enough, even though the president continues to describe the call as “perfect.”

But the readout the White House released isn’t a verbatim transcript (it says so right in the text of the readout) of the conversation, which has led to concerns that some of what was said on the call may have been left out.

Vindman, one of the few administration officials who actually listened in on the call in real time, told the impeachment inquiry that there were in fact a few omissions — one of which is bad news for the administration.

In the White House version, Zelensky says that a new prosecutor general will be taking office soon and that “He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue.”

Vindman said in his testimony that Zelensky didn’t actually say “the company” there — he specifically said “Burisma.”

That matters, because it shows Trump explicitly discussing Burisma with his counterpart. No one can say, then, that Trump had no real knowledge of the scheme at hand. In fact, per Vindman, he was keenly aware.

More in Politics

Podcasts
The Supreme Court abortion pills case, explainedThe Supreme Court abortion pills case, explained
Podcast
Podcasts

How Louisiana brought mifepristone back to SCOTUS.

By Peter Balonon-Rosen and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
The Logoff
Flavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA headFlavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA head
The Logoff

Why Marty Makary is out at the FDA, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Virginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymanderVirginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymander
Politics

Democrats just handed the Supreme Court’s Republicans a loaded weapon.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
Can Trump lower gas prices?Can Trump lower gas prices?
The Logoff

What suspending the gas tax would mean for you, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters