An ally of Donald Trump has altered his testimony to the impeachment inquiry to confirm that the US president offered Ukraine a quid pro quo to investigate a political rival.
In a revision described by The Guardian as “dramatic”, Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the EU, said he told a senior official in Ukraine that nearly $400m in military aid would probably be withheld until the country announced an investigation into allegations about a gas company with ties to the former vice-president Joe Biden’s son Hunter.
The 375-page transcript of Sondland's 17 October deposition was released yesterday with an additional three-page declaration from Sondland, along with a letter from his attorney dated 4 November, at the end.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Sondland originally told investigators there was never a quid pro quo attaching aid or a White House visit to investigations. However, after subsequent witness appearances, Sondland returned with lawyers to Capitol Hill to “review” his testimony in a move described as “striking” by Time.
Sondland said he remembered a conversation on 1 September, 2019, in Warsaw with Andriy Yermak, a top adviser to the president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy.
He recalled in his updated evidence: “I said that resumption of the US aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anticorruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks.”
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a round-up of the most important stories from around the world - and a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the week’s news agenda - try The Week magazine. Get your first six issues for £6–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Democrats have seized on the news. Chris Murphy, a senator from Connecticut, wrote on Twitter: “Nobody can pretend there’s any lingering debate over what happened. It’s over. Open and shut. Today, the one guy who said there wasn’t a corrupt aid-for-interference deal, changed his story to say that in fact, there was an aid-for-interference deal.”
Adam Schiff, the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, wrote in USA Today: “This is about more than just one call. We now know that the call was just one piece of a larger operation to redirect our foreign policy to benefit Donald Trump's personal and political interests, not the national interest.”
The US president is accused of withholding military aid to Ukraine to coerce Zelensky into investigating Biden and his son Hunter over unsubstantiated corruption charges.
Trump has repeatedly denied that military aid was tied to an investigation of Biden. In response to the Sondland transcripts, White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham said they “show there is even less evidence for this illegitimate impeachment sham than previously thought”.
-
The history of US nuclear weapons on UK soilThe Explainer Arrangement has led to protests and dangerous mishaps
-
Tea with Judi Dench: ‘touching’ show is must-watch Christmas TVThe Week Recommends The national treasure sits down with Kenneth Branagh at her country home for a heartwarming ‘natter’
-
Codeword: December 24, 2025The daily codeword puzzle from The Week
-
Danes ‘outraged’ at revived Trump Greenland pushSpeed Read
-
‘Tension has been building inside Heritage for a long time’Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
The MAGA civil war takes center stage at the Turning Point USA conferenceIN THE SPOTLIGHT ‘Americafest 2025’ was a who’s who of right-wing heavyweights eager to settle scores and lay claim to the future of MAGA
-
CBS pulls ‘60 Minutes’ report on Trump deporteesSpeed Read An investigation into the deportations of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador’s notorious prison was scrapped
-
Trump administration posts sliver of Epstein filesSpeed Read Many of the Justice Department documents were heavily redacted, though new photos of both Donald Trump and Bill Clinton emerged
-
Is Trump deliberately redacting Epstein files to shield himself?Today’s Big Question Removal of image from publicly released documents prompts accusations of political interference by justice department
-
What Nick Fuentes and the Groypers wantThe Explainer White supremacism has a new face in the US: a clean-cut 27-year-old with a vast social media following
-
Trump HHS moves to end care for trans youthSpeed Read The administration is making sweeping proposals that would eliminate gender-affirming care for Americans under age 18
