Page:2019-12-02-report-of-evidence-in-the-democrats-impeachment-inquiry-in-the-house-of-representatives.pdf/104

 witness to most of the events described," and admitted that he or she was not on the July 25 call between President Trump and President Zelensky. Instead, the anonymous whistleblower relied upon indirect, secondhand information provided by others—individuals who are also still unidentified. The whistleblower's lack of firsthand knowledge undermines the credibility of his or her accusations.

Testimony provided by officials with firsthand knowledge of the events rebuts the whistleblower's allegations. Ambassador Sondland testified that some of the concerns in the August 12 whistleblower complaint may be inaccurate or hyperbole. For example, both Ambassador Volker and Ambassador Sondland testified that the whistleblower incorrectly alleged "that State Department officials, including Ambassadors Volker and Sondland, had spoken with Mr. Giuliani to 'contain the damage' to U.S. national security." The ambassadors also disagreed with the whistleblower's statement that they helped Ukrainian leadership "'navigate' the demands" from President Trump.

In addition, Ambassador Sondland took issue with the whistleblower's characterization of efforts to arrange a meeting between President Trump and President Zelensky. The whistleblower complaint stated:

"During this same timeframe, multiple U.S. officials told me [the anonymous whistleblower] that the Ukrainian leadership was led to believe that a meeting or phone call between the President and President Zelensky would depend on whether Zelensky showed willingness to "play ball" on the issues that had been publicly aired by Mr. Lutsenko and Mr. Giuliani."

Ambassador Sondland testified that he never heard U.S. officials use the expression "play ball" in this context.

2. Press reports suggest that the anonymous whistleblower acknowledged having a professional relationship with former Vice President Biden.

The anonymous whistleblower reportedly acknowledged having a professional relationship with Vice President Biden. This admission is important because Vice President Biden was referenced in passing on the July 25 call and is a potential opponent of President Trump in the 2020 presidential election. It stands to reason that a mention of Vice President Biden—no matter how brief or innocuous—could stir the passion of someone who had a professional relationship with him. 91