Page:20191203 - full report hpsci impeachment inquiry - 20191203.pdf/136

 But ... the nightmare was he would mention those two, take all the heat from that, get himself in big trouble in this country and probably in his country as well, and the security assistance would not be released. That was the nightmare.935

Early in the morning in Europe on September 9, Ambassador Taylor reiterated his concerns about the President’s “quid pro quo” in another series of text messages with Ambassadors Volker and Sondland:

By “help with a political campaign,” Ambassador Taylor was referring to President Trump’s 2020 reelection effort.937 Ambassador Taylor testified: “The investigation of Burisma and the Bidens was clearly identified by Mr. Giuliani in public for months as a way to get information on the two Bidens.”938

Ambassador Taylor framed the broader national security implications of President Trump’s decision to withhold vital security assistance from Ukraine. He said:


 * [T]he United States was trying to support Ukraine as a frontline state against Russian attack. And, again, the whole notion of a rules-based order was being threatened by the Russians in Ukraine. So our security assistance was designed to support Ukraine. And it was not just the United States; it was all of our allies.939

Ambassador Taylor explained:


 * [S]ecurity assistance was so important for Ukraine as well as our own national interests, to withhold that assistance for no good reason other than help with a political campaign made no sense. It was counterproductive to all of what we had been trying to do. It was illogical. It could not be explained. It was crazy.940

In response to Ambassador Taylor’s text message that it was “crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign,” Ambassador Sondland denied that the President had demanded a “quid pro quo.”