At the core of&nbsp; US President Donald Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against Iran lies the belief that Iran can be forced to negotiate terms for the lifting of harsh US economic sanctions even if it has no confidence in US intentions and adherence to agreements.

The Trump administration’s belief, despite the conviction of much of the international community that maximum pressure has failed and risks provoking a devastating all-out war in the Middle East, says much about the president’s transactional approach towards foreign policy that rests on the assumption that bluster, intimidation and the brute wielding of power can protect US interests and impose US will.

Richard Goldberg, an Iran-hawk who this month resigned as the official on the president’s national security council responsible for countering Iranian weapons of mass destruction, signalled in an op-ed in The New York Times, entitled “Trump Has an Iran Strategy. This Is It,” that Trump attributes no importance to deep-seated Iranian concerns that he is gunning for regime change in Tehran and that building trust is not needed to resolve the Iran crisis.

“The Iranian regime doesn’t need to trust America or Trump to strike a deal; it just needs to act as a rational actor to avoid collapse,” said Goldberg, who backed by former national security advisor John Bolton, served for a year in the White House.

Goldberg appeared to ignore the fact that the US withdrawal 20 months ago from a 2015 international agreement that curbed Iran’s nuclear program sparked doubts not only in Iran but across the globe about the value of a US signature on any agreement.

He also appeared oblivious to the fact that Iranian suspicions were reinforced by allegations that his salary, while at the White House, was paid by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a hardline Washington-based think tank that is believed to have close ties to Israel and the United Arab Emirates. So did anecdotes about how his hardline views provoked clashes with other administration officials.

In his op-ed, Goldberg suggested that any new agreement with Iran could be ratified by the US Senate.

The Trump administration and Goldberg’s misreading of what it would take to steer the United States and Iran off a road of more than 40 years of deep-seated mutual distrust and animosity and towards the turning of a new page in their relationship was evident in indirect responses to the former national security council official’s assertions.

”Even if one day we negotiate with the US, the talks will not be with Trump, won’t be strategic (no normalization of ties) and will be done only by conservatives, not reformists. We need to see changes in the (US) Congress; whether Democrats will pursue a fair policy by which Iran is not under pressure over its missile program,” said a regime insider.

The Trump administration has demanded among other things that Iran curb its ballistic missile program, a core element of the Islamic republic’s defence strategy given that its armed forces lack a credible air force and navy.

Hardliners, who rather than moderates have proven in other Middle Eastern conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian dispute to be the ones capable of cutting deals, are expected to win next month’s parliamentary elections in Iran. The likelihood of hardline advances was enhanced by the fact that scores of moderates have been barred from running for office.

Iranian reformists argue that the accidental downing of a Ukrainian airliner Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps demonstrates the risk of an Iranian strategy that is pre-empted on eternal hostility towards the United States.

Goldberg offered a rare indication that the Trump administration recognizes Iran’s strategy of gradual escalation that, based on the assumption that neither the United States nor Iran wants an all-out war, aims to bring the two countries to the brink of an armed conflict in the belief that this would break the logjam and force a return to the negotiating table on terms acceptable to Iran.

Noting that Trump had failed in the past nine months to respond to multiple Iranian provocations, including the downing of a US drone and attacks on tankers off the coast of the United Arab Emirates and on key Saudi oil facilities, Goldberg asserted that Trump “recognized those traps for what they were and exercised strategic patience.”

Trump’s patience ended in December when he responded to the death of an American contractor in an attack by Iranian-backed Iraqi militias and the militias’ siege of the US embassy in Baghdad by first authorizing airstrikes against militias bases in Iraq and Syria and then the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani

Goldberg would likely describe the president’s decision not to respond to a subsequent Iranian retaliatory attack on housing facilities for US military personnel in Iraq as a renewed act of strategic patience. 
&nbsp;Trump’s strategic patience is bolstered by his retention of options to further increase maximum pressure on Iran. “Many wrongly believe the United States has already reached full ‘maximum pressure on Iran,” Goldberg said.

Goldberg pointed to sanctions targeting Iranian state shipping lines that are set to take effect in June, the administration’s recent identification of Iran’s financial sector as a “primary jurisdiction of money-laundering concern,” this month’s imposition of sanctions on its construction, mining and manufacturing sectors, and Europe’s triggering of the nuclear accord’s dispute mechanism that could lead to the return of United Nations-mandated sanctions.

Goldberg and Trump’s belief that imminent economic collapse and international political isolation could prompt Iranian leaders to suddenly place a call to the White House turns Trump’s handling of the Iran crisis into a litmus test of the president’s approach to foreign relations.

There is little in the torturous history of relations between the United States and the Islamic republic that suggests that pressure will persuade Iran, convinced that Washington is gunning for the fall of the regime, to gamble on an unconditional return to the negotiating table.

Nor does North Korea’s failure to succumb to US pressure even if Trump, in contrast to his remarks about Iranian spiritual leader Ali Khamenei, professed his love for Kim Jong-un.

Trump’s policy towards Iran, rather than reinforcing Gulf confidence in the United States’ reliability as a guarantor of regional security, has sparked a wait-and-see attitude and nagging doubts about US reliability.

If anything, risky US and Iranian strategies are likely to prove that the crisis can only be defused if both sides garner an understanding of the others’ objectives and some degree of confidence that both parties would remain committed to any agreement they conclude.

So far, US and Iranian policies amount to a dialogue of the deaf that is likely to perpetuate the risk of hostility getting out of hand and incentivize regional players to think about alternative arrangements that ultimately could weaken US influence and reduce tensions with Iran by including it, despite US policy, in a more multilateral security architecture.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;

At the core of US President Donald Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against Iran lies the belief that Iran can be forced to negotiate terms for the lifting of harsh US economic sanctions even if it has no confidence in US intentions and adherence to agreements.

At the core of US President Donald Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against Iran lies the belief that Iran can be forced to negotiate terms for the lifting of harsh US economic sanctions even if it has no confidence in US intentions and adherence to agreements. The Trump administration’s belief, despite the conviction of much of the international community that maximum pressure has failed and risks provoking a devastating all-out war in the Middle East, says much about the president’s transactional approach towards foreign policy that rests on the assumption that bluster, intimidation and the brute wielding of power can protect US interests and impose US will. Richard Goldberg, an Iran-hawk who this month resigned as the official on the president’s national security council responsible for countering Iranian weapons of mass destruction, signalled in an op-ed in The New York Times, entitled “Trump Has an Iran Strategy. This Is It,” that Trump attributes no importance to deep-seated Iranian concerns that he is gunning for regime change in Tehran and that building trust is not needed to resolve the Iran crisis. “The Iranian regime doesn’t need to trust America or Trump to strike a deal; it just needs to act as a rational actor to avoid collapse,” said Goldberg, who backed by former national security advisor John Bolton, served for a year in the White House. Goldberg appeared to ignore the fact that the US withdrawal 20 months ago from a 2015 international agreement that curbed Iran’s nuclear program sparked doubts not only in Iran but across the globe about the value of a US signature on any agreement. He also appeared oblivious to the fact that Iranian suspicions were reinforced by allegations that his salary, while at the White House, was paid by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a hardline Washington-based think tank that is believed to have close ties to Israel and the United Arab Emirates. So did anecdotes about how his hardline views provoked clashes with other administration officials. In his op-ed, Goldberg suggested that any new agreement with Iran could be ratified by the US Senate. The Trump administration and Goldberg’s misreading of what it would take to steer the United States and Iran off a road of more than 40 years of deep-seated mutual distrust and animosity and towards the turning of a new page in their relationship was evident in indirect responses to the former national security council official’s assertions. ”Even if one day we negotiate with the US, the talks will not be with Trump, won’t be strategic (no normalization of ties) and will be done only by conservatives, not reformists. We need to see changes in the (US) Congress; whether Democrats will pursue a fair policy by which Iran is not under pressure over its missile program,” said a regime insider. The Trump administration has demanded among other things that Iran curb its ballistic missile program, a core element of the Islamic republic’s defence strategy given that its armed forces lack a credible air force and navy. Hardliners, who rather than moderates have proven in other Middle Eastern conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian dispute to be the ones capable of cutting deals, are expected to win next month’s parliamentary elections in Iran. The likelihood of hardline advances was enhanced by the fact that scores of moderates have been barred from running for office. Iranian reformists argue that the accidental downing of a Ukrainian airliner Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps demonstrates the risk of an Iranian strategy that is pre-empted on eternal hostility towards the United States. Goldberg offered a rare indication that the Trump administration recognizes Iran’s strategy of gradual escalation that, based on the assumption that neither the United States nor Iran wants an all-out war, aims to bring the two countries to the brink of an armed conflict in the belief that this would break the logjam and force a return to the negotiating table on terms acceptable to Iran. Noting that Trump had failed in the past nine months to respond to multiple Iranian provocations, including the downing of a US drone and attacks on tankers off the coast of the United Arab Emirates and on key Saudi oil facilities, Goldberg asserted that Trump “recognized those traps for what they were and exercised strategic patience.” Trump’s patience ended in December when he responded to the death of an American contractor in an attack by Iranian-backed Iraqi militias and the militias’ siege of the US embassy in Baghdad by first authorizing airstrikes against militias bases in Iraq and Syria and then the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani Goldberg would likely describe the president’s decision not to respond to a subsequent Iranian retaliatory attack on housing facilities for US military personnel in Iraq as a renewed act of strategic patience. Trump’s strategic patience is bolstered by his retention of options to further increase maximum pressure on Iran. “Many wrongly believe the United States has already reached full ‘maximum pressure on Iran,” Goldberg said. Goldberg pointed to sanctions targeting Iranian state shipping lines that are set to take effect in June, the administration’s recent identification of Iran’s financial sector as a “primary jurisdiction of money-laundering concern,” this month’s imposition of sanctions on its construction, mining and manufacturing sectors, and Europe’s triggering of the nuclear accord’s dispute mechanism that could lead to the return of United Nations-mandated sanctions. Goldberg and Trump’s belief that imminent economic collapse and international political isolation could prompt Iranian leaders to suddenly place a call to the White House turns Trump’s handling of the Iran crisis into a litmus test of the president’s approach to foreign relations. There is little in the torturous history of relations between the United States and the Islamic republic that suggests that pressure will persuade Iran, convinced that Washington is gunning for the fall of the regime, to gamble on an unconditional return to the negotiating table. Nor does North Korea’s failure to succumb to US pressure even if Trump, in contrast to his remarks about Iranian spiritual leader Ali Khamenei, professed his love for Kim Jong-un. Trump’s policy towards Iran, rather than reinforcing Gulf confidence in the United States’ reliability as a guarantor of regional security, has sparked a wait-and-see attitude and nagging doubts about US reliability. If anything, risky US and Iranian strategies are likely to prove that the crisis can only be defused if both sides garner an understanding of the others’ objectives and some degree of confidence that both parties would remain committed to any agreement they conclude. So far, US and Iranian policies amount to a dialogue of the deaf that is likely to perpetuate the risk of hostility getting out of hand and incentivize regional players to think about alternative arrangements that ultimately could weaken US influence and reduce tensions with Iran by including it, despite US policy, in a more multilateral security architecture. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Iran crisis test drives fundaments of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

The White House violated federal law by withholding security aid approved by lawmakers for Ukraine, a nonpartisan congressional watchdog said on Thursday, in a blow for <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/president-trump-knew-exactly-what-was-going-on-giuliani-associate-on-ukraine-row-274734">US&nbsp;President Donald Trump</a> as the Senate prepared to hold a trial on whether to remove him from office.

The Democratic-led House of Representatives on Wednesday sent the Senate two charges it passed last month accusing Trump of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress arising from his dealings with Ukraine, clearing the way for only the third impeachment trial of a president to begin in earnest next week.

The abuse of power cited by the House included Trump's withholding of $391 million in security aid for Ukraine, a move Democrats have said was aimed at pressuring Kiev into investigating political rival Joe Biden, the Republican president's possible Democratic opponent in the November&nbsp;3 US&nbsp;election.

"Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law," the Government Accountability Office (GAO) concluded, referring to the fact that Congress had already voted to appropriate the funds.

An arm of Congress, the GAO is viewed as a top auditing agency for the federal government that advises lawmakers and various government entities on how taxpayer dollars are spent.

While the agency's assessment was a setback to Trump, it was unclear how or even if it would figure in his trial in the Republican-led Senate given that key issues such as whether witnesses will appear or new evidence will be considered remain up in the air.

Democrats said the GAO report showed the importance of the Senate hearing from witnesses and considering new documents in the trial.

"This reinforces - again - the need for documents and eyewitnesses in the Senate," House Speaker <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/adam-schiff-to-lead-prosecution-in-us-senate-on-trump-impeachment-trial-pelosi-274484">Nancy Pelosi</a> told a news conference.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican, has said senators should consider only the evidence amassed by the House.

The House voted on Wednesday 228-193, largely along party lines, to give the Senate the task of putting Trump on trial. The Senate is expected to acquit him, keeping Trump in office, as none of its 53 Republicans has voiced support for removing him, a step that requires a two-thirds majority.

Trump has denied wrongdoing and has called the impeachment process a sham.

Democrat sought report

The GAO issued its opinion after receiving a letter inquiring about the aid from Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen. The agency's findings are not legally binding, but its reports are seen by lawmakers as objective, reliable and generally uncontested. The GAO has no prosecutorial power.

Its report noted that the US&nbsp;Constitution grants a president no unilateral authority to withhold funds in the way that Trump did. Instead, a president has a "strictly circumscribed authority" to withhold spending only in limited circumstances expressly provided by law. Holding up money for a policy reason, which the Trump administration did in this case, is not permitted, the report said.

Congress approved the $391 million to help Ukraine combat Russia-backed separatists in the eastern part of the country. The money ultimately was provided to Kiev in September after the controversy had spilled into public view.

A pivotal event leading to Trump's impeachment was a July 25 call in which he asked Ukraine's president to investigate Biden and his son Hunter Biden over unsubstantiated allegations of corruption and to look into a discredited theory that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 US&nbsp;election.

Democrats have said Trump abused his power by asking a foreign government to interfere in a US&nbsp;election for his own benefit at the expense of American national security.

Republicans have argued that Trump's actions did not rise to the level of impeachable offenses. They have accused Democrats of using the Ukraine affair as a way to nullify Trump's 2016 election victory.

Ceremony, rather than substance, was expected to mark Thursday's proceedings in the Senate, with the seven House "managers" named to prosecute Trump to present the articles of impeachment to the Senate at noon (1700 GMT).

The Senate later in the day will invite US&nbsp;Chief Justice John Roberts to the chamber to be sworn in to preside over the trial and, eventually, to swear in all 100 senators to serve as jurors. It will then formally notify the White House of Trump's impending trial.

The White House violated federal law by withholding security aid approved by lawmakers for Ukraine, a nonpartisan congressional watchdog said on Thursday, in a blow for US President Donald Trump as the Senate prepared to hold a trial on whether to remove him from office.

The White House violated federal law by withholding security aid approved by lawmakers for Ukraine, a nonpartisan congressional watchdog said on Thursday, in a blow for US President Donald Trump as the Senate prepared to hold a trial on whether to remove him from office. The Democratic-led House of Representatives on Wednesday sent the Senate two charges it passed last month accusing Trump of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress arising from his dealings with Ukraine, clearing the way for only the third impeachment trial of a president to begin in earnest next week. The abuse of power cited by the House included Trump's withholding of $391 million in security aid for Ukraine, a move Democrats have said was aimed at pressuring Kiev into investigating political rival Joe Biden, the Republican president's possible Democratic opponent in the November 3 US election. "Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law," the Government Accountability Office (GAO) concluded, referring to the fact that Congress had already voted to appropriate the funds. An arm of Congress, the GAO is viewed as a top auditing agency for the federal government that advises lawmakers and various government entities on how taxpayer dollars are spent. While the agency's assessment was a setback to Trump, it was unclear how or even if it would figure in his trial in the Republican-led Senate given that key issues such as whether witnesses will appear or new evidence will be considered remain up in the air. Democrats said the GAO report showed the importance of the Senate hearing from witnesses and considering new documents in the trial. "This reinforces - again - the need for documents and eyewitnesses in the Senate," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told a news conference. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican, has said senators should consider only the evidence amassed by the House. The House voted on Wednesday 228-193, largely along party lines, to give the Senate the task of putting Trump on trial. The Senate is expected to acquit him, keeping Trump in office, as none of its 53 Republicans has voiced support for removing him, a step that requires a two-thirds majority. Trump has denied wrongdoing and has called the impeachment process a sham. Democrat sought report The GAO issued its opinion after receiving a letter inquiring about the aid from Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen. The agency's findings are not legally binding, but its reports are seen by lawmakers as objective, reliable and generally uncontested. The GAO has no prosecutorial power. Its report noted that the US Constitution grants a president no unilateral authority to withhold funds in the way that Trump did. Instead, a president has a "strictly circumscribed authority" to withhold spending only in limited circumstances expressly provided by law. Holding up money for a policy reason, which the Trump administration did in this case, is not permitted, the report said. Congress approved the $391 million to help Ukraine combat Russia-backed separatists in the eastern part of the country. The money ultimately was provided to Kiev in September after the controversy had spilled into public view. A pivotal event leading to Trump's impeachment was a July 25 call in which he asked Ukraine's president to investigate Biden and his son Hunter Biden over unsubstantiated allegations of corruption and to look into a discredited theory that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 US election. Democrats have said Trump abused his power by asking a foreign government to interfere in a US election for his own benefit at the expense of American national security. Republicans have argued that Trump's actions did not rise to the level of impeachable offenses. They have accused Democrats of using the Ukraine affair as a way to nullify Trump's 2016 election victory. Ceremony, rather than substance, was expected to mark Thursday's proceedings in the Senate, with the seven House "managers" named to prosecute Trump to present the articles of impeachment to the Senate at noon (1700 GMT). The Senate later in the day will invite US Chief Justice John Roberts to the chamber to be sworn in to preside over the trial and, eventually, to swear in all 100 senators to serve as jurors. It will then formally notify the White House of Trump's impending trial.

White House broke law by withholding Ukraine aid: Congressional agency

The full text of a partial US-China trade deal will be released only after it is signed next week, the White House said on Friday.

After nearly two years of escalating conflict, US President Donald Trump and top Chinese trade envoy Liu He are due to sign a "phase one" agreement on January 15.

"The whole document will be released Wednesday," Larry Kudlow, director of the National Economic Council, told reporters.

The signing will be preceded by a formal dinner and followed by a lunch, he added, calling the agreement a major achievement.

"This is history."

Since the trade war started in the first half of 2018, talks between Washington and Beijing broke down acrimoniously more than once, creating doubts the economic powers would have the appetite to reach a "phase two" agreement.

Trump said this week that negotiations on the next phase would begin promptly but that signing that agreement might have to wait until after the 2020 presidential elections.

Details of the deal are scant, but some critics have claimed it amounts to a strategic retreat for the United States, which cancelled some tariffs and reduced others in return for Chinese pledges to increase purchases of US exports by $200 billion over two years, including farm goods in particular.

Many tariffs will remain in place, but Kudlow on Friday said the accord amounted to a success.

"We got so much of what we wanted in this deal," he said.

US officials also say the agreement will touch on other areas of Chinese trade practices that were the subject of the Americans' major grievances, such as intellectual property, financial services, foreign exchange and dispute resolution.

The full text of a partial US-China trade deal will be released only after it is signed next week, the White House said on Friday. After nearly two years of escalating conflict, US President Donald Trump and top Chinese trade envoy Liu He are due to sign a "phase one" agreement on January 15.

The full text of a partial US-China trade deal will be released only after it is signed next week, the White House said on Friday. After nearly two years of escalating conflict, US President Donald Trump and top Chinese trade envoy Liu He are due to sign a "phase one" agreement on January 15. "The whole document will be released Wednesday," Larry Kudlow, director of the National Economic Council, told reporters. The signing will be preceded by a formal dinner and followed by a lunch, he added, calling the agreement a major achievement. "This is history." Since the trade war started in the first half of 2018, talks between Washington and Beijing broke down acrimoniously more than once, creating doubts the economic powers would have the appetite to reach a "phase two" agreement. Trump said this week that negotiations on the next phase would begin promptly but that signing that agreement might have to wait until after the 2020 presidential elections. Details of the deal are scant, but some critics have claimed it amounts to a strategic retreat for the United States, which cancelled some tariffs and reduced others in return for Chinese pledges to increase purchases of US exports by $200 billion over two years, including farm goods in particular. Many tariffs will remain in place, but Kudlow on Friday said the accord amounted to a success. "We got so much of what we wanted in this deal," he said. US officials also say the agreement will touch on other areas of Chinese trade practices that were the subject of the Americans' major grievances, such as intellectual property, financial services, foreign exchange and dispute resolution.

Details of US-China deal to be published after signing: White House

The tensions between Iran and the United States reached a tipping point on January 3 when the US missile strike killed the second-most powerful man in Iran - Gen Qassem Soleimani. In retaliation, Iran launched ballistic missiles at Iraqi bases housing US troops. In an address to the nation from the White House, President Trump said no Americans were killed or wounded when Iranian forces launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles against two military bases in Iraq marking the most significant Iranian attack in a growing conflict with the United States. Trump further added that Iran will never be allowed to have nuclear weapons, promising harsher sanctions against Iran "unless it changes its behaviour". #QassemSoleimani #DonaldTrump #US #Iran #SoleimaniKilling

Donald Trump: Iranian strike caused no American deaths

A senior <a href="https://www.wionews.com/science-tech/facebook-to-welcome-its-first-ever-facebook-tv-18323">Facebook</a> executive on Tuesday said the world's biggest social network unintentionally helped put <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/donald-trumps-attitude-towards-india-unpredictable-unreliable-238560">Donald Trump</a> in the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/americas/white-house-invokes-executive-privilege-to-stop-release-of-mueller-report-217070">White House</a> but warned against dramatic rule changes.

The Trump campaign did effectively use Facebook to rally support for his presidential run, and the social network should be mindful of that without making moves that stifle free political discourse, Andrew Bosworth said in a lengthy post on his personal Facebook page triggered by The New York Times publishing an internal memo he wrote.

"So was Facebook responsible for Donald Trump getting elected?" Bosworth asked.

"I think the answer is yes, but not for the reasons anyone thinks."

Bosworth contended Trump was not elected because of Russia or misinformation or Cambridge Analytica, but rather because he ran "the single best digital ad campaign I've ever seen from any advertiser."

He went on to say that, since Facebook has the same ad policies in place now, the outcome of the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/how-the-impeachment-inquiry-might-affect-donald-trumps-2020-re-election-chances-253716">2020 election</a> could be the same as it was four years ago.

"As tempting as it is to use the tools available to us to change the outcome, I am confident we must never do that or we will become that which we fear," Bosworth wrote.

That doesn't mean Facebook should not draw a line when it comes to how it is used, he reasoned. Clearly inciting violence, thwarting voting, and other blatant transgressions should be banned, but voters should be trusted to decide what kind of leaders they want to elect, according to Bosworth.

"If we don’t want hate-mongering politicians then we must not elect them," Bosworth wrote.

"If we change the outcomes without winning the minds of the people who will be ruled then we have a democracy in name only. If we limit what information people have access to and what they can say then we have no democracy at all."

A senior Facebook executive on Tuesday said the world's biggest social network unintentionally helped put Donald Trump in the White House but warned against dramatic rule changes.

A senior Facebook executive on Tuesday said the world's biggest social network unintentionally helped put Donald Trump in the White House but warned against dramatic rule changes. The Trump campaign did effectively use Facebook to rally support for his presidential run, and the social network should be mindful of that without making moves that stifle free political discourse, Andrew Bosworth said in a lengthy post on his personal Facebook page triggered by The New York Times publishing an internal memo he wrote. "So was Facebook responsible for Donald Trump getting elected?" Bosworth asked. "I think the answer is yes, but not for the reasons anyone thinks." Bosworth contended Trump was not elected because of Russia or misinformation or Cambridge Analytica, but rather because he ran "the single best digital ad campaign I've ever seen from any advertiser." He went on to say that, since Facebook has the same ad policies in place now, the outcome of the 2020 election could be the same as it was four years ago. "As tempting as it is to use the tools available to us to change the outcome, I am confident we must never do that or we will become that which we fear," Bosworth wrote. That doesn't mean Facebook should not draw a line when it comes to how it is used, he reasoned. Clearly inciting violence, thwarting voting, and other blatant transgressions should be banned, but voters should be trusted to decide what kind of leaders they want to elect, according to Bosworth. "If we don’t want hate-mongering politicians then we must not elect them," Bosworth wrote. "If we change the outcomes without winning the minds of the people who will be ruled then we have a democracy in name only. If we limit what information people have access to and what they can say then we have no democracy at all."

Facebook executive says it helped put Trump in White House

Dozens of protesters gathered near the White House and Trump International Hotel on Saturday to protest against U.S. airstrike killed Iranian military commander and deployment of US troops in the Middle East. #WhiteHouse #DonaldTrump #WION

Protest breaks out over Trump-Iraq policy near White House, Trump hotel

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump and Russian President<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/vladimir-putin-thanks-donald-trump-for-intelligence-that-foiled-attack-270901"> Vladimir Putin</a> discussed the state of relations between their two countries in a phone call instigated by Putin, the White House said on Monday.

The official reason for the call, according to both sides, was for Putin to thank Trump for what White House spokesman Hogan Gidley said was "information the United States provided that helped foil a potential holiday terrorist attack in Russia."

No details were provided, but Russia said on Sunday it had thwarted attacks reportedly planned in St. Petersburg thanks to a tip from Washington.

Gidley said both presidents committed to continuing counterterrorism cooperation between the two countries.

"The presidents also discussed the state of relations between the United States and Russia and future efforts to support effective arms control," he said, an apparent reference to Trump's stated desire for a new nuclear arms control deal.

Watch |&nbsp;Putin thanks Trump for foiling New Year attacks

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/putin-thanks-trump-for-foiling-new-year-attacks-270992/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Trump, on a two-week working vacation at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, has longed for strong US relations with Russia and complained that a US probe into whether his 2016 presidential campaign colluded with Russia had stymied him.

He has faced sweeping opposition to warmer ties with Russia from Republican and Democratic lawmakers troubled by Putin's annexation of Crimea and Russian support for separatists in eastern Ukraine, among other strains.

Some new tensions have arisen between the two countries.

Trump on Thursday warned Russia, Syria and Iran against killing civilians in Syria’s Idlib province.

Syrian and Russian forces have intensified their bombardment of targets in Idlib, the last significant rebel pocket of Syria. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has vowed to recapture it.

In another potential strain, Russia joined with China on a draft proposal to the U.N. Security Council to seek a lifting of some U.N.-backed sanctions against North Korea over its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

The Trump-Putin call came as the State Department announced Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will travel to Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Cyprus from Jan. 3-7.

US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin discussed the state of relations between their two countries in a phone call instigated by Putin, the White House said on Monday.

US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin discussed the state of relations between their two countries in a phone call instigated by Putin, the White House said on Monday. The official reason for the call, according to both sides, was for Putin to thank Trump for what White House spokesman Hogan Gidley said was "information the United States provided that helped foil a potential holiday terrorist attack in Russia." No details were provided, but Russia said on Sunday it had thwarted attacks reportedly planned in St. Petersburg thanks to a tip from Washington. Gidley said both presidents committed to continuing counterterrorism cooperation between the two countries. "The presidents also discussed the state of relations between the United States and Russia and future efforts to support effective arms control," he said, an apparent reference to Trump's stated desire for a new nuclear arms control deal. Watch | Putin thanks Trump for foiling New Year attacks × Trump, on a two-week working vacation at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, has longed for strong US relations with Russia and complained that a US probe into whether his 2016 presidential campaign colluded with Russia had stymied him. He has faced sweeping opposition to warmer ties with Russia from Republican and Democratic lawmakers troubled by Putin's annexation of Crimea and Russian support for separatists in eastern Ukraine, among other strains. Some new tensions have arisen between the two countries. Trump on Thursday warned Russia, Syria and Iran against killing civilians in Syria’s Idlib province. Syrian and Russian forces have intensified their bombardment of targets in Idlib, the last significant rebel pocket of Syria. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has vowed to recapture it. In another potential strain, Russia joined with China on a draft proposal to the U.N. Security Council to seek a lifting of some U.N.-backed sanctions against North Korea over its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. The Trump-Putin call came as the State Department announced Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will travel to Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Cyprus from Jan. 3-7.

Trump, Putin discussed Russia attack, arms control, relations: White House

The United States would be very disappointed if <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/north-koreas-kim-holds-top-party-meeting-ahead-of-us-deadline-270787">North Korea</a> tested a long-range or nuclear missile and would take appropriate action as a leading military and economic power, White House national security adviser Robert O'Brien said on Sunday.

Washington has many "tools in its tool kit" to respond to any such test, O'Brien said in an interview with ABC's "This Week."

"We'll reserve judgment but the United States will take action as we do in these situations," he said. "If Kim Jong Un takes that approach we'll be extraordinarily disappointed and we'll demonstrate that disappointment."

North Korea has asked Washington to offer a new initiative to iron out differences over Pyongyang's nuclear weapons program. It warned Washington this month that failure to meet its expectations could result in an unwanted "Christmas gift."

US&nbsp;military commanders have said the North Korean move could involve the testing of a long-range missile - something North Korea has suspended, along with nuclear bomb tests, since 2017.

O'Brien said the United States and North Korea had open channels of communication but did not elaborate. He said Washington hoped North Korean leader Kim Jong Un would live up to his commitments to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula.

The United States was still the leading military power in the world and had tremendous economic power, said O'Brien. "There's a lot of pressure that we can bring to bear," he said.

North Korea threatened a Christmas surprise, despite the fact that Trump and Kim have engaged in personal diplomacy over the years and have a good personal relationship, O'Brien said.

"So perhaps he's reconsidered that," O'Brien added. "But we will have to wait and see. We're going to monitor it closely. It's a situation that concerns us, of course."

Kim convened a meeting of top ruling party officials on Saturday to discuss important policy matters ahead of the year-end deadline set by Kim for the United States, the state news agency said on Sunday.

Senator Ben Cardin, a Democrat on the US&nbsp;Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said meetings between the two leaders have produced "very little" on denuclearization.

"So what I want to see, I want to see is the leader of North Korea, Kim Jong Un, make a full declaration of his nuclear weapons program and make a real commitment to start to dismantle that," he said. "We haven’t seen any of that during the Trump administration."

The United States would be very disappointed if North Korea tested a long-range or nuclear missile and would take appropriate action as a leading military and economic power, White House national security adviser Robert O'Brien said on Sunday.

The United States would be very disappointed if North Korea tested a long-range or nuclear missile and would take appropriate action as a leading military and economic power, White House national security adviser Robert O'Brien said on Sunday. Washington has many "tools in its tool kit" to respond to any such test, O'Brien said in an interview with ABC's "This Week." "We'll reserve judgment but the United States will take action as we do in these situations," he said. "If Kim Jong Un takes that approach we'll be extraordinarily disappointed and we'll demonstrate that disappointment." North Korea has asked Washington to offer a new initiative to iron out differences over Pyongyang's nuclear weapons program. It warned Washington this month that failure to meet its expectations could result in an unwanted "Christmas gift." US military commanders have said the North Korean move could involve the testing of a long-range missile - something North Korea has suspended, along with nuclear bomb tests, since 2017. O'Brien said the United States and North Korea had open channels of communication but did not elaborate. He said Washington hoped North Korean leader Kim Jong Un would live up to his commitments to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula. The United States was still the leading military power in the world and had tremendous economic power, said O'Brien. "There's a lot of pressure that we can bring to bear," he said. North Korea threatened a Christmas surprise, despite the fact that Trump and Kim have engaged in personal diplomacy over the years and have a good personal relationship, O'Brien said. "So perhaps he's reconsidered that," O'Brien added. "But we will have to wait and see. We're going to monitor it closely. It's a situation that concerns us, of course." Kim convened a meeting of top ruling party officials on Saturday to discuss important policy matters ahead of the year-end deadline set by Kim for the United States, the state news agency said on Sunday. Senator Ben Cardin, a Democrat on the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said meetings between the two leaders have produced "very little" on denuclearization. "So what I want to see, I want to see is the leader of North Korea, Kim Jong Un, make a full declaration of his nuclear weapons program and make a real commitment to start to dismantle that," he said. "We haven’t seen any of that during the Trump administration."

United States promises action on any North Korea missile test: White House

The White House does not want to see a prolonged impeachment trial in the US&nbsp;Senate, a senior administration official said on Sunday, suggesting President Donald Trump is comfortable with proceeding without calling witnesses in his defense.

The Democratic-led House of Representatives approved two impeachment charges against Trump on Wednesday over his pressuring of Ukraine to investigate a political rival. There is little chance he will be convicted and removed from office through a trial in a Senate controlled by fellow Republicans.

Democrats are pressing to call top Trump aides to testify, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wants the Senate to consider the case without hearing from new witnesses.

While Trump had indicated an interest in calling separate witnesses in his defense, he has also said he would go along with whatever decision McConnell and other Senate Republican leaders make.

In remarks on Sunday talk shows, Marc Short, chief of staff to Vice President Mike Pence, indicated the White House was on board with McConnell's goal of a speedy trial.

"The American people are tired of this sham," Short said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

"To the extent that there's a prolonged trial, we're not anxious about that," he said. "Our administration is anxious to get back to working for the American people ... We've had a lot of witnesses already."

Lawmakers left Washington for a holiday break on Friday at loggerheads over how to proceed.

To ramp up pressure on McConnell to permit new testimony, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi - the top Democrat in Congress - has postponed sending the impeachment charges to the Senate.

Republicans have suggested Democrats want witnesses because the case they have assembled is so weak, while Democrats portray Republicans as scared about what new testimony might reveal.

"If her case is so air tight ... why does she need more witnesses?" Short said on "Fox News Sunday."

Speaking to reporters in New York, Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer stuck with Democrats' position that further testimony was required. "It's a sham trial and that's why we feel so strongly there ought to be witnesses and documents," he said.

Republican moderates

Trump is only the third US&nbsp;president in history to be impeached. The others were Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998. Richard Nixon resigned in 1974 as he faced the threat of impeachment.

The House charged Trump with abusing his power by holding back $391 million in security aid to Ukraine in an effort to get Kiev to announce a corruption investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden, a leading candidate for the Democratic nomination to face Trump in the November 2020 election.

Trump was also charged with obstructing Congress by directing administration officials and agencies not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry. He says he did nothing wrong and has dismissed his impeachment as a partisan bid to undo his 2016 election win.

"The American people and the United States Senate deserve to have a full, fair and complete trial and that means witnesses, it means documents," Democratic Senator Doug Jones told ABC's "This Week."

Responding to Republican charges that the case was thin, Jones said that if it was thin, "it's thin because the president of the United States ordered his top people who were in the room who have first-hand knowledge, not to testify."

Republicans hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, and Democrats are hoping a few moderate Republicans will support their bid for further testimony and force McConnell's hand.

"The leverage is our hope that four Republican senators will stand up ... and say this is much bigger than our current political squabbles," Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, told CNN's "State of the Union."

"If four Republican senators step up, it can make a big difference," he said.

The White House does not want to see a prolonged impeachment trial in the US Senate, a senior administration official said on Sunday, suggesting President Donald Trump is comfortable with proceeding without calling witnesses in his defense.

The White House does not want to see a prolonged impeachment trial in the US Senate, a senior administration official said on Sunday, suggesting President Donald Trump is comfortable with proceeding without calling witnesses in his defense. The Democratic-led House of Representatives approved two impeachment charges against Trump on Wednesday over his pressuring of Ukraine to investigate a political rival. There is little chance he will be convicted and removed from office through a trial in a Senate controlled by fellow Republicans. Democrats are pressing to call top Trump aides to testify, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wants the Senate to consider the case without hearing from new witnesses. While Trump had indicated an interest in calling separate witnesses in his defense, he has also said he would go along with whatever decision McConnell and other Senate Republican leaders make. In remarks on Sunday talk shows, Marc Short, chief of staff to Vice President Mike Pence, indicated the White House was on board with McConnell's goal of a speedy trial. "The American people are tired of this sham," Short said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "To the extent that there's a prolonged trial, we're not anxious about that," he said. "Our administration is anxious to get back to working for the American people ... We've had a lot of witnesses already." Lawmakers left Washington for a holiday break on Friday at loggerheads over how to proceed. To ramp up pressure on McConnell to permit new testimony, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi - the top Democrat in Congress - has postponed sending the impeachment charges to the Senate. Republicans have suggested Democrats want witnesses because the case they have assembled is so weak, while Democrats portray Republicans as scared about what new testimony might reveal. "If her case is so air tight ... why does she need more witnesses?" Short said on "Fox News Sunday." Speaking to reporters in New York, Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer stuck with Democrats' position that further testimony was required. "It's a sham trial and that's why we feel so strongly there ought to be witnesses and documents," he said. Republican moderates Trump is only the third US president in history to be impeached. The others were Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998. Richard Nixon resigned in 1974 as he faced the threat of impeachment. The House charged Trump with abusing his power by holding back $391 million in security aid to Ukraine in an effort to get Kiev to announce a corruption investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden, a leading candidate for the Democratic nomination to face Trump in the November 2020 election. Trump was also charged with obstructing Congress by directing administration officials and agencies not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry. He says he did nothing wrong and has dismissed his impeachment as a partisan bid to undo his 2016 election win. "The American people and the United States Senate deserve to have a full, fair and complete trial and that means witnesses, it means documents," Democratic Senator Doug Jones told ABC's "This Week." Responding to Republican charges that the case was thin, Jones said that if it was thin, "it's thin because the president of the United States ordered his top people who were in the room who have first-hand knowledge, not to testify." Republicans hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, and Democrats are hoping a few moderate Republicans will support their bid for further testimony and force McConnell's hand. "The leverage is our hope that four Republican senators will stand up ... and say this is much bigger than our current political squabbles," Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, told CNN's "State of the Union." "If four Republican senators step up, it can make a big difference," he said.

White House does not want prolonged impeachment trial: Senior official

United States President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/united-states-space-force-donald-trump-creates-new-warfare-service-branch-of-pentagon-269433">Donald Trump</a> has extended an invitation to the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to visit him in the White House during the new year, Britain's Sunday Times newspaper reported.

According to the report, Trump invited Johnson after the latter recently swept the British elections.

"Some potential dates have been floated in mid-January but nothing has yet been formally agreed. But it is clear that both sides want to make it happen sometime in early 2020," the report quoted a source as saying.

Watch: Gravitas -&nbsp;President Trump impeached in the house

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/wion-gravitas-president-trump-impeached-in-the-house-269253/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

On Friday, Johnson won approval for the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/british-pm-boris-johnsons-brexit-deal-wins-first-vote-in-new-parliament-269404">Brexit deal</a> in the British parliament. His election pledge revolved around Britain's departure from the European Union by January 31

The parliamentary approval followed Johnson's landslide election victory earlier this month.

Amid Brexit plans, Johnson and Trump agreed in a phone call on Monday to pursue an "ambitious" UK-US free trade agreement.

Trump expressed elation after Johnson's win and said that his victory had the cleared the way for a 'massive' trade deal after Brexit.

"This deal has the potential to be far bigger and <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/donald-trump-enthusiastic-about-boris-johnsons-victory-but-it-wont-be-smooth-sailing-for-them-269348">more lucrative</a> than any deal that could be made with the EU", Trump had said in a tweet earlier this month.

No formal discussions regarding this visit have taken place yet.

(With inputs from agencies)

United States President Donald Trump has extended an invitation to the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to visit him in the White House during the new year, Britain's Sunday Times newspaper reported.

United States President Donald Trump has extended an invitation to the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to visit him in the White House during the new year, Britain's Sunday Times newspaper reported. According to the report, Trump invited Johnson after the latter recently swept the British elections. "Some potential dates have been floated in mid-January but nothing has yet been formally agreed. But it is clear that both sides want to make it happen sometime in early 2020," the report quoted a source as saying. Watch: Gravitas - President Trump impeached in the house On Friday, Johnson won approval for the Brexit deal in the British parliament. His election pledge revolved around Britain's departure from the European Union by January 31 The parliamentary approval followed Johnson's landslide election victory earlier this month. Amid Brexit plans, Johnson and Trump agreed in a phone call on Monday to pursue an "ambitious" UK-US free trade agreement. Trump expressed elation after Johnson's win and said that his victory had the cleared the way for a 'massive' trade deal after Brexit. "This deal has the potential to be far bigger and more lucrative than any deal that could be made with the EU", Trump had said in a tweet earlier this month. No formal discussions regarding this visit have taken place yet. (With inputs from agencies)

US President Trump invites Britain's Johnson to White House for new year: Sources

US&nbsp;Democrats on Thursday pressed the Republican-controlled Senate to call <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/impeached-us-president-trump-says-democrats-consumed-with-hatred-269042">Donald Trump</a>'s top lieutenants to testify in its trial of the impeached president, as they sought to focus attention on the trial ahead of the 2020 presidential election.

A day after the Democratic-led US&nbsp;House of Representatives <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-house-votes-to-impeach-trump-for-obstruction-of-congress-269040/amp">impeached Trump</a>, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she would not formally hand off impeachment to the Senate until she got a sense of how Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell would manage the trial.

"We're ready when we see what they have," she told a news conference.

Pelosi was not expected to move until lawmakers return from their year-end recess in early January, according to aides.

That did not seem to bother McConnell, who said the two sides were at an impasse.

"I'm not sure what leverage there is in refraining from sending us something we do not want," he said on the Senate floor.

The impeachment effort has deepened the partisan divide in Washington, and polls show that public opinion has hardened along ideological lines as well.

One surprise came when Christianity Today, a prominent evangelical publication, called Trump's conduct "profoundly immoral" and said he should be removed from office.

Polls have found that white evangelical Christians are among Trump's most loyal supporters.

Trump has denied wrongdoing and called the impeachment enquiry launched by Pelosi in September a "witch hunt."

His political future now rests with 77-year-old McConnell, a self-proclaimed "Grim Reaper" who is widely known as a shrewd negotiator who plays hardball politics at a level unusual even by Washington standards.

Democrats want McConnell to allow top Trump aides like Mick Mulvaney, the White House acting chief of staff, and John Bolton, Trump's former national security adviser, to testify, according to a senior Democratic aide.

"Is the president's case so weak that none of the president's men can defend him under oath?" asked Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, who later urged McConnell in a meeting to use the two-week recess to consider allowing witnesses.

In an interview on MSNBC, Schumer said he doubted McConnell would agree to allow witness testimony. But Schumer said he believed enough Republican senators would join all the Democrats in forcing the adoption of rules for the trial that would include having witnesses testify.

In a historic vote on Wednesday evening, House <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/impeached-us-president-trump-says-democrats-consumed-with-hatred-269042">Democrats impeached Trump</a> for alleged abuse of power and obstruction of Congress related to his attempts to pressure Ukraine to investigate Democratic political foe, Joe Biden. He is only the third US&nbsp;president to be impeached.

Also Watch:&nbsp;Donald Trump impeached. What happens next?

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-impeached-what-happens-next-269092/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The Senate trial is expected in early January. Trump himself has expressed an interest in a long trial with witnesses, but senior Republican senators want to put the affair behind them. They point out that there were no live witnesses at the 1999 impeachment trial of Democratic then-President Bill Clinton.

McConnell and Schumer met on Thursday afternoon. Asked how he felt about Pelosi potentially withholding the articles of impeachment, the Republican said: "If the speaker wants to hold on to them, it’s fine with us."

Earlier, McConnell accused Democrats of succumbing to "transient passions and factionalism" and made it clear that he did not think the Senate should find Trump guilty.

"The vote did not reflect what had been proven. It only reflects how they feel about the president. The Senate must put this right," McConnell said on the Senate floor.

Trump, 73, is accused of abusing his power by pressuring Ukraine to investigate Biden, a former US&nbsp;vice president, as well as a discredited theory that Democrats conspired with Ukraine to meddle in the 2016 election.

Democrats say that as part of his pressure campaign, Trump held back $391 million in security aid for Ukraine and a coveted White House meeting for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy as leverage to coerce Kyiv into interfering in the 2020 election by smearing Biden.

Trump is also accused of obstruction of Congress for directing administration officials and agencies not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry.

A Senate trial would kick off a politically charged year heading into the presidential election, which will pit Trump against one of a field of Democratic contenders, including Biden, who has repeatedly criticized the president's conduct in office.

Fewer than half of Americans want Trump removed from office, according to polls&nbsp;released on Thursday.

The Senate is highly unlikely to find Trump guilty and remove him from office. At least 20 Republican senators would have to vote to convict Trump and none has indicated a willingness to do so.

McConnell has said he is working in tandem with the White House on trial preparations, drawing accusations from Democrats that he is ignoring his duty to consider the evidence in an impartial manner.

Asked about his strategy, Trump told reporters at the White House: "We have great senators - Republican senators. ... I'm going to let them decide what to do. That's going to be up to them."

Pelosi she would wait to name the Democratic House "managers," who will prosecute the case, until she knew more about the Senate trial procedures. The chamber's No. 3 Democrat, James Clyburn, told CNN the House could wait indefinitely.

Pelosi's tactic gives Democrats time to convince some Senate Republicans that they should hear from witnesses, said Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen.

"When you have a trial you get to call witnesses," he told Reuters.

US Democrats on Thursday pressed the Republican-controlled Senate to call Donald Trump's top lieutenants to testify in its trial of the impeached president, as they sought to focus attention on the trial ahead of the 2020 presidential election.

US Democrats on Thursday pressed the Republican-controlled Senate to call Donald Trump's top lieutenants to testify in its trial of the impeached president, as they sought to focus attention on the trial ahead of the 2020 presidential election. A day after the Democratic-led US House of Representatives impeached Trump, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she would not formally hand off impeachment to the Senate until she got a sense of how Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell would manage the trial. "We're ready when we see what they have," she told a news conference. Pelosi was not expected to move until lawmakers return from their year-end recess in early January, according to aides. That did not seem to bother McConnell, who said the two sides were at an impasse. "I'm not sure what leverage there is in refraining from sending us something we do not want," he said on the Senate floor. The impeachment effort has deepened the partisan divide in Washington, and polls show that public opinion has hardened along ideological lines as well. One surprise came when Christianity Today, a prominent evangelical publication, called Trump's conduct "profoundly immoral" and said he should be removed from office. Polls have found that white evangelical Christians are among Trump's most loyal supporters. Trump has denied wrongdoing and called the impeachment enquiry launched by Pelosi in September a "witch hunt." His political future now rests with 77-year-old McConnell, a self-proclaimed "Grim Reaper" who is widely known as a shrewd negotiator who plays hardball politics at a level unusual even by Washington standards. Democrats want McConnell to allow top Trump aides like Mick Mulvaney, the White House acting chief of staff, and John Bolton, Trump's former national security adviser, to testify, according to a senior Democratic aide. "Is the president's case so weak that none of the president's men can defend him under oath?" asked Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, who later urged McConnell in a meeting to use the two-week recess to consider allowing witnesses. In an interview on MSNBC, Schumer said he doubted McConnell would agree to allow witness testimony. But Schumer said he believed enough Republican senators would join all the Democrats in forcing the adoption of rules for the trial that would include having witnesses testify. In a historic vote on Wednesday evening, House Democrats impeached Trump for alleged abuse of power and obstruction of Congress related to his attempts to pressure Ukraine to investigate Democratic political foe, Joe Biden. He is only the third US president to be impeached. Also Watch: Donald Trump impeached. What happens next? × The Senate trial is expected in early January. Trump himself has expressed an interest in a long trial with witnesses, but senior Republican senators want to put the affair behind them. They point out that there were no live witnesses at the 1999 impeachment trial of Democratic then-President Bill Clinton. McConnell and Schumer met on Thursday afternoon. Asked how he felt about Pelosi potentially withholding the articles of impeachment, the Republican said: "If the speaker wants to hold on to them, it’s fine with us." Earlier, McConnell accused Democrats of succumbing to "transient passions and factionalism" and made it clear that he did not think the Senate should find Trump guilty. "The vote did not reflect what had been proven. It only reflects how they feel about the president. The Senate must put this right," McConnell said on the Senate floor. Trump, 73, is accused of abusing his power by pressuring Ukraine to investigate Biden, a former US vice president, as well as a discredited theory that Democrats conspired with Ukraine to meddle in the 2016 election. Democrats say that as part of his pressure campaign, Trump held back $391 million in security aid for Ukraine and a coveted White House meeting for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy as leverage to coerce Kyiv into interfering in the 2020 election by smearing Biden. Trump is also accused of obstruction of Congress for directing administration officials and agencies not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry. A Senate trial would kick off a politically charged year heading into the presidential election, which will pit Trump against one of a field of Democratic contenders, including Biden, who has repeatedly criticized the president's conduct in office. Fewer than half of Americans want Trump removed from office, according to polls released on Thursday. The Senate is highly unlikely to find Trump guilty and remove him from office. At least 20 Republican senators would have to vote to convict Trump and none has indicated a willingness to do so. McConnell has said he is working in tandem with the White House on trial preparations, drawing accusations from Democrats that he is ignoring his duty to consider the evidence in an impartial manner. Asked about his strategy, Trump told reporters at the White House: "We have great senators - Republican senators. ... I'm going to let them decide what to do. That's going to be up to them." Pelosi she would wait to name the Democratic House "managers," who will prosecute the case, until she knew more about the Senate trial procedures. The chamber's No. 3 Democrat, James Clyburn, told CNN the House could wait indefinitely. Pelosi's tactic gives Democrats time to convince some Senate Republicans that they should hear from witnesses, said Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen. "When you have a trial you get to call witnesses," he told Reuters.

US Democrats seek high-profile trial for Trump in Senate

The White House said on Wednesday it was confident the US Senate would exonerate President Donald Trump in a trial after the House of Representatives voted to impeach him for abusing his power and obstructing Congress, reported news agency Reuters.

The White House said on Wednesday it was confident the US Senate would exonerate President Donald Trump in a trial after the House of Representatives voted to impeach him for abusing his power and obstructing Congress, reported news agency Reuters. "Today marks the culmination in the House of one of the most shameful political episodes in the history of our nation. Without receiving a single Republican vote, and without providing any proof of wrongdoing, Democrats pushed illegitimate articles of impeachment against the president through the House of Representatives," the report added quoting a statement from the White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham. "The president is confident the Senate will restore regular order, fairness, and due process, all of which were ignored in the House proceedings. He is prepared for the next steps and confident that he will be fully exonerated," she added. (With inputs from Reuters)

White House says it is confident President Trump will be exonerated after impeachment 

Trump impeachment saga: What you need to know ahead of the vote

Amazon.com Inc on Monday accused US&nbsp;President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/donald-trumps-attitude-towards-india-unpredictable-unreliable-238560">Donald&nbsp;Trump</a>&nbsp;of exerting "improper pressure" and bias that led the Department of Defence to award a lucrative $10 billion&nbsp;cloud&nbsp;contract&nbsp;to rival <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/growth-in-cloud-computing-business-helps-lift-microsoft-corps-quarterly-revenue-2847">Microsoft Corp</a>.

In a complaint filed in the US&nbsp;Court of Federal Claims,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/amazon-offers-employees-10000-to-quit-launch-delivery-business-218463">Amazon</a>&nbsp;said&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;launched "repeated public and behind-the-scenes attacks to steer" the&nbsp;Pentagon&nbsp;cloud&nbsp;contract&nbsp;called the Joint Enterprise Defence Infrastructure, popularly known as JEDI, away from&nbsp;Amazon&nbsp;Web Services.

The heavily redacted complaint said&nbsp;Trump's motive was to "harm his perceived political enemy-Jeffrey P. Bezos, founder, and CEO of AWS's parent company,&nbsp;Amazon.com and owner of the Washington Post."

Trump's interference made it impossible for the&nbsp;Pentagon&nbsp;to judge a winner "reasonably, consistently, an in a fair and equal manner,"&nbsp;Amazon&nbsp;said.

Trump&nbsp;has long criticized Bezos and&nbsp;Amazon&nbsp;over low tax payments and accused the Washington Post of acting as a lobbyist for Bezos and&nbsp;Amazon&nbsp;and spreading "fake news."

Amazon&nbsp;called for a reevaluation of the proposals submitted to the&nbsp;Pentagon&nbsp;and a new award decision.

"The question is whether the President of the United States should be allowed to use the budget of DoD to pursue his own personal and political ends," the 103-page complaint said.

Amazon&nbsp;and the Department of Defense did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Details from the complaint were first reported by Bloomberg last week.

In recent congressional testimony, a top&nbsp;Pentagon&nbsp;technology official, Dana Deasy, denied that&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;or the White House influenced the JEDI selection process.

A challenge to the Defense Department's award announced in October was widely expected by legal experts, analysts and consultants, especially after&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;publicly derided&nbsp;Amazon's bid for the high-stakes&nbsp;contract.

Amazon.com Inc on Monday accused US President Donald Trump of exerting "improper pressure" and bias that led the Department of Defence to award a lucrative $10 billion cloud contract to rival Microsoft Corp.

Amazon.com Inc on Monday accused US President Donald Trump of exerting "improper pressure" and bias that led the Department of Defence to award a lucrative $10 billion cloud contract to rival Microsoft Corp. In a complaint filed in the US Court of Federal Claims, Amazon said Trump launched "repeated public and behind-the-scenes attacks to steer" the Pentagon cloud contract called the Joint Enterprise Defence Infrastructure, popularly known as JEDI, away from Amazon Web Services. The heavily redacted complaint said Trump's motive was to "harm his perceived political enemy-Jeffrey P. Bezos, founder, and CEO of AWS's parent company, Amazon.com and owner of the Washington Post." Trump's interference made it impossible for the Pentagon to judge a winner "reasonably, consistently, an in a fair and equal manner," Amazon said. Trump has long criticized Bezos and Amazon over low tax payments and accused the Washington Post of acting as a lobbyist for Bezos and Amazon and spreading "fake news." Amazon called for a reevaluation of the proposals submitted to the Pentagon and a new award decision. "The question is whether the President of the United States should be allowed to use the budget of DoD to pursue his own personal and political ends," the 103-page complaint said. Amazon and the Department of Defense did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Details from the complaint were first reported by Bloomberg last week. In recent congressional testimony, a top Pentagon technology official, Dana Deasy, denied that Trump or the White House influenced the JEDI selection process. A challenge to the Defense Department's award announced in October was widely expected by legal experts, analysts and consultants, especially after Trump publicly derided Amazon's bid for the high-stakes contract.

Amazon lawsuit blames Trump for loss of Pentagon cloud contract

Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden says his family members would not engage in any business abroad if he were to win the White House next year, citing the activities of Donald Trump's children as problematic.

But the former vice president defended his son Hunter's work on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, which has become a focus for Republicans in the impeachment probe swirling around Trump.

"They will not be engaged in any foreign business because of what's happened in this administration," Biden said in an interview with "Axios on HBO" that aired Sunday on the cable network.

"No one's going to be seeking patents for things from China. No one's going to be engaged in that kind of thing," he added.

"If you want to talk about problems, let's talk about Trump's family."

During Trump's administration, his daughter Ivanka -- a senior White House aide -- obtained initial approval for a number of trademarks for her fashion label, which has since closed.

The wide-ranging interview was part of a media blitz as the 77-year-old looks to consolidate his position as the frontrunner in the Democratic Party contest to take on Trump in 2020.

Biden was adamant in his defence of his son's work at Burisma, which has been the target of corruption accusations, though Hunter Biden has not been personally accused of criminal wrongdoing.

He admitted, however, he didn't know what Hunter's responsibilities were at Burisma.

"I don't know what he was doing. I know he was on the board. I found out he was on the board after he was on the board and that was it," Biden said.&nbsp;

Asked whether he wanted to know more, Biden said, "No. Because I trust my son."

"You know there's not one single bit of evidence, not one little tiny bit, to say anything done was wrong. You know that," a combative Biden added.

Democrats accuse Trump of linking military aid and a White House meeting for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to a request that Kiev investigate Joe and Hunter Biden.

Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden says his family members would not engage in any business abroad if he were to win the White House next year, citing the activities of Donald Trump's children as problematic.

Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden says his family members would not engage in any business abroad if he were to win the White House next year, citing the activities of Donald Trump's children as problematic. But the former vice president defended his son Hunter's work on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, which has become a focus for Republicans in the impeachment probe swirling around Trump. "They will not be engaged in any foreign business because of what's happened in this administration," Biden said in an interview with "Axios on HBO" that aired Sunday on the cable network. "No one's going to be seeking patents for things from China. No one's going to be engaged in that kind of thing," he added. "If you want to talk about problems, let's talk about Trump's family." During Trump's administration, his daughter Ivanka -- a senior White House aide -- obtained initial approval for a number of trademarks for her fashion label, which has since closed. The wide-ranging interview was part of a media blitz as the 77-year-old looks to consolidate his position as the frontrunner in the Democratic Party contest to take on Trump in 2020. Biden was adamant in his defence of his son's work at Burisma, which has been the target of corruption accusations, though Hunter Biden has not been personally accused of criminal wrongdoing. He admitted, however, he didn't know what Hunter's responsibilities were at Burisma. "I don't know what he was doing. I know he was on the board. I found out he was on the board after he was on the board and that was it," Biden said. Asked whether he wanted to know more, Biden said, "No. Because I trust my son." "You know there's not one single bit of evidence, not one little tiny bit, to say anything done was wrong. You know that," a combative Biden added. Democrats accuse Trump of linking military aid and a White House meeting for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to a request that Kiev investigate Joe and Hunter Biden.

Biden says no foreign business for family if he wins White House

Democratic&nbsp;presidential&nbsp;candidate&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/as-poll-numbers-slide-elizabeth-warren-wrestles-with-medicare-for-all-dilemma-266968">Elizabeth&nbsp;Warren</a>&nbsp;released information on Sunday about her&nbsp;past&nbsp;legal&nbsp;work,&nbsp;showing&nbsp;nearly $2&nbsp;million&nbsp;in&nbsp;compensation&nbsp;from dozens of clients, as a dispute intensified with her rival Pete Buttigieg over transparency.

Warren, a leading&nbsp;candidate&nbsp;among the 15 Democrats vying for the party’s nomination to take on <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/democrats-zoom-in-on-trump-impeachment-charges-this-week-267046">President Donald Trump</a> in the November 2020 election, had already put out 11 years of tax returns in April and called on other&nbsp;candidates to follow suit.

Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, has said in recent days that&nbsp;Warren, a US&nbsp;senator from Massachusetts, should release older tax documents detailing her corporate&nbsp;legal&nbsp;work.

In return,&nbsp;Warren&nbsp;has called on Buttigieg to allow media coverage of his private donor events and to disclose information about his&nbsp;past&nbsp;work&nbsp;at the consultancy company McKinsey.&nbsp;Warren&nbsp;does not hold big-ticket fundraisers and has focused her campaign on combating Washington corruption and corporate greed.

Buttigieg's campaign said on Saturday it was&nbsp;working on making the&nbsp;details&nbsp;of his employment at McKinsey "fully transparent" and called on&nbsp;Warren&nbsp;to match that by releasing her tax returns covering her corporate&nbsp;legal&nbsp;work.

On Sunday, in a 15-page document,&nbsp;Warren's campaign provided examples of her&nbsp;legal&nbsp;work, some of which dated back to 1985, in capacities including as a counsel, consultant and expert witness, giving information about the cases and how much she was compensated.

The document included dozens of cases, some of which&nbsp;Warren&nbsp;took on a pro-bono basis and was not compensated for. In some cases, she&nbsp;worked with a group of consultants. The document showed a total of nearly $2&nbsp;million&nbsp;in&nbsp;compensation.

A Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll on Thursday showed that support for&nbsp;Warren&nbsp;dropped nationally to its lowest level in four months, as she came under attack over her proposal to extend government-paid healthcare to all Americans, deemed too costly by her rivals for the nomination.

Warren, 70, is still among the leaders in opinion polls in Iowa, which kicks off the&nbsp;Democratic&nbsp;nominating contests on February&nbsp;3, and in other early voting states. Buttigieg, 37, who had campaign stops this weekend in Iowa, has surged into the lead in recent opinion polls there.

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren released information on Sunday about her past legal work, showing nearly $2 million in compensation from dozens of clients, as a dispute intensified with her rival Pete Buttigieg over transparency.

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren released information on Sunday about her past legal work, showing nearly $2 million in compensation from dozens of clients, as a dispute intensified with her rival Pete Buttigieg over transparency. Warren, a leading candidate among the 15 Democrats vying for the party’s nomination to take on President Donald Trump in the November 2020 election, had already put out 11 years of tax returns in April and called on other candidates to follow suit. Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, has said in recent days that Warren, a US senator from Massachusetts, should release older tax documents detailing her corporate legal work. In return, Warren has called on Buttigieg to allow media coverage of his private donor events and to disclose information about his past work at the consultancy company McKinsey. Warren does not hold big-ticket fundraisers and has focused her campaign on combating Washington corruption and corporate greed. Buttigieg's campaign said on Saturday it was working on making the details of his employment at McKinsey "fully transparent" and called on Warren to match that by releasing her tax returns covering her corporate legal work. On Sunday, in a 15-page document, Warren's campaign provided examples of her legal work, some of which dated back to 1985, in capacities including as a counsel, consultant and expert witness, giving information about the cases and how much she was compensated. The document included dozens of cases, some of which Warren took on a pro-bono basis and was not compensated for. In some cases, she worked with a group of consultants. The document showed a total of nearly $2 million in compensation. A Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll on Thursday showed that support for Warren dropped nationally to its lowest level in four months, as she came under attack over her proposal to extend government-paid healthcare to all Americans, deemed too costly by her rivals for the nomination. Warren, 70, is still among the leaders in opinion polls in Iowa, which kicks off the Democratic nominating contests on February 3, and in other early voting states. Buttigieg, 37, who had campaign stops this weekend in Iowa, has surged into the lead in recent opinion polls there.

Democratic candidate Warren discloses details of past legal work, showing $2 million in compensation

US President Donald Trump on Friday called for the World Bank to stop loaning money to China, one day after the institution adopted a lending plan to Beijing over Washington's objections.

US President Donald Trump on Friday called for the World Bank to stop loaning money to China, one day after the institution adopted a lending plan to Beijing over Washington's objections. The World Bank on Thursday adopted a plan to aid China with $1 billion to $1.5 billion in low-interest loans annually through June 2025. The plan calls for lending to "gradually decline" from the previous five-year average of $1.8 billion. "Why is the World Bank loaning money to China? Can this be possible? China has plenty of money, and if they don't, they create it. STOP!" Trump wrote in a post on Twitter. "World Bank lending to China has fallen sharply and will continue to reduce as part of our agreement with all our shareholders including the United States," the World Bank said in an emailed statement. "We eliminate lending as countries get richer." Spokespeople for the White House declined to comment on the record. The World Bank loaned China $1.3 billion in the fiscal 2019 year, which ended on June 30, a decrease from around $2.4 billion in fiscal 2017. But the fall in the World Bank's loans to China is not swift enough for the Trump administration, which has argued that Beijing is too wealthy for international aid.

US President Trump calls for World Bank to stop loaning to China

The top&nbsp;US&nbsp;solar&nbsp;industry&nbsp;trade group on Wednesday urged members to use social media to hit back in a dispute with the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/washington-airspace-alert-sparks-white-house-lockdown-264738">White&nbsp;House</a>&nbsp;over whether the Trump administration's tariffs on imported panels are killing or creating American jobs.

The&nbsp;Solar&nbsp;Energy&nbsp;Industry&nbsp;Association's call to action came a day after it released a study saying the levies would cost 62,000 jobs and $19 billion in clean energy investments. The study is part of a strategy to persuade President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/global-stocks-rattled-after-donald-trump-says-no-deadline-on-us-china-trade-deal-266025">Donald Trump</a> to reduce or end the four-year tariff regime implemented early last year.

The study prompted a withering rebuttal from Trump's trade adviser Peter Navarro, who called the estimate&nbsp;"fake news" and the association "a loose confederation of Chinese&nbsp;solar&nbsp;companies seeking to destroy American&nbsp;solar&nbsp;manufacturing jobs."

In an email to the&nbsp;solar&nbsp;group's public relations committee on Wednesday, Dan Whitten, it's vice president of public affairs, asked that members post photos of&nbsp;US&nbsp;solar&nbsp;workers online with the phrase: "Mr. Peter Navarro, I am an American&nbsp;solar&nbsp;worker. #StopSolarTariffs @WhiteHouse&nbsp;&amp; @USTradeRep".

"We need your help to punch back," said the email, which was seen by Reuters. "We need to engage our workers in a&nbsp;Twitter&nbsp;campaign&nbsp;to hit back."

SEIA's president, Abigail Hopper, issued a statement in response to Navarro's comments saying: "We'd be thrilled if Mr. Navarro would come to one of our conferences to meet some of the 240,000 Americans who work in this great&nbsp;industry, including the tens of thousands of people who manufacture&nbsp;solar&nbsp;products."

Trump's tariff program on imported panels was his opening salvo in a trade war aimed at helping&nbsp;US&nbsp;manufacturers rebound from years of decline due to foreign competition.&nbsp;Solar&nbsp;installers opposed the tariffs because they rely on cheap imported panels to compete with fossil fuels.

The levies started at 30 per cent&nbsp;and were designed to drop by five percentage points each year.

The report, whose gloomy forecasts were based on that rate regime, came out two days before a scheduled mid-term review of the tariff program by the International Trade Commission that could influence whether Trump maintains, changes or cancels it.

Most panels installed in the United States are made in Asia. Despite the tariffs, panel prices have continued to fall due to an oversupply in top producer China, which cut incentives on installations, unleashing a flood of&nbsp;solar&nbsp;products onto the global market.

The top US solar industry trade group on Wednesday urged members to use social media to hit back in a dispute with the White House over whether the Trump administration's tariffs on imported panels are killing or creating American jobs.

The top US solar industry trade group on Wednesday urged members to use social media to hit back in a dispute with the White House over whether the Trump administration's tariffs on imported panels are killing or creating American jobs. The Solar Energy Industry Association's call to action came a day after it released a study saying the levies would cost 62,000 jobs and $19 billion in clean energy investments. The study is part of a strategy to persuade President Donald Trump to reduce or end the four-year tariff regime implemented early last year. The study prompted a withering rebuttal from Trump's trade adviser Peter Navarro, who called the estimate "fake news" and the association "a loose confederation of Chinese solar companies seeking to destroy American solar manufacturing jobs." In an email to the solar group's public relations committee on Wednesday, Dan Whitten, it's vice president of public affairs, asked that members post photos of US solar workers online with the phrase: "Mr. Peter Navarro, I am an American solar worker. #StopSolarTariffs @WhiteHouse & @USTradeRep". "We need your help to punch back," said the email, which was seen by Reuters. "We need to engage our workers in a Twitter campaign to hit back." SEIA's president, Abigail Hopper, issued a statement in response to Navarro's comments saying: "We'd be thrilled if Mr. Navarro would come to one of our conferences to meet some of the 240,000 Americans who work in this great industry, including the tens of thousands of people who manufacture solar products." Trump's tariff program on imported panels was his opening salvo in a trade war aimed at helping US manufacturers rebound from years of decline due to foreign competition. Solar installers opposed the tariffs because they rely on cheap imported panels to compete with fossil fuels. The levies started at 30 per cent and were designed to drop by five percentage points each year. The report, whose gloomy forecasts were based on that rate regime, came out two days before a scheduled mid-term review of the tariff program by the International Trade Commission that could influence whether Trump maintains, changes or cancels it. Most panels installed in the United States are made in Asia. Despite the tariffs, panel prices have continued to fall due to an oversupply in top producer China, which cut incentives on installations, unleashing a flood of solar products onto the global market.

US solar industry urged members to use social media to 'hit back' at White house

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-house-approves-uighur-bill-demanding-sanctions-on-senior-chinese-officials-266033">Trump&nbsp;administration</a>&nbsp;said on Wednesday it will make it harder for states to keep residents in the US&nbsp;food&nbsp;stamp program in a move that is projected to end benefits for nearly&nbsp;700,000&nbsp;people.

President Donald&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;has argued that many Americans receiving&nbsp;food&nbsp;stamps&nbsp;through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, do not need it given the strong economy and low unemployment. The program provides free&nbsp;food&nbsp;to 36 million Americans.

The&nbsp;administration&nbsp;has now finalised a rule that tightens guidelines on when and where states can waive limits on how long certain residents can receive benefits. The changes will move more "able-bodied" adults into the workplace, US&nbsp;Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said.

"States are seeking waivers for wide swaths of their population, and millions of&nbsp;people&nbsp;who could work are continuing to receive SNAP benefits," he told reporters.

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/united-states-ends-freeze-on-lebanon-aid-worth-100-million-265820">United States</a> generally limits the amount of time that adults ages 18-49, who do not have dependents or disability, can receive&nbsp;food&nbsp;stamps&nbsp;to three months in a 36-month period unless they meet certain work requirements.

States can apply for waivers to this time limit due to tough economic conditions. However, counties with an unemployment rate as low as 2.5 per cent&nbsp;have been included in waived areas, according to the US&nbsp;Department of Agriculture, which runs SNAP.

The agency is stiffening guidelines defining where recipients can reside to be eligible for waivers and standards for demonstrating whether an area has enough jobs to justify a waiver.

The US&nbsp;unemployment rate was 3.6 per cent&nbsp;in October.

"We need everyone who can work to work," Perdue said.

But critics say the&nbsp;moves&nbsp;will hurt poor Americans.

"This is an unacceptable escalation of the&nbsp;administration's war on working families, and it comes during a time when too many are forced to stretch already-thin budgets to make ends meet," said US&nbsp;Representative Marcia Fudge, an Ohio Democrat.

The&nbsp;administration&nbsp;has sought to tighten requirements for&nbsp;food&nbsp;stamps&nbsp;without congressional approval after Congress blocked a&nbsp;Trump-backed effort to pass new restrictions through the Farm Bill last year.

The latest rule will take effect next year and save the US&nbsp;government $5.5 billion over five years by removing about 688,000&nbsp;people&nbsp;from&nbsp;food&nbsp;stamps, said Brandon Lipps, a USDA deputy undersecretary.

"For those impacted, it will mean less nutritious meals or meals that are skipped altogether," said Cassie Ramos, policy associate for the Centre&nbsp;for Science in the Public Interest, an advocacy group.

The Trump administration said on Wednesday it will make it harder for states to keep residents in the US food stamp program in a move that is projected to end benefits for nearly 700,000 people.

The Trump administration said on Wednesday it will make it harder for states to keep residents in the US food stamp program in a move that is projected to end benefits for nearly 700,000 people. President Donald Trump has argued that many Americans receiving food stamps through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, do not need it given the strong economy and low unemployment. The program provides free food to 36 million Americans. The administration has now finalised a rule that tightens guidelines on when and where states can waive limits on how long certain residents can receive benefits. The changes will move more "able-bodied" adults into the workplace, US Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said. "States are seeking waivers for wide swaths of their population, and millions of people who could work are continuing to receive SNAP benefits," he told reporters. The United States generally limits the amount of time that adults ages 18-49, who do not have dependents or disability, can receive food stamps to three months in a 36-month period unless they meet certain work requirements. States can apply for waivers to this time limit due to tough economic conditions. However, counties with an unemployment rate as low as 2.5 per cent have been included in waived areas, according to the US Department of Agriculture, which runs SNAP. The agency is stiffening guidelines defining where recipients can reside to be eligible for waivers and standards for demonstrating whether an area has enough jobs to justify a waiver. The US unemployment rate was 3.6 per cent in October. "We need everyone who can work to work," Perdue said. But critics say the moves will hurt poor Americans. "This is an unacceptable escalation of the administration's war on working families, and it comes during a time when too many are forced to stretch already-thin budgets to make ends meet," said US Representative Marcia Fudge, an Ohio Democrat. The administration has sought to tighten requirements for food stamps without congressional approval after Congress blocked a Trump-backed effort to pass new restrictions through the Farm Bill last year. The latest rule will take effect next year and save the US government $5.5 billion over five years by removing about 688,000 people from food stamps, said Brandon Lipps, a USDA deputy undersecretary. "For those impacted, it will mean less nutritious meals or meals that are skipped altogether," said Cassie Ramos, policy associate for the Centre for Science in the Public Interest, an advocacy group.

Trump administration moves to remove 700,000 people from food stamps' benefits

A US&nbsp;House Intelligence Committee report laying out the Democratic case for President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-impeachment-row-according-to-call-records-nunes-had-frequent-contact-with-giuliani-266054">Donald Trump's impeachment</a> will be publicly released on Tuesday, the panel's chairman said in a television interview.

"We’re putting the finishing touches on the report, which will be released tomorrow,” Democrat Adam Schiff said on MSNBC on Monday night.

The Democratic-controlled panel is expected to vote on the report's approval on Tuesday night.

A copy of the report was made available privately to House Intelligence members on Monday night for a 24-hour review period.

Republican Representative Jim Jordan, an ardent defender of Trump, told reporters he had read portions of the report in a secure room at the Capitol but was instructed not to discuss the contents until Tuesday night.

House Republicans issued their own rebuttal report on Monday, saying <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/democrat-report-makes-forceful-impeachment-case-against-trump-266049">Democrats</a> had not established an impeachable offense by Trump.

Democrats have been looking into the Republican president's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden, the former US&nbsp;vice president who is seeking the Democratic nomination to face Trump in the 2020 election, and his son Hunter Biden, who was a board member of a Ukrainian energy company.

Congressional Democrats on Monday named the four witnesses who will testify this week at a public hearing in the impeachment inquiry of Trump, in what is seen as a likely precursor to the announcement of formal charges within weeks.

As opinion polls show Americans are bitterly divided over whether to impeach Trump, the Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives will feature four legal scholars discussing the constitutional grounds for removing a US&nbsp;president from office.

The impeachment inquiry has heard testimony from current and former officials that military aid was withheld from Ukraine and that a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was conditioned on investigations into the Bidens and a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukraine interference in the 2016 US&nbsp;election.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing and says a July 25 phone call with Zelenskiy, in which he pressed for the probes, was "perfect." He and fellow Republicans say Democrats are seeking to overturn the results of the 2016 presidential election.

Wednesday's hearing, while academic in nature, will set the stage for the Judiciary Committee to begin determining whether Trump should face formal articles of impeachment. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a letter to supporters last week that Trump had committed "bribery" and needed to be held accountable.

The hearing witnesses, announced by the committee on Monday, are Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School, Pamela Karlan of Stanford Law School, Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law and Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School.

Also watch:&nbsp;Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for Dec 4

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-impeachment-hearings-set-for-dec-4-265791/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

In a defiant response on Sunday night, the White House informed Democrats that Trump and his lawyers would not participate in Wednesday's hearing, citing a lack of "fundamental fairness."

Speaking to reporters as he departed the White House on Monday en route to London for a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/cool-it-france-and-germany-to-tell-trump-at-nato-talks-266086">NATO summit</a>, Trump said he had declined to participate in the hearing because it was a hoax.

Representative Jerrold Nadler, the Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, called the White House's decision "unfortunate" and said that allowing Trump to participate had been a priority from the outset of the impeachment probe.

White House counsel Pat Cipollone has not ruled out taking part in future proceedings if Democrats address a list of procedural complaints.

The committee, which is not expected to consider evidence against Trump until next week, has given the president until 5 p.m. (2200 GMT) on Friday to say whether he plans to mount a defense by calling witnesses and introducing evidence.

The 110-page House Republican report said the witnesses called during the impeachment inquiry had painted a picture of "unelected bureaucrats" who "fundamentally disagreed with President Trump's style, world view and decisions," and had presented no evidence that amounted to an impeachable offense.

Schiff said the Republican report "ignores voluminous evidence that the president used the power of his office to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rival," which Schiff said was outside the law and "a violation of his oath of office."

If the House approves articles of impeachment, the Republican-controlled Senate would hold a trial to see if Trump should be removed from office. That move is unlikely, as few Senate Republicans have shown an appetite for removing the president.

But the impeachment inquiry has cast a shadow over Trump's already tumultuous presidency and sharpened a divide among Americans that is likely to intensify as election campaigning heats up in the coming weeks.

Democratic aides said a vote on possible articles of impeachment would follow quickly on the heels of an evidentiary hearing.

A US House Intelligence Committee report laying out the Democratic case for President Donald Trump's impeachment will be publicly released on Tuesday, the panel's chairman said in a television interview.

A US House Intelligence Committee report laying out the Democratic case for President Donald Trump's impeachment will be publicly released on Tuesday, the panel's chairman said in a television interview. "We’re putting the finishing touches on the report, which will be released tomorrow,” Democrat Adam Schiff said on MSNBC on Monday night. The Democratic-controlled panel is expected to vote on the report's approval on Tuesday night. A copy of the report was made available privately to House Intelligence members on Monday night for a 24-hour review period. Republican Representative Jim Jordan, an ardent defender of Trump, told reporters he had read portions of the report in a secure room at the Capitol but was instructed not to discuss the contents until Tuesday night. House Republicans issued their own rebuttal report on Monday, saying Democrats had not established an impeachable offense by Trump. Democrats have been looking into the Republican president's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden, the former US vice president who is seeking the Democratic nomination to face Trump in the 2020 election, and his son Hunter Biden, who was a board member of a Ukrainian energy company. Congressional Democrats on Monday named the four witnesses who will testify this week at a public hearing in the impeachment inquiry of Trump, in what is seen as a likely precursor to the announcement of formal charges within weeks. As opinion polls show Americans are bitterly divided over whether to impeach Trump, the Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives will feature four legal scholars discussing the constitutional grounds for removing a US president from office. The impeachment inquiry has heard testimony from current and former officials that military aid was withheld from Ukraine and that a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was conditioned on investigations into the Bidens and a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukraine interference in the 2016 US election. Trump has denied any wrongdoing and says a July 25 phone call with Zelenskiy, in which he pressed for the probes, was "perfect." He and fellow Republicans say Democrats are seeking to overturn the results of the 2016 presidential election. Wednesday's hearing, while academic in nature, will set the stage for the Judiciary Committee to begin determining whether Trump should face formal articles of impeachment. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a letter to supporters last week that Trump had committed "bribery" and needed to be held accountable. The hearing witnesses, announced by the committee on Monday, are Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School, Pamela Karlan of Stanford Law School, Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law and Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School. Also watch: Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for Dec 4 × In a defiant response on Sunday night, the White House informed Democrats that Trump and his lawyers would not participate in Wednesday's hearing, citing a lack of "fundamental fairness." Speaking to reporters as he departed the White House on Monday en route to London for a NATO summit, Trump said he had declined to participate in the hearing because it was a hoax. Representative Jerrold Nadler, the Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, called the White House's decision "unfortunate" and said that allowing Trump to participate had been a priority from the outset of the impeachment probe. White House counsel Pat Cipollone has not ruled out taking part in future proceedings if Democrats address a list of procedural complaints. The committee, which is not expected to consider evidence against Trump until next week, has given the president until 5 p.m. (2200 GMT) on Friday to say whether he plans to mount a defense by calling witnesses and introducing evidence. The 110-page House Republican report said the witnesses called during the impeachment inquiry had painted a picture of "unelected bureaucrats" who "fundamentally disagreed with President Trump's style, world view and decisions," and had presented no evidence that amounted to an impeachable offense. Schiff said the Republican report "ignores voluminous evidence that the president used the power of his office to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rival," which Schiff said was outside the law and "a violation of his oath of office." If the House approves articles of impeachment, the Republican-controlled Senate would hold a trial to see if Trump should be removed from office. That move is unlikely, as few Senate Republicans have shown an appetite for removing the president. But the impeachment inquiry has cast a shadow over Trump's already tumultuous presidency and sharpened a divide among Americans that is likely to intensify as election campaigning heats up in the coming weeks. Democratic aides said a vote on possible articles of impeachment would follow quickly on the heels of an evidentiary hearing.

US House panel impeachment report to be released Tuesday: Adam Schiff

Donald Trump Impeachment Hearings Set for Dec 4. Watch video to know more.

Donald Trump Impeachment Hearings Set for Dec 4

Trump impeachment inquiry: What happens next?

Billionaire businessman <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/bloomberg-admits-he-was-wrong-apologises-for-stop-and-frisk-in-new-york-262793">Michael&nbsp;Bloomberg</a>, yet to officially declare himself a presidential candidate, took another step towards a run at the White House Thursday by registering with the US Federal Election Commission. &nbsp;

The 77-year-old former mayor of New York filed paperwork to register a committee called "Mike&nbsp;Bloomberg&nbsp;2020," commission spokeswoman Judith Ingram confirmed to AFP.

All candidates must register with the commission if they want to raise or spend campaign funds of more than $5,000, but registration itself does not confirm that a candidate is running.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/michael-bloomberg-to-launch-100-million-digital-anti-trump-campaign-262468">Bloomberg&nbsp;has prepared the groundwork for a possible bid</a> for the Democratic nomination in recent weeks, including registering as a candidate in the states of Alabama, Arkansas and Texas.

A message on his website mikebloomberg.com says the site is "paid for by Mike&nbsp;Bloomberg&nbsp;2020."

Ten days ago he said he was "close" to making a final decision on whether or not to enter the crowded field.

His personal fortune of $50 billion means a&nbsp;Bloomberg&nbsp;candidacy would likely shake up the open race, with 17 candidates already vying to be the Democratic nominee to take on President Donald Trump next year.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/bloomberg-files-papers-paving-way-for-us-presidential-bid-260916">Bloomberg's advisors</a> have said that if he does run then he will probably not campaign in the four states that will hold primaries in February.

Instead, he would focus on the 15 primaries scheduled for March 3, known as "Super Tuesday," including the most populous states of California and Texas.

Former vice president Joe Biden leads the race ahead of left-wingers Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, with moderate Pete Buttigieg in fourth place, according to national polls.

Billionaire businessman Michael Bloomberg, yet to officially declare himself a presidential candidate, took another step towards a run at the White House Thursday by registering with the US Federal Election Commission.

Billionaire businessman Michael Bloomberg, yet to officially declare himself a presidential candidate, took another step towards a run at the White House Thursday by registering with the US Federal Election Commission. The 77-year-old former mayor of New York filed paperwork to register a committee called "Mike Bloomberg 2020," commission spokeswoman Judith Ingram confirmed to AFP. All candidates must register with the commission if they want to raise or spend campaign funds of more than $5,000, but registration itself does not confirm that a candidate is running. Bloomberg has prepared the groundwork for a possible bid for the Democratic nomination in recent weeks, including registering as a candidate in the states of Alabama, Arkansas and Texas. A message on his website mikebloomberg.com says the site is "paid for by Mike Bloomberg 2020." Ten days ago he said he was "close" to making a final decision on whether or not to enter the crowded field. His personal fortune of $50 billion means a Bloomberg candidacy would likely shake up the open race, with 17 candidates already vying to be the Democratic nominee to take on President Donald Trump next year. Bloomberg's advisors have said that if he does run then he will probably not campaign in the four states that will hold primaries in February. Instead, he would focus on the 15 primaries scheduled for March 3, known as "Super Tuesday," including the most populous states of California and Texas. Former vice president Joe Biden leads the race ahead of left-wingers Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, with moderate Pete Buttigieg in fourth place, according to national polls.

Michael Bloomberg registers committee in anticipation of 2020 US presidential poll

A key actor in President Donald&nbsp;Trump's alleged effort to pressure Ukraine for dirt on his political rivals will be in the&nbsp;hot&nbsp;seat&nbsp;Wednesday as Democrats build their <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/impeachment-inquiry-white-house-official-criticizes-trump-call-decries-cowardly-attacks-263213">case for impeaching</a> the US leader.

Numerous witnesses have fingered Gordon&nbsp;Sondland, the US ambassador to the European Union, as a central conveyor of&nbsp;Trump's demands that Ukraine investigate potential 2020 rival Joe Biden in exchange for unfreezing US aid to the country.

In earlier closed-door testimony&nbsp;Sondland&nbsp;repeated almost 100 times that he "can't remember" and "can't recall" when pressed over his dealings with&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;and Ukraine.

Initially maintaining that he was unaware that US military aid was being held up in exchange for a probe, he later made a humiliating about-face, amending his testimony to state that he did in fact know this was the case.

In the second week of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/trump-impeachment-public-hearings-today-261834">televised&nbsp;hearings</a>&nbsp;in the House Intelligence Committee, the hotel tycoon-turned-diplomat is expected to be confronted with powerful evidence that could force him into refusing to answer, or dramatically testifying against the US leader.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/trump-impeachment-what-rules-will-the-house-use-in-televised-hearings-261826">In Pictures:&nbsp;Trump impeachment: What rules will the House use in televised hearings?</a>

Sondland's testimony will come a day after Republicans struggled to defend&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;against mounting allegations of abuse of power and charges that he sought to "extort" Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

During nine hours of testimony Tuesday, four witnesses described how&nbsp;Trump,&nbsp;Sondland&nbsp;and&nbsp;Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani sought for months to persuade Ukraine to investigate both Biden and a baseless claim that the Kiev government helped Democrats in the 2016 US elections.

Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, a respected member of the White House National Security Council, told the committee that&nbsp;Trump's July 25 phone call with Zelensky, seeking a "favor" to investigate Biden and the vague 2016 election meddling claim, was <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/top-white-house-ukraine-expert-says-trump-request-for-biden-probe-was-improper-263232">"inappropriate," "improper"</a> and a "partisan play."

"Frankly I couldn't believe what I was hearing," Vindman said.&nbsp;

"It is improper for the president of the United States to demand a foreign government investigate a US citizen and a political opponent."&nbsp;

Sitting next to Vindman, Jennifer Williams, a foreign policy advisor to Vice President Mike Pence, said she too had doubts about the "unusual" July 25 call, which they both monitored from a separate room.

"The references to specific individuals and investigations such as former vice president Biden and his son, struck me as political in nature, given that the former vice president is a political opponent of the president," she told the panel.

Two other witnesses in a second session, former US special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker and National Security Council aide Tim Morrison, supported allegations the White House improperly sought the political assistance.

But both assigned more blame to an "irregular" diplomatic track in the hands of Giuliani and&nbsp;Sondland.

Volker said he worried about "conspiracy theories" that Giuliani "was conveying... to the president."&nbsp;

Also watch:&nbsp;US&nbsp;Ambassador Volker says he did not know Ukraine corruption probe was tied to Biden

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-ambassador-volker-says-he-did-not-know-ukraine-corruption-probe-was-tied-to-biden-263265/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Morrison, who only took his position in mid-July, said his predecessor warned him of "the Gordon problem," referring to&nbsp;Sondland's Ukraine dealings away from standard US diplomatic channels.&nbsp;

Republicans and the White House continued to insist that the investigation, which could see&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;impeached possibly as soon as the end of the year, was a political witch hunt.

"We have learned nothing new in today's illegitimate 'impeachment&nbsp;proceedings,'" said White House Spokesperson Stephanie Grisham.

"Today we are witnessing the Ukraine hoax, the direct-to-TV sequel to the Russia collusion hoax," said Devin Nunes, the senior Republican on the Intelligence Committee.

But rather than confront the evidence, they turned to character attacks on the witnesses, including questioning the allegiance of Kiev-born Vindman, a 20-year US army veteran, to the United States.&nbsp;

Vindman, dressed in military uniform decorated with his Purple Heart and other commendations, countered that he had raised questions about the July 25 phone call "out of a sense of duty," and called Republicans attacks on public servants "reprehensible."

Sondland's appearance could generate fireworks. He is close to&nbsp;Trump, he was named ambassador to the EU in 2017 after donating $1 million to the president's inauguration festivities.

David Holmes, an official at the US embassy in Ukraine, told investigators last week that, after a phone call to&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;from a Kiev restaurant,&nbsp;Sondland&nbsp;said the president sought political benefits from the bilateral relationship.

Trump&nbsp;"did not give a shit about Ukraine," but cares about "big stuff that benefits the president, like the Biden investigation," Holmes testified.

Testimony like that could force&nbsp;Sondland&nbsp;into a difficult choice between protecting himself by giving evidence against&nbsp;Trump, or facing his own legal problems by refusing to answer questions.

The White House "should be deeply concerned about&nbsp;Sondland's testimony tomorrow," said University of Alabama Law Professor Joyce Vance.

A key actor in President Donald Trump's alleged effort to pressure Ukraine for dirt on his political rivals will be in the hot seat Wednesday as Democrats build their case for impeaching the US leader.

A key actor in President Donald Trump's alleged effort to pressure Ukraine for dirt on his political rivals will be in the hot seat Wednesday as Democrats build their case for impeaching the US leader. Numerous witnesses have fingered Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the European Union, as a central conveyor of Trump's demands that Ukraine investigate potential 2020 rival Joe Biden in exchange for unfreezing US aid to the country. In earlier closed-door testimony Sondland repeated almost 100 times that he "can't remember" and "can't recall" when pressed over his dealings with Trump and Ukraine. Initially maintaining that he was unaware that US military aid was being held up in exchange for a probe, he later made a humiliating about-face, amending his testimony to state that he did in fact know this was the case. In the second week of televised hearings in the House Intelligence Committee, the hotel tycoon-turned-diplomat is expected to be confronted with powerful evidence that could force him into refusing to answer, or dramatically testifying against the US leader. In Pictures: Trump impeachment: What rules will the House use in televised hearings? Sondland's testimony will come a day after Republicans struggled to defend Trump against mounting allegations of abuse of power and charges that he sought to "extort" Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky. During nine hours of testimony Tuesday, four witnesses described how Trump, Sondland and Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani sought for months to persuade Ukraine to investigate both Biden and a baseless claim that the Kiev government helped Democrats in the 2016 US elections. Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, a respected member of the White House National Security Council, told the committee that Trump's July 25 phone call with Zelensky, seeking a "favor" to investigate Biden and the vague 2016 election meddling claim, was "inappropriate," "improper" and a "partisan play." "Frankly I couldn't believe what I was hearing," Vindman said. "It is improper for the president of the United States to demand a foreign government investigate a US citizen and a political opponent." Sitting next to Vindman, Jennifer Williams, a foreign policy advisor to Vice President Mike Pence, said she too had doubts about the "unusual" July 25 call, which they both monitored from a separate room. "The references to specific individuals and investigations such as former vice president Biden and his son, struck me as political in nature, given that the former vice president is a political opponent of the president," she told the panel. Two other witnesses in a second session, former US special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker and National Security Council aide Tim Morrison, supported allegations the White House improperly sought the political assistance. But both assigned more blame to an "irregular" diplomatic track in the hands of Giuliani and Sondland. Volker said he worried about "conspiracy theories" that Giuliani "was conveying... to the president." Also watch: US Ambassador Volker says he did not know Ukraine corruption probe was tied to Biden × Morrison, who only took his position in mid-July, said his predecessor warned him of "the Gordon problem," referring to Sondland's Ukraine dealings away from standard US diplomatic channels. Republicans and the White House continued to insist that the investigation, which could see Trump impeached possibly as soon as the end of the year, was a political witch hunt. "We have learned nothing new in today's illegitimate 'impeachment proceedings,'" said White House Spokesperson Stephanie Grisham. "Today we are witnessing the Ukraine hoax, the direct-to-TV sequel to the Russia collusion hoax," said Devin Nunes, the senior Republican on the Intelligence Committee. But rather than confront the evidence, they turned to character attacks on the witnesses, including questioning the allegiance of Kiev-born Vindman, a 20-year US army veteran, to the United States. Vindman, dressed in military uniform decorated with his Purple Heart and other commendations, countered that he had raised questions about the July 25 phone call "out of a sense of duty," and called Republicans attacks on public servants "reprehensible." Sondland's appearance could generate fireworks. He is close to Trump, he was named ambassador to the EU in 2017 after donating $1 million to the president's inauguration festivities. David Holmes, an official at the US embassy in Ukraine, told investigators last week that, after a phone call to Trump from a Kiev restaurant, Sondland said the president sought political benefits from the bilateral relationship. Trump "did not give a shit about Ukraine," but cares about "big stuff that benefits the president, like the Biden investigation," Holmes testified. Testimony like that could force Sondland into a difficult choice between protecting himself by giving evidence against Trump, or facing his own legal problems by refusing to answer questions. The White House "should be deeply concerned about Sondland's testimony tomorrow," said University of Alabama Law Professor Joyce Vance.

Trump emissary Sondland to speak at impeachment hearings

Donald Trump sought Wednesday to distance himself from <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-never-discussed-ukraine-aid-freeze-with-me-us-diplomat-gordon-sondland-263472">US envoy Gordon Sondland</a>, after he told an impeachment hearing he had followed the president's orders in seeking a "quid pro quo" deal with Ukraine.

"I don't know him very well. I have not spoken to him much," Trump told reporters at the White House, before reading from notes which he said showed that he wanted "nothing" from Kiev.

In an October 8 tweet, Trump had described his ambassador to the European Union as "a really good man and great American."

Meanwhile, US diplomat Gordon Sondland said that President Donald Trump never spoke to him about stalled military aid to Ukraine or any alleged link to Trump's demands for political investigations.

"I never heard from President Trump that aid was conditioned on an announcement of (the investigations)," Sondland told a congressional impeachment inquiry.

"I don't recall President Trump ever talking to me about any security assistance, ever," he added.

Donald Trump sought Wednesday to distance himself from US envoy Gordon Sondland, after he told an impeachment hearing he had followed the president's orders in seeking a "quid pro quo" deal with Ukraine.

Donald Trump sought Wednesday to distance himself from US envoy Gordon Sondland, after he told an impeachment hearing he had followed the president's orders in seeking a "quid pro quo" deal with Ukraine. "I don't know him very well. I have not spoken to him much," Trump told reporters at the White House, before reading from notes which he said showed that he wanted "nothing" from Kiev. In an October 8 tweet, Trump had described his ambassador to the European Union as "a really good man and great American." Meanwhile, US diplomat Gordon Sondland said that President Donald Trump never spoke to him about stalled military aid to Ukraine or any alleged link to Trump's demands for political investigations. "I never heard from President Trump that aid was conditioned on an announcement of (the investigations)," Sondland told a congressional impeachment inquiry. "I don't recall President Trump ever talking to me about any security assistance, ever," he added.

Trump impeachment inquiry: US President says does not know Sondland 'very well'

A White House official testified in the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump on Tuesday that a phone call the president made to ask Ukraine to investigate his political rivals was improper and denounced attacks on witnesses in the investigation.

Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, the White House National Security Council's top Ukraine expert, testified at the third public hearing in the impeachment effort before the US House of Representatives Intelligence Committee.

The inquiry focuses on a July 25 phone call in which Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to carry out two investigations that would benefit him politically including one targeting Democratic political rival Joe Biden. The other involved a debunked conspiracy theory embraced by some Trump allies that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 US election.

"It was inappropriate, it was improper for the president to request - to demand - an investigation into a political opponent, especially (from) a foreign power where there is at best dubious belief that this would be a completely impartial investigation and that this would have significant implications if it became public knowledge," Vindman told the committee.

He testified alongside Jennifer Williams, an aide to US Vice President Mike Pence, both of whom were among the U.S. officials who listened in on the July 25 call.

Vindman, an Iraq war veteran who appeared at the hearing wearing his Army uniform and medals, has been publicly criticized by Trump along with other witnesses. He told lawmakers that "character attacks" against public servants testifying in the impeachment inquiry were "reprehensible."

"It is natural to disagree and engage in spirited debate, this has been the custom of our country since the time of our Founding Fathers, but we are better than personal attacks," he told lawmakers.

In his prepared opening statement to the committee, he had referred to "vile character attacks" and said "we are better than callow and cowardly attacks," but did not use those words at the hearing.

Trump has attacked both Williams and Vindman on Twitter as "Never Trump" witnesses, a term to describe Republicans who oppose him.

A US official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Vindman had recently concerns over his personal security and the Army has been carrying out security assessments. The official said Vindman and his family could be moved to a military base if the security threat warrants such action but that has not yet occurred.

Vindman, whose family fled the Soviet Union and settled in the United States, sent out a message to his father from the witness seat.

"Dad, that I am sitting here today, in the US Capitol talking to our elected officials is proof that you made the right decision 40 years ago to leave the Soviet Union and come here to the United States of America in search of a better life for our family. Do not worry, I will be fine for telling the truth," Vindman testified.

Ahead of the call, Trump had frozen $391 million in US security aid approved by Congress to help Ukraine combat Russia-backed separatists in the eastern part of the country. Trump was seeking a Ukrainian investigation of Biden, a leading contender for the Democratic nomination to face Trump in the 2020 presidential election, and Biden's son Hunter, who had served on the board of a Ukrainian energy firm called Burisma.

Trump has denied wrongdoing and attacked the Democrats leading the inquiry.

'Domestic political matter'

Williams told the committee that Trump's call with Zelenskiy was unusual because "it involved discussion of what appeared to be a domestic political matter." She said the White House budget office had said Trump's acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, had directed that $391 million in security aid to Ukraine be put on hold and that she never learned why the assistance was later released in September.

Democrats have accused Trump of using the frozen aid and Zelenskiy's desire for an Oval Office meeting as leverage to pressure a vulnerable U.S. ally to dig up dirt on political adversaries.

The investigation could lead the House to approve formal charges against Trump – known as articles of impeachment – that would be sent to the Republican-controlled Senate for a trial on whether to remove him from office. Few Republican senators have broken with Trump.

Representative Devin Nunes, the committee's top Republican and a close Trump ally, did not address the substance of the witness testimony about the president's actions in his opening statement on Tuesday but unleashed an attack on the media, calling journalists "puppets of the Democratic Party."

Representative Adam Schiff, the committee's Democratic chairman, noted Trump's criticism of Williams and of Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine who testified in the impeachment inquiry on Friday. Schiff also noted the "scurrilous attacks" on Vindman's character.

"I note that you have shed blood for America, and we owe you an immense debt of gratitude," Schiff told Vindman, who was awarded a Purple Heart medal for war wounds.

At one point, Schiff interrupted Nunes' questioning of Vindman that appeared to be aimed at revealing the identity of the intelligence community whistleblower whose complaint about Trump's July 25 call triggered the impeachment inquiry. The whistleblower's identity has remained a secret, but Trump and his allies have repeatedly attacked the individual.

"These proceedings will not be used to out the whistleblower," Schiff said.

Vindman referred to the two investigations that Trump had sought from Ukraine as "alternative false narratives," and noted that Russian President Vladmir Putin had promoted the notion that the Ukrainians had interfered in the 2016 U.S. election.

U.S. intelligence agencies and former Special Counsel Robert Mueller determined that Russia used a campaign of hacking and propaganda to boost Trump's candidacy and harm his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.

Two other witnesses were scheduled to testify later on Tuesday: Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine, and former National Security Council Russia expert Tim Morrison.

(Reporting by Jonathan Landay and Patricia Zengerle; Ad

A White House official testified in the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump on Tuesday that a phone call the president made to ask Ukraine to investigate his political rivals was improper and denounced attacks on witnesses in the investigation.

A White House official testified in the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump on Tuesday that a phone call the president made to ask Ukraine to investigate his political rivals was improper and denounced attacks on witnesses in the investigation. Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, the White House National Security Council's top Ukraine expert, testified at the third public hearing in the impeachment effort before the US House of Representatives Intelligence Committee. The inquiry focuses on a July 25 phone call in which Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to carry out two investigations that would benefit him politically including one targeting Democratic political rival Joe Biden. The other involved a debunked conspiracy theory embraced by some Trump allies that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 US election. "It was inappropriate, it was improper for the president to request - to demand - an investigation into a political opponent, especially (from) a foreign power where there is at best dubious belief that this would be a completely impartial investigation and that this would have significant implications if it became public knowledge," Vindman told the committee. He testified alongside Jennifer Williams, an aide to US Vice President Mike Pence, both of whom were among the U.S. officials who listened in on the July 25 call. Vindman, an Iraq war veteran who appeared at the hearing wearing his Army uniform and medals, has been publicly criticized by Trump along with other witnesses. He told lawmakers that "character attacks" against public servants testifying in the impeachment inquiry were "reprehensible." "It is natural to disagree and engage in spirited debate, this has been the custom of our country since the time of our Founding Fathers, but we are better than personal attacks," he told lawmakers. In his prepared opening statement to the committee, he had referred to "vile character attacks" and said "we are better than callow and cowardly attacks," but did not use those words at the hearing. Trump has attacked both Williams and Vindman on Twitter as "Never Trump" witnesses, a term to describe Republicans who oppose him. A US official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Vindman had recently concerns over his personal security and the Army has been carrying out security assessments. The official said Vindman and his family could be moved to a military base if the security threat warrants such action but that has not yet occurred. Vindman, whose family fled the Soviet Union and settled in the United States, sent out a message to his father from the witness seat. "Dad, that I am sitting here today, in the US Capitol talking to our elected officials is proof that you made the right decision 40 years ago to leave the Soviet Union and come here to the United States of America in search of a better life for our family. Do not worry, I will be fine for telling the truth," Vindman testified. Ahead of the call, Trump had frozen $391 million in US security aid approved by Congress to help Ukraine combat Russia-backed separatists in the eastern part of the country. Trump was seeking a Ukrainian investigation of Biden, a leading contender for the Democratic nomination to face Trump in the 2020 presidential election, and Biden's son Hunter, who had served on the board of a Ukrainian energy firm called Burisma. Trump has denied wrongdoing and attacked the Democrats leading the inquiry. 'Domestic political matter' Williams told the committee that Trump's call with Zelenskiy was unusual because "it involved discussion of what appeared to be a domestic political matter." She said the White House budget office had said Trump's acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, had directed that $391 million in security aid to Ukraine be put on hold and that she never learned why the assistance was later released in September. Democrats have accused Trump of using the frozen aid and Zelenskiy's desire for an Oval Office meeting as leverage to pressure a vulnerable U.S. ally to dig up dirt on political adversaries. The investigation could lead the House to approve formal charges against Trump – known as articles of impeachment – that would be sent to the Republican-controlled Senate for a trial on whether to remove him from office. Few Republican senators have broken with Trump. Representative Devin Nunes, the committee's top Republican and a close Trump ally, did not address the substance of the witness testimony about the president's actions in his opening statement on Tuesday but unleashed an attack on the media, calling journalists "puppets of the Democratic Party." Representative Adam Schiff, the committee's Democratic chairman, noted Trump's criticism of Williams and of Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine who testified in the impeachment inquiry on Friday. Schiff also noted the "scurrilous attacks" on Vindman's character. "I note that you have shed blood for America, and we owe you an immense debt of gratitude," Schiff told Vindman, who was awarded a Purple Heart medal for war wounds. At one point, Schiff interrupted Nunes' questioning of Vindman that appeared to be aimed at revealing the identity of the intelligence community whistleblower whose complaint about Trump's July 25 call triggered the impeachment inquiry. The whistleblower's identity has remained a secret, but Trump and his allies have repeatedly attacked the individual. "These proceedings will not be used to out the whistleblower," Schiff said. Vindman referred to the two investigations that Trump had sought from Ukraine as "alternative false narratives," and noted that Russian President Vladmir Putin had promoted the notion that the Ukrainians had interfered in the 2016 U.S. election. U.S. intelligence agencies and former Special Counsel Robert Mueller determined that Russia used a campaign of hacking and propaganda to boost Trump's candidacy and harm his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton. Two other witnesses were scheduled to testify later on Tuesday: Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine, and former National Security Council Russia expert Tim Morrison. (Reporting by Jonathan Landay and Patricia Zengerle; Ad

Top White House Ukraine expert says Trump request for Biden probe was improper

A White House official testified in the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump on Tuesday that the president's phone call urging Ukraine's leader to investigate Trump's political rivals was improper and blasted what he called "cowardly" attacks on witnesses in the investigation.

Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, the White House National Security Council's top Ukraine expert, testified at the third public hearing in the impeachment effort before the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee.

Vindman, who along with other witnesses has been publicly criticized by Trump, also told lawmakers that "vile character attacks" against public servants testifying in the impeachment inquiry were "reprehensible," urging Americans to be "better than callow and cowardly attacks." Vindman, an Iraq war veteran, appeared at the hearing wearing his Army uniform and medals.

Vindman did not specifically mention Trump when he referred to "cowardly attacks." Some Trump allies in the conservative media have questioned Vindman's loyalty to the United States.

"It is improper for the president of the United States to demand a foreign government investigate a US citizen and political opponent," Vindman said in his opening statement in the second week of public hearings.

Three other witnesses were scheduled to testify at Tuesday's hearing: Kurt Volker, the former US special envoy to Ukraine; Jennifer Williams, an aide to Vice President Mike Pence; and former National Security Council Russia expert Tim Morrison.

The inquiry focuses on a July 25 phone call in which Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to carry out two investigations that would benefit him politically including one targeting Democratic political rival Joe Biden. The other involved a debunked conspiracy theory embraced by some Trump allies that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 US election.

In her prepared statement to the committee, Williams said Trump's July 25 call was "unusual" because it "it involved discussion of what appeared to be a domestic political matter." Williams said the White House Budget office had said Trump's acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, had directed that $391 million in security aid to Ukraine be put on hold and that she never learned why the assistance was later released in September.

Williams, who was attacked by Trump on Twitter just days before her public appearance, also told lawmakers that she was committed to serving America's interests, adding "it was with great pride and conviction that I swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution."

Williams was among the US officials who monitored the Trump-Zelenskiy call. She previously testified behind closed doors this month that some of Trump's comments were "inappropriate."

Trump assailed her on Twitter on Sunday as a "Never Trumper" who should "work out a better presidential attack." He has used the term "Never Trumper" to describe Republicans who oppose him. Trump has called them "human scum."

The investigation could lead the House to approve formal charges against Trump – known as articles of impeachment – that would be sent to the Republican-controlled Senate for a trial on whether to remove him from office. Few Republican senators have broken with Trump.

Differing testimony

Volker, the former US special envoy to Ukraine, won praise from Republicans after he testified privately last month but can expect a cooler reception from Democrats during Tuesday's hearing.

Volker told lawmakers in October he did not know of any effort by Trump to press Ukraine to investigate Biden, a leading Democratic contender opposing Trump's bid for re-election next year, and Biden's son Hunter, who had served on the board of a Ukrainian energy firm called Burisma.

"Vice President Biden was never a topic of discussion," Volker said in his October 3 closed-door testimony.

But other witnesses have identified Volker as one of the "Three Amigos," along with Energy Secretary Rick Perry and US Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland, who were tasked by Trump to obtain Zelenskiy's commitment to probing the Bidens. Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani also was a central figure in trying to get Ukraine to carry out those investigations.

Among those whose previous testimony was at odds with Volker's deposition was Vindman.

Vindman and Volker have clashed, for example, over what occurred at a July 10 White House meeting. Volker testified that US and Ukrainian officials in the meeting did not discuss any investigations. Vindman said Sondland raised the need for Ukraine to open "specific investigations" if Zelenskiy wanted to have a coveted meeting with Trump.

At a follow-up meeting that both also attended, Vindman said in previous testimony: "Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens and Burisma."

Ahead of his request that Zelenskiy carry out the two investigations, Trump had frozen $391 million in US security aid approved by Congress to help Ukraine combat Russia-backed separatists in the eastern part of the country.

Democrats have accused Trump of using the frozen aid and Zelenskiy's desire for an Oval Office meeting as leverage to pressure a vulnerable US ally to dig up dirt on political adversaries. Trump is seeking re-election next year.

Trump has repeatedly denied wrongdoing and raged on Twitter against what he calls "a witch hunt" and a "hoax." He said on Monday he might testify before the House Intelligence Committee, which is leading the inquiry. Democrats responded with skepticism.

(Reporting by Jonathan Landay and Patricia Zengerle; Additional reporting by Mark Hoseball; Editing by Richard Valdmanis and Peter

A White House official testified in the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump on Tuesday that the president's phone call urging Ukraine's leader to investigate Trump's political rivals was improper and blasted what he called "cowardly" attacks on witnesses in the investigation.

A White House official testified in the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump on Tuesday that the president's phone call urging Ukraine's leader to investigate Trump's political rivals was improper and blasted what he called "cowardly" attacks on witnesses in the investigation. Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, the White House National Security Council's top Ukraine expert, testified at the third public hearing in the impeachment effort before the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee. Vindman, who along with other witnesses has been publicly criticized by Trump, also told lawmakers that "vile character attacks" against public servants testifying in the impeachment inquiry were "reprehensible," urging Americans to be "better than callow and cowardly attacks." Vindman, an Iraq war veteran, appeared at the hearing wearing his Army uniform and medals. Vindman did not specifically mention Trump when he referred to "cowardly attacks." Some Trump allies in the conservative media have questioned Vindman's loyalty to the United States. "It is improper for the president of the United States to demand a foreign government investigate a US citizen and political opponent," Vindman said in his opening statement in the second week of public hearings. Three other witnesses were scheduled to testify at Tuesday's hearing: Kurt Volker, the former US special envoy to Ukraine; Jennifer Williams, an aide to Vice President Mike Pence; and former National Security Council Russia expert Tim Morrison. The inquiry focuses on a July 25 phone call in which Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to carry out two investigations that would benefit him politically including one targeting Democratic political rival Joe Biden. The other involved a debunked conspiracy theory embraced by some Trump allies that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 US election. In her prepared statement to the committee, Williams said Trump's July 25 call was "unusual" because it "it involved discussion of what appeared to be a domestic political matter." Williams said the White House Budget office had said Trump's acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, had directed that $391 million in security aid to Ukraine be put on hold and that she never learned why the assistance was later released in September. Williams, who was attacked by Trump on Twitter just days before her public appearance, also told lawmakers that she was committed to serving America's interests, adding "it was with great pride and conviction that I swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution." Williams was among the US officials who monitored the Trump-Zelenskiy call. She previously testified behind closed doors this month that some of Trump's comments were "inappropriate." Trump assailed her on Twitter on Sunday as a "Never Trumper" who should "work out a better presidential attack." He has used the term "Never Trumper" to describe Republicans who oppose him. Trump has called them "human scum." The investigation could lead the House to approve formal charges against Trump – known as articles of impeachment – that would be sent to the Republican-controlled Senate for a trial on whether to remove him from office. Few Republican senators have broken with Trump. Differing testimony Volker, the former US special envoy to Ukraine, won praise from Republicans after he testified privately last month but can expect a cooler reception from Democrats during Tuesday's hearing. Volker told lawmakers in October he did not know of any effort by Trump to press Ukraine to investigate Biden, a leading Democratic contender opposing Trump's bid for re-election next year, and Biden's son Hunter, who had served on the board of a Ukrainian energy firm called Burisma. "Vice President Biden was never a topic of discussion," Volker said in his October 3 closed-door testimony. But other witnesses have identified Volker as one of the "Three Amigos," along with Energy Secretary Rick Perry and US Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland, who were tasked by Trump to obtain Zelenskiy's commitment to probing the Bidens. Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani also was a central figure in trying to get Ukraine to carry out those investigations. Among those whose previous testimony was at odds with Volker's deposition was Vindman. Vindman and Volker have clashed, for example, over what occurred at a July 10 White House meeting. Volker testified that US and Ukrainian officials in the meeting did not discuss any investigations. Vindman said Sondland raised the need for Ukraine to open "specific investigations" if Zelenskiy wanted to have a coveted meeting with Trump. At a follow-up meeting that both also attended, Vindman said in previous testimony: "Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens and Burisma." Ahead of his request that Zelenskiy carry out the two investigations, Trump had frozen $391 million in US security aid approved by Congress to help Ukraine combat Russia-backed separatists in the eastern part of the country. Democrats have accused Trump of using the frozen aid and Zelenskiy's desire for an Oval Office meeting as leverage to pressure a vulnerable US ally to dig up dirt on political adversaries. Trump is seeking re-election next year. Trump has repeatedly denied wrongdoing and raged on Twitter against what he calls "a witch hunt" and a "hoax." He said on Monday he might testify before the House Intelligence Committee, which is leading the inquiry. Democrats responded with skepticism. (Reporting by Jonathan Landay and Patricia Zengerle; Additional reporting by Mark Hoseball; Editing by Richard Valdmanis and Peter

Impeachment inquiry: White House official criticizes Trump call, decries 'cowardly' attacks

A White House budget official walked into a closed session of the US House of Representatives impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump on Saturday, where he testified about the holdup of military aid to Ukraine.

Mark Sandy, a career official of the Office of Management and Budget, is the first person from OMB to testify before the inquiry after three political appointees defied congressional subpoenas to appear.

Sandy complied with a subpoena issued to compel his testimony, an official working on the impeachment inquiry said.

Trump's pressure on Ukraine is at the heart of the Democratic-led inquiry into whether the Republican president misused US foreign policy to undermine former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his potential opponents in the 2020 election.

On Friday, Trump launched a Twitter attack on a former US ambassador to Ukraine while she was testifying to an impeachment hearing in Congress, in an extraordinary moment that Democrats said amounted to witness intimidation.

Trump blasted Marie Yovanovitch, a career diplomat, as she explained on the second day of televised impeachment hearings how she had fought corruption in Ukraine and how the Trump administration abruptly removed her from her post earlier this year.

While Yovanovitch's testimony dominated headlines on Friday, closed-door deposition lawmakers held later in the day with David Holmes, an US embassy official in Kiev, could prove more consequential.

Holmes told lawmakers he overheard a phone call between Trump and Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the European Union, in which the president inquired about Ukraine's willingness to carry out investigations of Biden and his son, Hunter, who sat on the board of a Ukrainian energy company.

The phone call occurred one day after the now-infamous July 25 phone conversation between Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart at the heart of the impeachment probe.

"So, he's gonna do the investigation?" Trump asked Sondland, referring to Ukrainian president Volodmyr Zelenskiy, according to Holmes' testimony.

"He's gonna do it," replied Sondland, adding the Ukrainian president would do "anything you ask him to," according to Holmes.

The testimony by Holmes, an aide to top US diplomat in Ukraine Bill Taylor, ties Trump more directly to the pressure campaign in Ukraine to investigate the Bidens led Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.

Holmes' statement appears to contradict Sondland's previous sworn testimony about his interactions with Trump, in which he did not mention the July 26 phone call with the president.

Sondland, who has already revised his testimony once, is scheduled to testify publicly on November 20.

Representative Eric Swalwell, a Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters on Saturday that House leaders were considering bringing Holmes in for a public hearing.

"In that (Holmes) statement that was released there was a lot to be concerned about, particularly that more witnesses described the president's obsession with investigating his political opponents," Swalwell said.

A White House budget official walked into a closed session of the US House of Representatives impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump on Saturday, where he testified about the holdup of military aid to Ukraine.

A White House budget official walked into a closed session of the US House of Representatives impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump on Saturday, where he testified about the holdup of military aid to Ukraine. Mark Sandy, a career official of the Office of Management and Budget, is the first person from OMB to testify before the inquiry after three political appointees defied congressional subpoenas to appear. Sandy complied with a subpoena issued to compel his testimony, an official working on the impeachment inquiry said. Trump's pressure on Ukraine is at the heart of the Democratic-led inquiry into whether the Republican president misused US foreign policy to undermine former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his potential opponents in the 2020 election. On Friday, Trump launched a Twitter attack on a former US ambassador to Ukraine while she was testifying to an impeachment hearing in Congress, in an extraordinary moment that Democrats said amounted to witness intimidation. Trump blasted Marie Yovanovitch, a career diplomat, as she explained on the second day of televised impeachment hearings how she had fought corruption in Ukraine and how the Trump administration abruptly removed her from her post earlier this year. While Yovanovitch's testimony dominated headlines on Friday, closed-door deposition lawmakers held later in the day with David Holmes, an US embassy official in Kiev, could prove more consequential. Holmes told lawmakers he overheard a phone call between Trump and Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the European Union, in which the president inquired about Ukraine's willingness to carry out investigations of Biden and his son, Hunter, who sat on the board of a Ukrainian energy company. The phone call occurred one day after the now-infamous July 25 phone conversation between Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart at the heart of the impeachment probe. "So, he's gonna do the investigation?" Trump asked Sondland, referring to Ukrainian president Volodmyr Zelenskiy, according to Holmes' testimony. "He's gonna do it," replied Sondland, adding the Ukrainian president would do "anything you ask him to," according to Holmes. The testimony by Holmes, an aide to top US diplomat in Ukraine Bill Taylor, ties Trump more directly to the pressure campaign in Ukraine to investigate the Bidens led Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani. Holmes' statement appears to contradict Sondland's previous sworn testimony about his interactions with Trump, in which he did not mention the July 26 phone call with the president. Sondland, who has already revised his testimony once, is scheduled to testify publicly on November 20. Representative Eric Swalwell, a Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters on Saturday that House leaders were considering bringing Holmes in for a public hearing. "In that (Holmes) statement that was released there was a lot to be concerned about, particularly that more witnesses described the president's obsession with investigating his political opponents," Swalwell said.

Trump impeachment hearing: In closed door session, White House budget official testifies on military aid to Ukraine

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-holds-in-depth-talks-with-us-on-phase-one-of-trade-deal-262023">United States and China</a> are getting close to a trade agreement, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said on Thursday, citing what he called very constructive talks with Beijing about ending a 16-month trade war.

Kudlow said negotiators for the world's two largest economies were in close touch via telephone but he gave no further details on the timing of a possible deal.

"We're getting close," he told an event at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. "The mood music is pretty good, and that has not always been so in these things."

The United States and China have been locked in successive waves of tit-for-tat tariffs that have roiled financial markets and threaten to drag growth in the global economy to its lowest rate since the 2007-2008 financial crisis.

Markets are anxiously awaiting an agreement to end the uncertainty that has slowed business investment around the globe. An agreement had appeared likely in May, but those prospects were dashed after US&nbsp;negotiators said China backed away from the text of a draft agreement.

Kudlow's comments could ease market concerns that flared again this week amid reports that the trade talks had hit a snag over how and when to reduce tariffs, and what level of agricultural purchases could be expected from China.

Markets also soured after US&nbsp;President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he could impose substantial new tariffs on China if no deal was reached.

Kudlow told the audience he had just come from a meeting of the top Trump administration trade officials and was more optimistic.

"It's not done yet, but there has been very good progress and the talks have been very constructive," he told the event.

He also opened the door to the possibility that Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping would not need to meet in person to clinch a deal.

Trump had hoped to sign the "phase one" agreement with China on the sidelines of the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Chile this month, but that possibility disappeared after Chile withdrew from hosting the event.

Kudlow said the White House had hoped to stick to that general timetable. He joked that his preference was for the deal to be signed in his office on the second floor of the White House.

"I don't like to travel," he quipped.

The United States and China are getting close to a trade agreement, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said on Thursday, citing what he called very constructive talks with Beijing about ending a 16-month trade war.

The United States and China are getting close to a trade agreement, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said on Thursday, citing what he called very constructive talks with Beijing about ending a 16-month trade war. Kudlow said negotiators for the world's two largest economies were in close touch via telephone but he gave no further details on the timing of a possible deal. "We're getting close," he told an event at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. "The mood music is pretty good, and that has not always been so in these things." The United States and China have been locked in successive waves of tit-for-tat tariffs that have roiled financial markets and threaten to drag growth in the global economy to its lowest rate since the 2007-2008 financial crisis. Markets are anxiously awaiting an agreement to end the uncertainty that has slowed business investment around the globe. An agreement had appeared likely in May, but those prospects were dashed after US negotiators said China backed away from the text of a draft agreement. Kudlow's comments could ease market concerns that flared again this week amid reports that the trade talks had hit a snag over how and when to reduce tariffs, and what level of agricultural purchases could be expected from China. Markets also soured after US President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he could impose substantial new tariffs on China if no deal was reached. Kudlow told the audience he had just come from a meeting of the top Trump administration trade officials and was more optimistic. "It's not done yet, but there has been very good progress and the talks have been very constructive," he told the event. He also opened the door to the possibility that Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping would not need to meet in person to clinch a deal. Trump had hoped to sign the "phase one" agreement with China on the sidelines of the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Chile this month, but that possibility disappeared after Chile withdrew from hosting the event. Kudlow said the White House had hoped to stick to that general timetable. He joked that his preference was for the deal to be signed in his office on the second floor of the White House. "I don't like to travel," he quipped.

United States and China 'getting close' to trade deal: White House economic adviser

white-house

White House, News on White House, stories on White House, articles on White House, White House stories at Wion, White House news, White House latest news

white house

Iran crisis test drives fundaments of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

Iran crisis test drives fundaments of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

Iran crisis test drives fundaments of Donald Trump’s foreign policy

White House broke law by withholding Ukraine aid: Congressional agency

Details of US-China deal to be published after signing: White House

Donald Trump: Iranian strike caused no American deaths

Facebook executive says it helped put Trump in White House

Protest breaks out over Trump-Iraq policy near White House, Trump hotel

Trump, Putin discussed Russia attack, arms control, relations: White House

United States promises action on any North Korea missile test: White House

White House does not want prolonged impeachment trial: Senior official

US President Trump invites Britain's Johnson to White House for new year: Sources

US Democrats seek high-profile trial for Trump in Senate

White House says it is confident President Trump will be exonerated after impeachment

Trump impeachment saga: What you need to know ahead of the vote

Amazon lawsuit blames Trump for loss of Pentagon cloud contract

Biden says no foreign business for family if he wins White House

Democratic candidate Warren discloses details of past legal work, showing $2 million in compensation

US President Trump calls for World Bank to stop loaning to China

US solar industry urged members to use social media to 'hit back' at White house

Trump administration moves to remove 700,000 people from food stamps' benefits

US House panel impeachment report to be released Tuesday: Adam Schiff

Donald Trump Impeachment Hearings Set for Dec 4

Trump impeachment inquiry: What happens next?

Michael Bloomberg registers committee in anticipation of 2020 US presidential poll

Trump emissary Sondland to speak at impeachment hearings