January 27, 2020

Trump’s Lawyer Just Made the Most Misleading Statement I Have Ever Heard

Jay Sekulow

Jay SekulowSenate Television via AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

During the Senate impeachment trial Monday, Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow made a bold claim. “Not a single witness,” he declared, “testified that the president himself said that there was any connection between any investigation and security assistance, a presidential meeting, or anything else.” While he talked, Trump’s legal team displayed a slide making a similar assertion: “NONE of the Democrats’ witnesses say President Trump linked investigations to security assistance or a meeting.”

And that’s true! Sort of. While Trump’s EU ambassador, Gordon Sondland, testified that there was indeed a quid pro quo—Ukraine’s president would get a meeting at the White House only after he announced investigations into Trump’s political foes—he acknowledged that Trump had not told him this directly.

But here’s the thing. Less than 24 hours ago, multiple news outlets reported that John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, wrote in a draft of his forthcoming book that yes, Trump really did link the military aid to an investigation of Joe Biden. According to the New York Times, Bolton wrote that Trump told him in August 2019 that “he preferred sending no assistance to Ukraine until officials had turned over all materials they had about the Russia investigation that related to Mr. Biden and supporters of Mrs. Clinton in Ukraine.”

And Bolton isn’t the only one. Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney last year also appeared to acknowledge—while speaking to reporters on camera—that Trump had linked the Ukraine aid to his demands for an investigation into Democrats. (Mulvaney later tried to walk back that admission.)

So was Sekulow lying? Well, not exactly. Sekulow didn’t say that no Trump administration official had said that Trump told them about the quid pro quo. Instead, Sekulow said that no “witness” had “testified” that Trump had done so.

You see, Trump ordered Bolton and Mulvaney not to participate in the House impeachment inquiry, and—unlike many other administration officials—they chose to comply with the president’s demand. They were not “witnesses.” They have not “testified.”

Senate Democrats tried to subpoena Bolton and Mulvaney last week, but Republicans blocked that effort on a party-line vote. Democrats will soon have another opportunity to persuade a handful of Republicans to issue those subpoenas. If they succeed, Sekulow may need to find a new talking point. 

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate