2 budget officials resigned in part over concerns about Ukraine aid hold, official testifies
WASHINGTON - Two officials at the White House Office of Management and Budget recently resigned in part over concerns about the holdup on Ukraine aid, a career employee of the agency told impeachment investigators, according to a transcript of his testimony released Tuesday.
Mark Sandy, the only OMB official to testify in the impeachment inquiry, did not name the employees in question. He said one worked in the OMB legal division and described that person as having a "dissenting opinion" about how the security assistance to Ukraine could be held up in light of the Impoundment Control Act, which limits the ability of the executive branch to change spending decisions already made by Congress.
Sandy, the agency's deputy associate director for national security programs, testified on Nov. 16, and his remarks revealed some of the White House's internal maneuvers when it came to blocking the money. Other White House officials, including Sandy's superiors at the budget office who are political appointees, have defied congressional subpoenas to participate in the House Democrats' impeachment inquiry.
Sandy was asked specifically about whether the official who worked in OMB's legal office quit "at least in part because of their concerns or frustrations about the hold on Ukraine security assistance." Sandy replied, "Yes, in terms of that process, in part."
He said the other official, who resigned in September, "expressed some frustrations about not understanding the reason for the hold."
The release of Sandy's testimony came as House Democrats on Tuesday took steps forward in their impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump's actions, with the judiciary panel scheduling its first hearing for Dec. 4 and the budget panel releasing a report alleging the White House broke the law by withholding money from Ukraine.
The moves show the impeachment process quickly advancing beyond the hearings held by the House Intelligence Committee this month to proceedings that could lead to a formal vote on impeachment.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., in a 13-page letter to Trump, gave the president until Dec. 1 to decide whether he planned to participate in that panel's impeachment hearings. Nadler's committee has the power to draft the articles of impeachment against Trump.
House Democrats in September began an impeachment inquiry into Trump's actions during the summer, alleging that he withheld security funding for Ukraine and a White House meeting for that country's president until the new leader, Volodymyr Zelensky, agreed to announce investigations into Trump's U.S. political opponents.
Current and former government officials have testified that they were alarmed about the White House's decision to withhold the money, with some saying they feared that Trump was trying to pressure the Ukrainian government for his own political gain. Trump has denied wrongdoing and decried the investigation.
Sandy's testimony is the first public confirmation that the dispute at the OMB over handling of the Ukraine aid became so intense that it contributed to resignations from the agency. In the transcript released Tuesday, Sandy said that he himself voiced concerns within the agency about whether holding up the Ukraine aid comported with the law.
"I just made a general reference to the Impoundment Control Act ... and said that we would have to assess that with the advice of counsel before proceeding," Sandy said in describing a conversation he had with a political appointee at the agency who was his superior.
Ultimately that political appointee, Mike Duffey, took over the process of signing off on the documents that held up the Ukraine money. Sandy told impeachment investigators that until that time, Duffey had voiced no interest in the process of approving apportionments.
Sandy said his own staff was "surprised and they were concerned" about the apportionment authority being removed from him, and that he was not aware of such a step happening before.
He testified that Duffey's stated explanation was he wanted to learn more about the "accounts and the programs" at OMB, but that Sandy thought there were better ways to go about doing this. But, "I took him at his word," Sandy said.
Duffey defied a congressional subpoena to testify in the impeachment inquiry.
In announcing the Dec. 4 hearing, Nadler sent a letter to Trump and asked whether he or his lawyer planned to attend and question witnesses.
"We expect to discuss the constitutional framework through which the House may analyze the evidence gathered in the present inquiry," Nadler wrote. "We will also discuss whether your alleged actions warrant the House's exercising its authority to adopt articles of impeachment."
UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy: