Real-Time Witness Intimidation: Trump Tweeted Attacks Against Marie Yovanovitch While She Testified in the Impeachment Hearing
Tier 3Documented2019-11-15 to 2019-11-15
Factual Summary
On November 15, 2019, former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch testified publicly before the House Intelligence Committee as part of the first impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. While Yovanovitch was actively testifying, Trump posted a tweet attacking her professional record. The tweet stated: "Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in Somalia, how did that go?" Trump went on to claim credit for the appointment of a new ambassador and asserted his "absolute right" to recall ambassadors.
Committee Chairman Adam Schiff read the tweet aloud to Yovanovitch during the hearing and asked her to respond. Yovanovitch replied: "It's very intimidating. I can't speak to what the president is trying to do, but I think the effect is to be intimidating." Schiff then stated during a break that the committee had witnessed "witness intimidation in real time by the president of the United States, once again going after this dedicated and respected career public servant in an effort to not only chill her, but to chill others who may come forward."
Yovanovitch had been recalled from her ambassadorial post in Ukraine in May 2019 after a campaign led by Giuliani and his associates, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, to remove her. She testified that she had been told by a senior State Department official that although she had "done nothing wrong," Trump had lost confidence in her and she needed to leave Kyiv on the "next plane." During her testimony, Yovanovitch described being "shocked and devastated" by a section of the July 25, 2019 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky in which Trump called her "bad news" and said she was "going to go through some things."
House Majority Whip James Clyburn stated that the tweet could form the basis for an additional article of impeachment, saying, "It may get to that." Multiple legal scholars and former prosecutors noted that witness intimidation is a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. Section 1512, which prohibits knowingly intimidating or harassing a witness in an official proceeding. The tweet was not ultimately charged as a separate article of impeachment, though it was cited in the House Judiciary Committee's impeachment report as evidence of Trump's pattern of obstruction.
Trump defended his tweet later that day, telling reporters: "I have the right to speak. I have freedom of speech just as other people do."
Primary Sources
1. House Intelligence Committee public hearing transcript, November 15, 2019, testimony of Marie Yovanovitch
2. Trump tweet, November 15, 2019 (archived via the Trump Twitter Archive and congressional record)
3. House Judiciary Committee Report on Articles of Impeachment, H. Rept. 116-346, December 2019
Corroborating Sources
1. NBC News: "Trump tweeted as Marie Yovanovitch testified: Was it witness tampering?" November 15, 2019
2. CNN: "Trump on his tweet attacking the witness: 'I have the right to speak,'" November 15, 2019
3. Washington Post: "Democrats call Trump's tweets 'witness intimidation,' contemplate adding charge to impeachment articles," November 15, 2019
4. PBS NewsHour: "Trump attacks impeachment witness Marie Yovanovitch on Twitter," November 15, 2019
5. Common Dreams: "'Witness Intimidation in Real Time': Trump Tweets Attack on Yovanovitch During Public Impeachment Testimony," November 15, 2019
Counterarguments and Context
Trump and White House officials argued that the tweet was not witness intimidation but rather an expression of the president's opinion about Yovanovitch's job performance. Trump asserted his First Amendment right to comment on the proceedings. White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham stated that the president had every right to express his views. Supporters argued that the tweet was not directed at Yovanovitch personally during her testimony and that there was no evidence Trump was watching the hearing at the moment he posted. Legal experts were divided on whether the tweet met the statutory threshold for witness intimidation, which requires proof of intent to influence, delay, or prevent testimony. However, the tweet was posted during the hearing, was read aloud to the witness in real time, and the witness herself stated under oath that the effect was intimidating. The question of chilling effect on future witnesses, which Schiff raised, cannot be empirically measured but is a legitimate concern in the context of ongoing proceedings in which additional witnesses had yet to testify.
Author's Note
This entry is classified as Tier 3 because the underlying facts are documented through primary evidence, including the hearing transcript, the tweet itself, and Yovanovitch's sworn testimony. The characterization of the tweet as "witness intimidation" involves a legal and normative judgment that was made by members of Congress and legal commentators but was never adjudicated in a criminal proceeding.