Tuesday Impeachment Hearing Recap: 'It Was A Moment Of Shock'

Tuesday Impeachment Hearing Recap: 'It Was A Moment Of Shock'

Assessment

Interactive Video

Social Studies

University

Hard

Created by

Quizizz Content

FREE Resource

The transcript covers testimonies related to a July call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky. Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vinman and Jennifer Williams express concerns about the call, with Vinman reporting it to the NSC lawyer. Their testimonies highlight differing views on the call's implications. Tim Morrison and Kurt Volker also testify, denying any improper linkage between aid to Ukraine and investigations. The transcript concludes with a preview of upcoming testimonies from other officials.

Read more

5 questions

Show all answers

1.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What was Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vinman's reaction to the July call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky?

He found it routine and unremarkable.

He was shocked and reported it to the NSC's lawyer.

He supported the call's content.

He was unaware of the call.

2.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

How did Jennifer Williams describe the July call?

As a routine diplomatic conversation.

As unusual and political.

As a clear violation of protocol.

As supportive of Ukrainian interests.

3.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What was Congressman John Radcliffe's observation about Vinman and Williams' testimonies?

They both supported the President's actions.

They refused to testify.

They had differing views on the call's nature.

They both agreed on the call's impropriety.

4.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What did Kurt Volker testify regarding the hold on security assistance to Ukraine?

He supported the hold as a strategic move.

He denied any linkage to investigations.

He confirmed it was linked to investigations.

He was unaware of any hold on assistance.

5.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

What change did Kurt Volker make to his previous testimony?

He stated he was not present at the meeting.

He denied any discussions about investigations.

He confirmed the hold was linked to investigations.

He acknowledged a comment about investigations was made.