Meet Gordon Sondland: The US Hotelier Turned EU Ambassador at the Center of Trump Ukraine Scandal

Daniel Mihailescu/Getty Images

Until recently, the name Gordon Sondland would barely register a blip of recognition outside the worlds of Pacific Northwest boutique hotels and European diplomacy circles. (As such entities are so often connected?) But the U.S. ambassador to the European Union is now in the epicenter of a political earthquake that threatens the very existence of the Trump administration.

Sondland catapulted into the headlines Tuesday when the White House made the stunning move to block his testimony before three House committees. As the New York Times reported, the move signaled the administration has “all but declared war on the House impeachment inquiry.”

Sondland finds himself in the middle of the storm surrounding Trump’s apparent campaign to pressure  Ukraine to investigate his political rival, Joe Biden — efforts that sparked the metastasizing impeachment inquiry. That the White House took the extraordinary step of blocking Sondland’s testimony hints at how dangerous they see his questioning by House investigators.

Who is Gordon Sondland and how did he get here?

Like so many of those appointed to high posts in the Trump administration, Sondland fits a specific profile: He’s a self-made and mega-wealthy entrepreneur who, despite declining to support Trump’s 2016 campaign for the presidency, got on the radar of Donald Trump by donating a sizable amount of money to his inauguration.

Notably, Sondland also had zero experience in diplomacy and statesmanship before he was appointed to one of the most powerful U.S. ambassadorships: handling diplomacy with the European Union.

The Washington Post described him:

So it may not come as a surprise that an individual with such little experience with international diplomacy — and maybe less knowledge of legal behavior — is not at the center of this scandal.

In Brussels, Sondland garnered a reputation for his truculent manner and fondness for the trappings of privilege. He peppered closed-door negotiations with four-letter words. He carried a wireless buzzer into meetings at the U.S. Mission that enabled him to silently summon support staff to refill his teacup.

Sondland seemed to chafe at the constraints of his assignment. He traveled for meetings in Israel, Romania and other countries with little or no coordination with other officials. He acquired a reputation for being indiscreet, and was chastised for using his personal phone for state business, officials said.

Sondland also shuttled repeatedly back to Washington, often seeking face time with Trump. When he couldn’t gain entry to the Oval Office, officials said, he would meet instead with White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, preferring someone closer to Trump’s inner circle than national security officials responsible for Europe.

“He always seemed to be in D.C.,” a former White House official said. “People would say, ‘Does he spend any time in Brussels?’ ”

It was not just Sondland’s personal style that has raised questions. It’s his specific role in the Ukrainian scandal (which we can now fairly describe as a shit storm). His role was best summed up in a terrific report this week in the Washington Post. Reporter Megan Flynn writes:

“Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump’s intentions,” Sondland wrote last month, before urging Taylor, the U.S. charges d’affaires in Ukraine, to call him instead.

Those text messages are now at the center of the House impeachment inquiry into Trump’s dealings with Ukraine, bringing State Department officials’ private discussions surrounding the events into sharp focus. But unlike longtime diplomats such as Taylor, Sondland charted an unconventional course on his journey into the middle of the scandal now plaguing Trump’s presidency.

Details of Sondland’s role emerged after former U.S. Emissary to Ukraine Kurt Volker testified before House committees last week. Since that closed-door testimony, reporting has confirmed previous allegations that Sondland communicated personally with Trump about Ukraine.

What’s more, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), a staunch defender of Trump in his impeachment fight, told the Journal that in August Sondland told him the military aid being withheld from Ukraine was contingent on an investigation Trump wanted.

The Wall Street Journal reported that while Sondland was communicating with Bill Taylor, a U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, about fears Taylor had that Trump was engaging in a quid pro quo, Sondland called Trump.

“As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign,” Taylor wrote.

Sondland called Trump after receiving that text, and Trump reportedly denied there was a quid pro quo. After speaking with Trump, Sondland texted Taylor: “Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump’s intentions. The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quos of any kind. The President is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelensky promised during his campaign I suggest we stop the back and forth by text.”

Who exactly put Sondland in charge of this particular Ukrainian affair? No one can truly know for certain, but all evidence points to none other than Donald Trump.

So the mega-wealthy hotelier from the Pacific Northwest — who it appears was only named U.S. Ambassador to the EU because of his $1 million in donations to the Trump inauguration — is now at the center of an impeachment inquiry. It doesn’t require a sharp critical mind to suddenly understand why the Trump administration is keeping from testifying before Congress.

Because who knows how this still unraveling story will continue, especially under oath.