Tim Morrison: White House national security official set to testify in impeachment inquiry stepping down soon

This summer, he was tapped by Bolton to replace Fiona Hill, who had been the White House’s top official on Russian affairs. Hill testified before the committees earlier this month.

Creature of process

Morrison’s hawkish views align with those of Bolton and he has been described as a creature of process by some close to him.

Bolton always told those who worked for him that process was their protector and sometimes you have to listen to the person elected — advice Morrison adopted, sources said.

Morrison is a lifelong Republican described as a Reaganite and is referred to as “‘Bolton’s Bolton,’ he is really hard right,” according to one source familiar with Morrison.

A Baltimore native, Morrison attended law school at George Washington University and was planning to head to the Department of Justice when he graduated until an offer came in from former Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl’s office.

Morrison was impressed by Kyl’s record so accepted the offer. He spent more than 17 years on the hill — working for Kyl and the House Armed Services Committee — before joining the NSC.

Bolton brought Morrison on at the NSC as a political appointee. The two men met over a decade ago when Morrison was working for Kyl and Bolton was Ambassador to the United Nations.

When Bolton was fired, Morrison kept his job. The two old allies have been in touch on a personal basis but it is unclear if they have discussed the Ukraine probe specifically, according to a source close to Morrison.

‘It could have gone better’

Taylor meticulously documented how he believed the White House had conditioned releasing security aid to Ukraine and providing a one-on-one meeting with Zelensky on Kiev publicly announcing an investigation that could help the President politically. He said that Gordon Sondland, the US ambassador to the European Union, had told him that “everything” depended on the investigation being announced.

His opening statement mentioned Morrison 15 times by name.

Morrison will only be the second person who was on that call to answer lawmakers’ questions.

He is also an integral player because he was serving in the top NSC role when security assistance to Ukraine was put on hold in mid-July due to a review announced internally by the Office of Management and Budget — a review that CNN has reported never actually happened.

While Morrison is expected to corroborate parts of Taylor’s account, he is also expected to paint a picture of the NSC keeping the train on the tracks and not carrying out any illegal actions.

“The NSC process does not allow anything that isn’t legal. It just, it would never get to the President. Certainly not any process that Tim was ever a part of,” said a source close to Morrison. “A piece of paper does not get to the national security adviser without first going through the lawyers, much less to the President.”

It is also unclear what Morrison will say when asked if there was a quid pro quo.

Morrison has been “completely aligned with the end result of all the administration’s decisions,” the source said, without getting into the key details of all the elements of the administration’s process to reach decisions.

He is not likely to say there was a quid pro quo, another source close to Morrison said, adding that Morrison will stay in the lanes of the policy process that he was following and directing.

But Morrison will be asked to detail what he meant when he told Taylor, according to Taylor’s testimony, that he had a “sinking feeling” after learning about a conversation between Trump and Sondland. During that conversation Trump said he was not asking for a “quid pro quo” but he still “insisted” that Zelensky “go to a microphone” to announce investigations into Biden and 2016 election interference.

Democrats seized on the information Taylor laid out as showing that there was a quid pro quo, but Taylor would not explicitly say that himself during his closed-door testimony, according to multiple sources familiar with what he said.

Taylor said that was a legal definition lawmakers should decide on, and he was just there to provide the facts.

One-on-one with Trump

Unlike Taylor, Morrison has had one-on-one conversations with Trump throughout his 15-month tenure at the NSC, according to the source close to him. The fact they have interacted directly means Morrison will have to decide how he handles the constraints of executive privilege.

In technical terms executive privilege is defined by interactions with the President — meaning there will be other ways Morrison handled or did his job that do not directly tie to Trump, which he will be able to reveal.

Morrison views Trump as the same on TV as he is in person. “He’s not acting,” the source familiar with Morrison’s thinking said.

He has grown to believe that Trump often has a long-term vision for where he wants policy to go, though he does not necessarily share his thinking with anyone and frequently encounters potholes along the way, sources said.

Barbara Van Gelder, Morrison’s lawyer, told CNN that privilege issues are fact specific and they will be handled in accordance with the House rules if they come up during the deposition. Van Gelder would not provide comment further on Morrison’s testimony.