Mark Sandy Yara Nardi/Reuters

Two officials with the White House Office of Management and Budget resigned after expressing frustration with President Donald Trump’s move to freeze millions in military aid to Ukraine, according to the closed-door testimony of another official.

Mark Sandy, a career OMB official, testified on the resignations to House impeachment investigators on November 16. His testimony was released publicly this week.

One of the officials worked in the OMB’s legal division and left „at least in part because of their concerns or frustrations about the hold on Ukraine security assistance,“ Sandy said.

This official apparently had concerns related to the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which sets restrictions on when a president can defer spending funds. The law was a response to President Richard Nixon’s overreach.

The other OMB official, who was not in the legal division and resigned in September, „expressed some frustrations about not understanding the reason for the hold,“ Sandy said.

Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.

President Donald Trump’s decision to withhold roughly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine appeared to directly contribute to the resignations of two White House Office of Management and Budget officials, according to closed-door testimony of a career OMB official to House impeachment investigators.

The official, Mark Sandy, testified to the House Intelligence Committee behind closed doors on November 16. His testimony was publicly released Tuesday.

Both of the officials who left OMB were unnamed, but Sandy said one worked in the agency’s legal office.

Sandy was asked whether the official who worked in the legal office left „at least in part because of their concerns or frustrations about the hold on Ukraine security assistance.“

He replied: „Yes, in terms of that process, in part.“ Sandy later added: „I never want to attribute that as the, you know, sole purpose for an individual’s actions, but I am aware of their frustrations in that area, yes.“

According to Sandy’s testimony, the legal official expressed concerns about the Impoundment Control Act, a law that sets limits or restrictions on when a president can defer congressionally approved spending funds.

Sandy said this official had a „dissenting opinion“ regarding the freeze on the aid to Ukraine in relation to this law.

The other OMB official, who was not in the legal division and resigned in September, „expressed some frustrations about not understanding the reason for the hold,“ Sandy said.

Trump has offered inconsistent and dubious reasons for withholding the aid, including concerns over corruption and consternation over European countries not providing more assistance to Ukraine.

The impeachment inquiry was born from a whistleblower complaint that zeroed in on a July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The complaint accuses Trump of abusing the power of his office to solicit foreign interference in the 2020 election. During the call, Trump urged Zelensky to open investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden as well as a bogus conspiracy theory on the 2016 election.

Trump moved to freeze the military aid to Ukraine before the call, and there’s evidence Ukraine knew about the hold on the assistance at the time.

Testimony from multiple witnesses suggests Trump was far more concerned with personally benefiting from the requested investigations than rooting out corruption in Ukraine. The president’s suggestion that European countries have not put up money to assist Ukraine is also highly misleading. Since 2014, for example, the European Union and European financial institutions have contributed over $16.4 billion in grants and loans to Ukraine.

The military aid to Ukraine was released September 11, less than a week after three House committees launched investigations into Trump’s dealings with the former Soviet republic.

As Sandy’s testimony was released Tuesday, a New York Times report also surfaced suggesting Trump knew about the whistleblower complaint before unfreezing the aid. White House lawyers approached Trump about the complaint in late August, according to the report, which raises more questions about the president’s motivations for releasing the aid.