White House Ukraine expert Alexander Vindman told lawmakers he became convinced that President Trump was personally holding up $400 million in aid for Ukraine to force the country into announcing that it was investigating 2020 presidential hopeful Joe Biden and his son.
CNN reported Wednesday that Vindman, who sat down for a deposition on Capitol Hill Tuesday, was convinced that a quid pro quo existed by July 10, which was before the now-infamous July 25 call between Trump and Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Vindman also told lawmakers, according to Politico, that he planned to debrief Trump on Zelenksy’s May inauguration, but was instructed ‘at the last second’ not to attend because advisers worried it might confuse the president.
Trump, Vindman said, was under the impression that the National Security Council’s top Ukraine expert was Kash Patel, a longtime staffer of Rep. Devin Nunes, the Intelligence Committee’s top Republican.
Vindman’s boss, NSC Senior director for European and Russian affairs Fiona Hill told Vindman that she and national security adviser John Bolton decided to keep Vindman out of the meeting to avoid ‘an uncomfortable’ situation.
Vindman said Patel ‘misrepresented’ himself as a Ukraine expert, Politico reported.
New details of Alexander Vindman’s testimony came out Wednesday including that he thought a quid pro quo existed before President Trump’s phone call with the Ukranian president
Alexander Vindman testified, according to Politico, that Kash Patel (right) ‘misrepresented’ himself as a Ukraine expert. And while Vindman was the National Security Council’s top Ukraine expert, he was told to not attend a meeting with Patel as it might confuse Trump
The president began his day on Twitter swinging at Vindman, an active-duty Army lieutenant colonel who was awarded a Purple Heart after being wounded in Iraq, saying he had ‘never heard of’ him but insisting he is a ‘Never Trumper.’
But hours in, Vindman’s testimony was already alarming Democratic members of Congress.
Acting chair of the Oversight Committee, Rep. Carolyn Maloney, called it ‘extremely disturbing,’ NBC News reported.
During the closed-door questioning by lawmakers in a secure room used by the House Intelligence Committee, Republicans and Democrats clashed. Democrats, led by panel chair Rep. Adam Schiff, accused Republicans of trying to use the interview to out the whistle-blower who first brought forward claims of an alleged effort to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens, using military aid and a White House meeting as leverage.
‘It’s very hard to out somebody that you don’t know who they are,’ Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), a Trump ally, told DailyMail.com, denying the charge.
‘In general, you want to know who your witnesses have talked to about certain information that they’re sharing. And that’s the extent of the conversation,’ he said. He said he wanted to know ‘whomever they’ve talked to.’
Even as he denied trying to unmask the whistle-blower though stoked the impeachment inquiry, Meadows said he had a high amount of certainty of who it might be.
‘This was just some questions about who did you talked to, and [Democrats] got all weirded out because they thought we were going to out somebody that we have no knowledge of who they are,’ he said.
‘If I had a degree of certainty of who the whistle-blower is, I promise you I would tell you. I have no idea who it is. Well, I have an idea, but I don’t – I’m less than 80 per cent confident,’ he continued. ‘I think there’s three or four people it could be.’
‘I don’t do anything without a hundred per cent knowledge. It’s not 100, I’m not going to say it,’ he concluded.
Vindman told investigators Tuesday that he listened to Donald Trump’s call with Ukraine’s new president Volodymr Zelensky and ‘did not think it was proper’ – potentially a huge boost to the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry.
The White House also ordered the officer not to testify, prompting the House Intelligence Committee to issue a subpoena directing him to give evidence.
Vindman testified that he twice raised concerns over the Trump administration’s interest in having Ukraine investigate Joe Biden and his son.
He is the first White House official to say he heard the July 25 telephone call between Trump and Zelensky that is at the center of the impeachment inquiry.
House Republican conference chair Rep. Liz Cheney blasted ‘shameful’ questioning of Vindman’s patriotism after attacks from Trump allies.
Cheney, a Wyoming Republican and the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, issued her public admonition hours after high-profile conservative commentators sought to discredit Vindman before his testimony – with a former top Bush administration comparing him to a spy.
‘I also want to say a word about something else that’s been going on over the last couple of hours, and last night, which I think is also shameful, and that is questioning the patriotism, questioning the dedication to country, of people like Mr. Vindman – Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, who will be coming today – and others who have testified,’ Cheney said at a House leadership press conference.
She spoke after former top Bush Administration official John Yoo even compared some of Vindman’s activities on the National Security Council to ‘espionage.’
Former Wisconsin GOP Rep. Sean Duffy joined in the attack, saying on CNN Tuesday about Vindman: ‘It seems very clear that he is incredibly concerned about Ukrainian defense. I don’t know that he’s concerned about American policy … we all have an affinity to our homeland where we came from … he has an affinity for the Ukraine.’
Host Laura Ingraham asked Yoo about a detail from a New York Times report that said Vindman advised Ukrainian officials on how to handle Rudy Giuliani
Rep. Adam Schiff accused Republicans of using questions to try to out the whistle-blower
‘It’s very hard to out somebody that you don’t know who they are,’ Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) told DailyMail.com. But he said he was 80 per cent sure of the whistle-blower’s identity
Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) called Vindman’s testimony ”extremely, extremely, extremely disturbing’
Vindman arrived at the Capitol wearing his dress uniform, displaying his Purple Heart and a series of other decorations for his service.
He was due to tell lawmakers he was a Ukrainian-born Jewish refugee who had lived ‘the American dream’ by serving his country in combat and as a diplomat.
Trump vented just before Lt. Col. Vindman arrived that that a transcript of the call makes it clear he did nothing wrong, and that Vindman is an unimportant figure who never crossed paths with him.
‘Why are people that I never even heard of testifying about the call. Just READ THE CALL TRANSCRIPT AND THE IMPEACHMENT HOAX IS OVER! Ukrain [sic] said NO PRESSURE,’ Trump tweeted.
But calling Vindman a ‘Never Trumper’ came as pro-Trump pundits were attacked by other Republicans for questioning Lt. Col Vindman’s patriotism, with one Fox News commentator going as far as to accuse him of ‘espionage’ against the president.
The officer was to testify that he is explicitly not the anonymous whistle-blower whose complaint about the call launched a now weeks-long chapter in the impeachment saga.
SCROLL DOWN TO READ LT. COL VINDMAN’S FULL OPENING STATEMENT
Alexander Vindman, an Army lieutenant colonel (pictured at center, arriving at the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday), will tell House investigators he listened to President Donald Trump’s call with the new Ukrainian president Volodymr Zelensky and ‘did not think it was proper’
President Trump vented Tuesday morning on Twitter, saying a simple reading of the call transcript combined with Zelensky’s own public comments should be enough to override the opinion of a junior official he has ‘never even heard of’
About an hour afte rsaying he had ‘never even heard of’ Vindman, the president declared that he was a ‘Never Trumper’ – the name given to Republicans who opposed him beginning with his presidential campaign’s launch in 2015
‘The Impeachment Hoax is a disgrace. Read the transcript!’ Trump added in another message.
Trump used the same ‘never Trumper’ insult to go after career diplomat William Taylor, who said in his own deposition that the was troubled by the administration’s push to get Ukraine to make public statements about investigations that would help the president in order to get military aid and a White House meeting.
Zelensky has said he felt no pressure on the call with Trump to take action. The transcript doesn’t appear to support Democrats’ contention that Trump directly linked U.S. military aid to Ukraine with Zelensky’s decision on launching an investigation that could give the president a political advantage in 2020.
Trump followed up his social media outrage with a string of retweets of congressional allies calling the entire impeachment inquiry illegitimate because of its secretive and one-sided beginning.
In his opening statement, first published by The New York Times, Vindman claimed the National Security Council proposed that Trump call President Zelensky to congratulate him after his party won parliamentary elections.
He explained: ‘On July 25, 2019, the call occurred. I listened in on the call in the Situation Room with colleagues from the NSC and the office of the Vice President.
‘As the transcript is in the public record, we are all aware of what was said. I was concerned by the call. I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine.
‘I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained.’
Burisma Holdings is the Ukrainian energy company where Biden’s son Hunter held a lucrative board seat while his father was vice president.
‘I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained.
Vindman claimed: ‘This would all undermine U.S. national security. Following the call, I again reported my concerns to NSC’s lead counsel.’
The New York Times reported that Vindman is due to be interviewed privately on Tuesday by the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight and Reform Committees.
Vindman served multiple overseas tours, including South Korea and Germany, and was deployed to Iraq for combat operations. He was wounded in an IED attack and was subsequently awarded a Purple Heart.
He served in United States’ embassies in Kiev, Ukraine and Moscow, Russia. In Washington, D.C., he was a politico-military affairs officer for Russia for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff before his appointment to the NSC.
Vindman is the latest in a line of subpoenaed witnesses who House Democrats hope will provide incriminating evidence against the president
Alexander Vindman (left) is seen with twin brother Eugene (right) and photographer Carol Kitman in October 2016 at a ceremony in Washington. Eugene – born Evgeny – is also an Army lieutenant colonel serving in the National Security Council; the twins have offices in the same area of the West Wing
Alexander Vindman is seen with wife Rachel and their daughter in front of the White House
REFUGEE WITH A BRILLIANT MILITARY CAREER: LT. COL VINDMAN’S COMBAT SERVICE
Army Lt. Col Alexander Vindman has a long military career as an infantry officer who has seen combat and diplomatic service.
Born in Ukraine, his mother died before he was three and his father took his older brother, his twin Eugene and his grandmother to the U.S. to escape persecution of Jews in the Soviet Union. They settled in Brighton Beach, Brooklyn, New York, an area known as Little Odessa.
He and his twin featured in the Ken Burns documentary, America, in a picture emblematic of the immigrant dream.
Alexander Vindman joined the Army in 1998, after graduating from the State University of New York, and was commissioned the next year from Cornell University.
After basic training at Fort Benning in Georgia, he was deployed first to South Korea as a junior infantry and anti-armor officer.
He saw combat in 2003 and was wounded, gaining the purple star. Other foreign deployments include to Germany and he has a series of medals for his service.
Fluent in Ukrainian and Russian, he has a degree from Harvard in Eastern European Studies and since 2008 has held diplomatic posts for the Army.
Here is what his Army Service Uniform shows about what he has achieved.
On the left of his uniform he wears awards given to him as an individual:
Top: Combat Infantryman Badge – shows that Lt. Col Vindman has seen action as an infantry officer, which he did in Iraq.
Top row of ribbons: Purple Heart, awarded in 2003 after being wounded in an IED attack in Iraq.
Defense Meritorious Service Medal with oak leaf. For distinguishing himself in non-combat operations; awarded twice.
Second row: Meritorious Service Medal – given to officers ranked major and above for outstanding service; can be awarded for combat but unknown if Vindland’s was.
Army Commendation Medal with three oak leaves – for sustained acts of heroism or meritorious service; Vindland has been awarded it four times.
Army Achievement Medal with oak leaf – for meritorious service as a junior officer. Awarded twice.
Third row: National Defense Service Medal – for honorable service since September 11, 2001.
Global War On Terror Expeditionary Medal – given for being deployed to Iraq.
Global War On Terror Service Medal – given for support duty to combat operations in Iraq or Afghanistan, or both.
Fourth row: Korean Defense Service Medal – for serving in Korea as an infantry officer in 2000. Army Service Ribbon – for completing training as an officer. Army Overseas Service Ribbon – for having served abroad.
Below (left): Ranger tab – meaning he completed the tough 61-day Ranger School course in small-unit infantry fighting.
Below (right): Parachutist wings: Is qualified to go into action in airborne operations.
Badge of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Vindman works for the Joint Chiefs in the National Security Council.
On the right of his uniform, Vindman wears decorations awarded to units he has served in:
Top: 2nd Cavalry Regiment. Was deployed to Iraq in 2003, suggesting that Vindman was serving with them when he was wounded. The unit includes infantry elements.
First row of ribbons: Joint Meritorious Unit Award. Equivalent to the Defense Superior Service Medal for an individual.
Second row of ribbons (from left): Valorous Unit Award. Equivalent to the Silver Star for an individual.
Navy Unit Commendation – suggests that he was attached to a Navy unit during his career.
Unknown.
Left: White House Service Badge, for being on active duty in the National Security Council. Right: 25th Infantry Division.
In his statement he adds: ‘I have a deep appreciation for American values and ideals and the power of freedom. I am a patriot, and it is my sacred duty and honor to advance and defend OUR country, irrespective of party or politics.’
REPUBLICAN CIVIL WAR OVER ACCUSING LT. COL. OF NOT LOVING HIS COUNTRY
House Republican conference chair Rep. Liz Cheney blasted ‘shameful’ questioning of the patriotism of a key impeachment witness who served in Iraq and testified Tuesday after getting undermined by prominent conservatives.
Cheney, a Wyoming Republican and the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, issued her public admonition hours after high-profile conservative commentators sought to discredit new impeachment witness Col. Alexander Vindman before his testimony – with a former top Bush administration comparing him to a spy.
Former Bush Administration official John Yoo participated in a panel segment that undermined Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman before his testimony before congressional committees Tuesday
‘I also want to say a word about something else that’s been going on over the last couple of hours, and last night, which I think is also shameful, and that is questioning the patriotism, questioning the dedication to country, of people like Mr. Vindman – Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, who will be coming today – and others who have testified,’ Cheney said at a House leadership press conference.
She spoke after former top Bush Administration official John Yoo even compared some of Vindman’s activities on the National Security Council to ‘espionage.’
Former Wisconsin GOP Rep. Sean Duffy joined in the attack, saying on CNN Tuesday about Vindman: ‘It seems very clear that he is incredibly concerned about Ukrainian defense. I don’t know that he’s concerned about American policy … we all have an affinity to our homeland where we came from … he has an affinity for the Ukraine.’
Vindman is due to tell the committee that he is not the whistle-blower who brought the issue to the CIA and the Committees’ attention. He also claimed he never had direct contact or communications with the President.
‘I did convey certain concerns internally to National Security officials in accordance with my decades of experience and training, sense of duty, and obligation to operate within the chain of command.
‘As an active duty military officer, the command structure is extremely important to me.’ Vindman said there was another incident which he thought was improper and he reported it to the National Security Council’s lead counsel.
He claimed that on July 10, Oleksandr Danylyuk, Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council for Ukraine, visited Washington, D.C. for a meeting with National Security Advisor John Bolton.
He said that Gordon D. Sondland, the United States ambassador to the European Union, and Kurt Volker, who resigned as U.S. special envoy to Ukraine earlier this month, were also in attendance.
In his testimony he claimed the Ukrainians saw this meeting as critically important in order to solidify the support of their most important international partner.
‘Amb. Sondland started to speak about Ukraine delivering specific investigations in order to secure the meeting with the President, at which time Ambassador Bolton cut the meeting short.
‘Following this meeting, there was a scheduled debriefing during which Amb. Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma.
‘I stated to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security, and that such investigations were not something the NSC was going to get involved in or push.
‘Dr. Hill then entered the room and asserted to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate.’
Vindman is married with one child and has a twin brother named Eugene, who also serves in the military. It is understood he is a lawyer in the National Security Council.
In his statement, Alexander claimed his family fled the Soviet Union when he was three. Upon arriving in New York City in 1979, his father worked multiple jobs to support them while learning English at night.
The Trump campaign has alleged that Biden quashed a Ukrainian investigation into Burisma, where Biden’s son Hunter served on the board from 2014 until earlier this year, using the threat of withholding U.S. foreign aid.
Biden has denied any wrongdoing, and Trump’s phone call to the Ukrainian president asking him to look into the matter is at the heart of House Democrats’ mounting impeachment probe into Trump.
Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump’s personal attorney, claimed earlier this month that Ukrainian gas company Burisma paid Joe Biden $900,000 in lobbying fees, citing documents released by a Ukrainian member of parliament.
‘Biden, his son and his brother had a 30-year-long scam to make money, millions, selling his public office,’ Giuliani said in an interview on Wednesday night with Fox News host Sean Hannity.
The interview with Giuliani was just hours after Biden backed the impeachment of Trump for the first time.
‘Senator first, vice president second. Ukraine, just the tip of the iceberg,’ Giuliani continued.
The Trump campaign has alleged that Biden quashed a Ukrainian investigation into Burisma, where Biden’s son Hunter served on the board from 2014 until earlier this year, using the threat of withholding U.S. foreign aid. Biden is pictured with son Hunter in 2010
Vindman claimed that he reported an incident involving Gordon D. Sondland, United States ambassador to the European Union, to the National Security Council’s lead counsel. He claimed Sondman emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma at a debriefing which he claimed was ‘inappropriate’
On April 21, 2019, Volodymyr Zelensky was elected President of Ukraine in a landslide victory
Alexander Vindman, raised concerns about comments made by Gordon Sondland when Oleksandr Danylyuk, (left), the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council for Ukraine, visited Washington D.C. in July. Former U.S. special envoy to the Ukraine Kurt Volker, (right), had also attended the meeting
Giuliani cited new allegations raised at a press conference in Kyiv by Ukrainian MP Andriy Derkach, who claimed he had investigative documents showing that Burisma paid Biden nearly a million dollars in lobbying fees.
In his concluding remarks, Vindman said it is vital that the U.S. and Ukraine remain ‘stragetic partners’ with a relationship that is rooted in the idea that free citizens should be able to exercise their democratic rights, choose their own destiny, and live in peace.
He adds: ‘It has been a great honor to serve the American people and a privilege to work in the White House and on the National Security Council. I hope to continue to serve and advance America’ s national security interests.’
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced there will be a vote this week on a resolution to affirm the impeachment investigation, set rules for public hearings and outline the potential process for writing articles of impeachment against Trump.
Pelosi told colleagues Monday in a letter obtained by The Associated Press that the vote will ‘eliminate any doubt’ about whether the Trump administration must comply with the investigation.
Republicans argue the impeachment probe is not legitimate unless the House takes a vote to authorize it. Pelosi disputes that view as having ‘no merit.’
The White House released the bombshell transcript of President Donald Trump’s phone call with the president of Ukraine where Trump urges his counterpart to investigate Joe Biden and work directly with his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani – and even brings up the DNC’s hacked email server.
But the transcript does not show Trump tying the investigation to aid for Ukraine as he spoke to Zelensky, the quid pro quo which some reports had suggested it contained.
The call forms part of the whistle-blower complaint from an unknown intelligence official which alleges a pattern of wrongdoing by the president in his dealings with Ukraine, but which has been blocked from being given to Congress.
In the call, the president mentions political rival Biden by name, seeks an inquiry into a company tied to Biden’s surviving son, Hunter, and predicts Ukraine’s economy will do ‘better and better’ – but does not explicitly tie the United States’ aid to the country to the investigation he demands.
He urges the president to contact Giuliani, who this summer called off a planned mission to Ukraine after bringing up a Ukrainian energy company where Hunter Biden served on the board.
‘There is a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that, so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great,’ Trump says, according to the transcript.
‘Biden went about bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… it sounds horrible to me,’ the president told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The Ukrainian president assured Trump: ‘The next prosecutor general will be 100 per cent my person, my candidate, who will be approved, by the parliament and will start. As a new prosecutor in September.
‘He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue. The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and will work on the investigation.’
READ IN FULL: Lt. Col. Alex Vindman’s opening statement to impeachment inquiry about Trump-Ukraine call
Before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the House Committee on Oversight and Reform
October 29, 2019
Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, thank you for the opportunity to address the Committees concerning the activities relating to Ukraine and my role in the events under investigation.
Background
I have dedicated my entire professional life to the United States of America. For more than two decades, it has been my honor to serve as an officer in the United States Army. As an infantry officer, I served multiple overseas tours, including South Korea and Germany, and a deployment to Iraq for combat operations. In Iraq, I was wounded in an IED attack and awarded a Purple Heart.
Colonel Alexander S. Vindman is expected to deliver this statement on Tuesday
Since 2008, I have been a Foreign Area Officer specializing in Eurasia. In this role, I have served in the United States’ embassies in Kiev, Ukraine and Moscow, Russia. In Washington, D.C., I was a politico-military affairs officer for Russia for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs where I authored the principle strategy for managing competition with Russia. In July 2018, I was asked to serve at the National Security Council.
The privilege of serving my country is not only rooted in my military service, but also in my personal history. I sit here, as a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army, an immigrant. My family fled the Soviet Union when I was three and a half years old. Upon arriving in New York City in 1979, my father worked multiple jobs to support us, all the while learning English at night. He stressed to us the importance of fully integrating into our adopted country. For many years, life was quite difficult. In spite of our challenging beginnings, my family worked to build its own American dream. I have a deep appreciation for American values and ideals and the power of freedom. I am a patriot, and it is my sacred duty and honor to advance and defend OUR country, irrespective of party or politics.
For over twenty years as an active duty United States military officer and diplomat, I have served this country in a nonpartisan manner, and have done so with the utmost respect and professionalism for both Republican and Democratic administrations.
Introduction
Before recounting my recollection of various events under investigation, I want to clarify a few issues. I am appearing today voluntarily pursuant to a subpoena and will answer all questions to the best of my recollection.
I want the Committees to know I am not the whistleblower who brought this issue to the CIA and the Committees’ attention. I do not know who the whistleblower is and I would not feel comfortable to speculate as to the identity of the whistleblower.
Also, as I will detail herein, I did convey certain concerns internally to National Security officials in accordance with my decades of experience and training, sense of duty, and obligation to operate within the chain of command. As an active duty military officer, the command structure is extremely important to me. On many occasions I have been told I should express my views and share my concerns with my chain of command and proper authorities. I believe that any good military officer should and would do the same, thus providing his or her best advice to leadership.
Furthermore, in performing my coordination role as a Director on the National Security Council, I provided readouts of relevant meetings and communications to a very small group of properly cleared national security counterparts with a relevant need-to-know.
My Service on the National Security Council
When I joined the White House’s National Security Council (“NSC”), I reported to Dr. Fiona Hill, who in turn reported to John Bolton, the National Security Advisor. My role at the NSC includes developing, coordinating, and executing plans and policies to manage the full range of diplomatic, informational, military, and economic national security issues for the countries in my portfolio, which includes Ukraine.
In my position, I coordinate with a superb cohort of inter-agency partners. I regularly prepare internal memoranda, talking points, and other materials for the National Security Advisor and senior staff.
Most of my interactions relate to national security issues and are therefore especially sensitive. I would urge the Committees to carefully balance the need for information against the impact that disclosure would have on our foreign policy and national security.
I have never had direct contact or communications with the President.
The Geopolitical Importance of Ukraine
Since 2008, Russia has manifested an overtly aggressive foreign policy, leveraging military power and employing hybrid warfare to achieve its objectives of regional hegemony and global influence. Absent a deterrent to dissuade Russia from such aggression, there is an increased risk of further confrontations with the West. In this situation, a strong and independent Ukraine is critical to U.S. national security interests because Ukraine is a frontline state and a bulwark against Russian aggression.
In spite of being under assault from Russia for more than five years, Ukraine has taken major steps towards integrating with the West. The U.S. government policy community’s view is that the election of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the promise of reforms to eliminate corruption will lock in Ukraine’s Western-leaning trajectory, and allow Ukraine to realize its dream of a vibrant democracy and economic prosperity.
Given this perspective and my commitment to advancing our government’s strategic interests, I will now recount several events that occurred.
Relevant Events
When I joined the NSC in July 2018, I began implementing the administration’s policy on Ukraine. In the Spring of 2019, I became aware of outside influencers promoting a false narrative of Ukraine inconsistent with the consensus views of the interagency. This narrative was harmful to U.S. government policy. While my interagency colleagues and I were becoming increasingly optimistic on Ukraine’s prospects, this alternative narrative undermined U.S. government efforts to expand cooperation with Ukraine.
April 21, 2019: President Trump Calls Ukraine President Zelenskyy
On April 21, 2019, Volodymyr Zelenskyy was elected President of Ukraine in a landslide victory. President Zelenskyy was seen as a unifying figure within the country. He was the first candidate to win a majority in every region of the country, breaking the claims that Ukraine would be subject to a perpetual divide between the Ukrainian- and Russian-speaking populations. President Zelenskyy ran on a platform of unity, reform, and anti-corruption, which resonated with the entire country.
In support of U.S. policy objectives to support Ukrainian sovereignty, President Trump called President Zelenskyy on April 21, 2019. I was one of several staff and officers who listened to the call. The call was positive, and President Trump expressed his desire to work with President Zelenskyy and extended an invitation to visit the White House.
May 21, 2019: Inauguration Delegation Goes to Ukraine
On May 21, 2019, I was directed by Ambassador Bolton and Dr. Hill to join the delegation attending President Zelenkskyy’s inauguration. When the delegation returned, they provided a debriefing to President Trump and explained their positive assessment of President Zelenskyy and his team. I did not participate in the debriefing.
Oleksandr Danylyuk Visit – July 10, 2019
On July 10, 2019, Oleksandr Danylyuk, the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council for Ukraine, visited Washington, D.C. for a meeting with National Security Advisor Bolton. Ambassadors Volker and Sondland also attended, along with Energy Secretary Rick Perry.
The meeting proceeded well until the Ukrainians broached the subject of a meeting between the two presidents. The Ukrainians saw this meeting as critically important in order to solidify the support of their most important international partner. Amb. Sondland started to speak about Ukraine delivering specific investigations in order to secure the meeting with the President, at which time Ambassador Bolton cut the meeting short.
Following this meeting, there was a scheduled debriefing during which Amb. Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigations into the 2016 election, the Bidens, and Burisma. I stated to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security, and that such investigations were not something the NSC was going to get involved in or push. Dr. Hill then entered the room and asserted to Amb. Sondland that his statements were inappropriate.
Following the debriefing meeting, I reported my concerns to the NSC’s lead counsel. Dr. Hill also reported the incident to the NSC’s lead counsel.
Election Call – July 25, 2019
On July 21, 2019, President Zelenskyy’s party won Parliamentary elections in a landslide victory. The NSC proposed that President Trump call President Zelenskyy to congratulate him.
On July 25, 2019, the call occurred. I listened in on the call in the Situation Room with colleagues from the NSC and the office of the Vice President. As the transcript is in the public record, we are all aware of what was said.
I was concerned by the call. I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine. I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained. This would all undermine U.S. national security. Following the call, I again reported my concerns to NSC’s lead counsel.
Conclusion
The United States and Ukraine are and must remain strategic partners, working together to realize the shared vision of a stable, prosperous, and democratic Ukraine that is integrated into the Euro-Atlantic community. Our partnership is rooted in the idea that free citizens should be able to exercise their democratic rights, choose their own destiny, and live in peace.
It has been a great honor to serve the American people and a privilege to work in the White House and on the National Security Council. I hope to continue to serve and advance America’s national security interests.
Thank you again for your consideration, and now I would be happy to answer your questions.