, 71 tweets, 9 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
My live thread of the hearing will be here. To watch:
NOTE: They are now 15 minutes late - after already once extending the break,
Inquiry: Counsel has paper copies of slides, if that is true, is there corroboration between you and this witness? Schiff: TV wasn't working so they were given paper copies so they could read along.
Nunes submitting letter into evidence. N: You admitted in your opening statement you dont have any firsthand knowledge. Want to talk about Grassley. Do you believe he is a serious and credible elected official?
Were you involved in any discussions about prep for call? Were you involved for pause? No- No- No-

Not sure why you are here today, if there are issues with employment disagreements, there is a more appropriate setting. Ambassador is not a fact witness to any accusations.
Stefanik: (Schiff interrupts- he wont recognize her) Nunes yielded time, Schiff wont let her speak.
Counsel now: Thank you, this is crazy environment, this is a television studio. You served a 3 year assignment beginning in 2016 supposed to go to 2019?
A: Yes
Q: Your return to US coincided with inauguration of Zelensky and you remain employed today?
A: Yes.
Q: You were asked what you wanted to do next?
A: yes
Q: You are now at Georgetown as a fellow and it is rewarding?
A: Yes I am grateful after what happened.
Q: We understand that you dont have a lot of facts and info relating to the part of this we are investigating from 5/20-9/11
A: She acknowledges.
Q: You first learned about the call on 9/25?
A: I heard about the call from George Kent.
Q: What were you told?
A: As it turns out it wasnt correct, but I recall he said that POTUS had asked Zelensky whether he could help him out (Which I understood to be these investigations)
Q: You learned of that before the call was made public?
A: Yes
Q: You weren't involved int he hold of foreign assistance?
A: That is correct.
She is bringing up the indictments of the two individuals with Giuliani. She is blaming them for her being fired.
Q: Is Taylor the type who would facilitate? He has high integrity?
A: He is the Charge, not the Ambassador- a man of the highest integrity.
Q: You testified abotu when you learned Giuliani had a concerted campaign against you- when did you learn?
A: In Nov Dec of 2018 rumors
Q: Minister Avakov alerted you to this "Campaign", when?
A: in February of 2019, he said that Mr. Lutsenko was working with Giuliani through Parnass and Fruman, that they basically wanted to remove her from post and that they were working on that.
Q: Did you know why they were seeking your ouster?
A: I didn't understand at all because I had never met them?
Q: Were you influential in affecting policy that was averse to them?
A: The general idea that one of our most important functions is to facilitate US business abroad
A: Everything has to be above board, but these two individuals looking to open up a new energy company to export gas, never came to the embassy because that would usually be a first stop.
Q: At any point did you try to reach out to Lutsenko to find out why he was paqrticipating to fire you?
A: No, no purpose- he clearly had I would say an animus for doing this, and he was working with Americans, so I reached out to the state department.
Q: When did you realize Lutsenko and you had become adversarial?
A: Strong word, we were pushing them to do what he had said they were going to do. He didn't do any of that. We kept on encouraging him to do the right thing.
She had an ongoing "discussion" about the "campaign" against her - we had the discussion because they were concerned that Ukranian leaders were hearing that she was going to be leaving and someone else was waiting in the wings and that undermined the US position.
Q: When did you realize the concerted campaign was a threat to your ability to do the job in Kiev
A: When you go into a job and they ask "Will you be leaving" that is concerning
(So far this is really useless. Not sure why I am even doing this)
Now talking about Burisma:
Q: has there ever been any focus on reexamining these issues?
A: There have been some efforts, and the US was welcoming to Lutsenko, but he didn't do that.
A: In Ukraine, the justice system is used as a tool of the political system- my understanding is that this did not loom large when I arrived, but over time my understanding was the case was on a pause, that it wasn't active but wasn't fully closed.
She is bowing out of any issues regarding Burisma and Biden. She never met Hunter Biden or talked to him.
Q: Was the perception problem of Biden on the board brought to your attention?
A: I was aware because in prep for confirmation, there was a question.
Q: Several witnesses have testified that he was concerned about the 2016 election, were you aware?
A: I am now, but it wasn't brought to my attention during the years I have served under the Trump admin.
Q: Was there any discussion about Ukranians advocating against Trump.
A: We didn't see it that way
Q: Did you know about Chalupa?
A: Didn't have further information, it was brought to my attention both at the time and subsequently
Q: Did you aim to get to the bottom of that?
A: I was the ambassador starting in August of 2016, and what you are describing took place in the US. If there were concerns about that, it would have been handled here.
Q: Do you know her?
A: I dont believe so
Q: Are you aware of Leshenko and his role of publicizing the black ledger?
A: Yes
Q: Was there anything about that that concerned you?
A: I certainly noticed it because I was a week or so away from arriving. From a Ukranian perspective, I think that Ukranians weren't worried
about Manafort, but Yanukovich.
Q: You can understand POTUS concluding there are elements of Ukranian establishment that are advocating against him?
A: Lushenko published the ledger as journalists would do, but I dont have info to suggest it was targeting Trump
A: I think that may have been the effect (Manafort targeting) we all know that there have been court cases where Manafort had been found guilty- at the end of the day he won the election.
Q: Some question if the info published is all correct or doctored?
A: I wasn't aware of that
Q: How frequently did you communicate with former ambassador to Ukraine?
A: Not often
Q: Can you see how writing an op-ed like that, might create a perception that there are elements against POTUS
A: My recollection is he was critical of a policy position about Crimea.
Q: Do you know if anyone tried to talk with Trump about concerns before Op-Ed?
A: I dont know
Q: Also, minister (cant spell) said bad things about Trump
A: I wasn't aware of this before seeing it in depo
Q: He is influential in Ukraine, right?
A: Yes
Q: Looking back do you see how this could cause a perception that someone was out to get Trump?
A: Probably not appropriate, but Minister has been a good partner to the US.
Q: All of these people form basis that made it appear as though there were many out to get POTUS
A: Those elements dont seem to be a plot to work against Trump, we all know that public life people are critical, that doesn't mean that a government is undermining a campaign or interfering in elections. Reminding again, that our own US IC has determined the Russians interfered
Schiff: Bring our attention you someone who thought you were important (Schiff and she are now going to talk about all of the talking about her)
Immediately after corrupt foreign prosecutor he invites him to speak with Giuliani who orchestrated the smear campaign.
Schiff: immediately after he brings you up he talks about Biden’s son- immediately after praising corrupt prosecutor he attacks you. Does he connect you to the prosecutor?
A: you are absolutely right that that is the thought progression.
Schiff is now hypothesizing about who Trump would put in place that could be bought. This is sick.
Schiff: the assistance ultimately went through, but they ultimately paid the money. Are you aware that the aid wasn’t released until after the whistleblower and congress investigating
About the call record: there is the call after inauguration and then the problematic call in July. But there was a readout put out by the WH at the time and said that the president discussed corruption but doesn’t appear. Why would they put out an inaccurate reading
A: can’t answer
Nunes: are you against politically appointed ambassadors? A: no I am not.
Stefanik: I thank you for your service and hosting. 1. Role of potus 2. Corruption 3. Aid to Ukraine.
We heard from Kent all ambassadors served at the pleasure of the president. You are still an employee of the state department and personally asked to be a fellow at Georgetown.
Corruption: described that anti corruption is important. In 2014 after the elections you testified that Ukraine had made clear they were done with corruption and they should set up the office - the investigation was never closed -
The first time you became aware of Burisma was during Obama practice Q and A it was about Hunter Biden and Burisma - “the way the question was phrased was what can you tell us about Biden being appointed to board of Burisma”
3. In terms of defensive legal aid, it wasn’t provided by Obama but Trump did. A: yes
Now Dems are saying how attacked this poor little woman was and what a shame this all is that she was fired. It’s his damn choice. Ridiculous.
Rep now saying that he is upset that the President is asserting an "Absolute right" to fire someone.
Q: Do you have the right to ask the CIA what they are doing?
A: Yes. Because sometimes operations have political consequences.
Q: What if you sold information to a Russian asset for $10k
A: I wouldnt want to think what would happen
Q: If I cast votes because someone bribed me it would be an abuse of power. Why did the president decide that you should be removed, because I think we agreed if it wasn't
in the national interest we would have a problem. If you had stayed, would you have asked for the investigations?
Q: No - again, our intelligence community determined that it was Russia
Conaway: Adding Pelosi about whitleblower to record.
Q: Thank you for your service. I would like to focus on after phone call. Any time ambassador changes post, you get to pick where you go
A: When I came back nothing was set up, and I recall that there was the fellowship
Q: You teach classes there?
A: I was supposed to teach two but I am teaching one, on National Security.
Q: Any other responsibility to state?
A: This
Q: Compensation affected?
A: No
Q: Any negative treatment from folks at state?
A: An outpouring of support from colleagues
Q: Any reason Kent would compliment you for any reason other than he believed it?
A: No
Entering articles about Schiff confirming whistleblower will testify from Adam Schiff. He is allowing all of them.
Sewell: Talking about her family history and why she wanted to be in Foreign Service. Complimenting her, can't pronounce the schools she was in, etc.
How did it feel to have your rep sullied? (They just debunked that completely) Making her a victim, making her a "target".
A: There is a question as to why the campaign to get me out of Ukraine happened, in my line of work all we have is our rep, (which she confirmed is fine)
Turner: You had to deal with more than just bilateral relationship- OSCE Budapest agreement and denuclearization, NATO, also, (lots of other stuff here)
You would have to work with France and UK and Germany, etc. You would have to work with NGO's Human trafficking, etc
Q: US ambassador to the EU would have aspiring nations to the EU, so Sondland would have had that under his portfolio?
A: I would agree (cut off) all EU ambassadors deal with EU countries but unusual to appoint to Ukraine
Q: Ambassador Holbrook was a man of great rep?
A: Yes
Q: Would it surprise you that Kerry had a member of his campaign team for POTUS traveled to Ukraine to meet with Ambassador. Would you have taken that meeting?
A: It depends
Carson: Returning to topic of corruption, Wednesday we heard more about that, Kent said you can't promote anti corruption without pissing off corrupt people. What concerned you about the Prosecutor Generals office
A: There wasnt any progress in the three overall objectives
Wenstrup: I appreciate your service. (lots more about military service etc...) In your depo, you said in terms of legal assistance we all thought it important that we provide lethal weapons to Ukraine. Spoke about generosity of congress etc,
I can't follow this in order to type it out correctly. Some of this is just time wasting.
Presidents can make their own foreign policy. Obama didn't give lethal aid as you requested, and Trump did. Without javelins, did the Russians have more ability to attack?
A: Yes.
She is now saying that she doesn't dispute the President removing an ambassador, why was it necessary to smear my rep? (PUKE EMOJI)
He says "Well, I wasn't asking you about that...."
I am going to halt on this for a while. Will comment if something jumps at me because this is really repetitive.
Our foreign policy is stated BY THE PRESIDENT. There isn’t a “foreign policy establishment”. There is the President.
The President is the COMMANDER IN CHIEF.
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with Tracy Beanz

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!