Government and the Justice Department, thats the perfect way to raise an issue with the ukrainian president , correct . It is appropriate for the Justice Department and the prosecutor again to cooperate and exchange information, yes. To the extent the president had concerns and the Attorney General is having u. S. Attorney durham looking into that. Is that entirely appropriate for the president to flag this for should be in touch with our official challenge . I dont know the precise appropriateness of these kinds of relations. Now, were you involved, either of you involved in the preparation for the 7 25 call . I was not. I was not. How do you account for that . I mean you were the two officials responsibility with ukrainian policies. If the president of the united
states having a call with the leader of ukraine, why would you not ordinarily be involved with the preparations. In preparations for a president ial phone call that lies within staff of the National Security council. If there is enough efficient time, National Security staff can solicit information usually from the State Department and we can draw an embassy. Thats only background information. National security staff writes a memo to the president and none of us sees that outside of National Security staff. So the u. S. Ambassador t country would not be on the call with the foreign leader . Thats correct. We are not. Anyone reaching out to you mr. Kent in preparation for the call . I was given notification the day before on july 24th and the
extent, i had any role was to reach out the embassy and give them a heads up and ensure the communication to the office of the president of ukraine so the call can be pass through the white houses situation room. Did you forget any advice to Conne Colonel Vitamin Mandman of the . I was not asked and provided. Same to you, ambassador . The same. The call was scheduled and you testified earlier that the call was on and off again. After the july 10th, meeting when baambassador bolton, the C Sen Consensus that would not happen. Once zelenskys party won the absolute majority on july 21st,
the where had of a congratutory call made perfect sense. Did you get a read out ambassador taylor from the call . I didnt. I read the, we all read the statement that the crew ukraiuk put out. I got a readout from mr. Morrison National Security council. How about you mr. Kent . I like wise first saw the ukrainians statements and the next day july 26th which was a friday, i did get a partial read out from colonel vindman. Is that because it is initially written in ukraine and translated in tuu. S. . No, as a general rule, theUnited States and other countries including ukraine will put out short summaries that hit the highlights of the discussion but without going into details. You mentioned there were scriptic. Looking back at their summary as i renault, I Dont Recall the exact words but they said that there were issues to be pursued to improve relations between the two countries. It seems ordinary. You heard from president Zelensky The Next Day . We had a meeting with him the next day. Did president zelensky raise any concerns of his view of the call . He said, volker, ambassador
sondland were in his office and we asked him on the policy. He said the call was fine. I was happy with the call. Did you get any additional readout subsequently . When did you learn that the call contain things that concerned you . Was it not until the 25th . Mr. Morrison briefed me several days later before the end of july. And as where i said in my testimony that he said could have gone better. He said the call mentioned mr. Rudy giuliani and also mentioned the call mentioned former ambassador. Both of those were concerning. I dont recall. It could been. I have it here if you would like it. Yeah, it is on page 3. The first mention of Rudy Giuliani was president zelensky was on page 3. And president zelensky says i will personally tell you one of my assistants spoke with mr. Rudy giuliani recently and we are hoping very much that mr. Rudy giuliani will be able to travel to ukraine and well meet once he comes to ukraine. Did that surprise you . Again, i didnt have the transcript at the time. All i heard was Rudy Giuliani was mentioned but mr. Martian says Rudy Giuliani was mentioned in the call. Zelensky is looking forward to speak to americas mayor. Thats what i found out when i read the transcript on the 25th Of September or so. No, mr. Kent, corruption in
ukraine is epidemic, correct . Thats correct. It affects the courts, the prosecutors and historically been problems with all prosecute rs with ukraine, correct . Up until the new set of prosecutors appointed by president zelensky in the last two months, correct. The u. S. Government, the consensus of the State Department and National Security council and white house. Skelet zelensky is a real deal. Hes interested in Rudy Giulianis corruption and prosecuting the bad guys. Correct . We are cautiously optimistic. Well work where ever there is a Pleasant Hill cal will to do the right thing and put forward genuine reform. This alioligarchs take contr
by virtual theft, for example, their rights on Certain Energy licenses, correct . Thats one element. The company, burisma, he had a little bit of a story history of corruption, does he . Mr. Lachesky, he used his authority to himself controlled. That would be an act of corruption in my view. Yes. Selfdealing and selfenriching. How did the Ukrainian Government pursue that . The new government, the revolution of dignity turns into partner with the u. S. And u. K. To try to recover tens of billions of dollars of stolen
assets. The first case that we tried to recover that money came from mr. Ch chesky. The 23 million was frozen until somebody in the general Prosecutors Office in ukraine shuts the case and issues the letter to his lawyer and that money went poof. Has anyone in the ukrainian investigation tried to we continue to raise as a Point Of Order but because u. S. Taxpaye Taxpaye Taxpayers dollars have been used and we continue to press ukrainian officials to answer
why alleged corrupt prosecutors had closed a case and we have knocked out the satisfactory. Those were our main concerns. Are you in favor of fully being investigated and prosecuted . I think u. S. Taxpayers dollars are wasted, i would love to find out who the prosecutor was that took the bribe and how much it was paid. Thats what i said to the the deputy in 2019. In addition the person that took the bribe should not be an organization or individuals that sponsored the bribes and bribes accused. I agree they should hold people account for breaking ukrainian law. This Company Burisma involved in
a lot of criminal activities, correct . I do not no know that. It has been a number of questionable it is the last largest producer in the country and Business Reputation is mixed. It would be fair for the genuine prosecutors to reexamine old times that had not been brought up to justice. I believe he made a statement to that end and reviewing past cases, keep in mind this is a country where those commit crimes generally never gets held to account so there is a lot to review. It was paid in what year . December of 2014. Right around that time, burisma started adding officials to its force. Is that correct . Yes, they invited a series of new individuals to join the board in 2014. You know what his strategy was and adding officials to his ward . I have never met him. Who were some of the folks he added todd the board. The most prominent was the president of alexander. Plrp a number of others, including some americans, the most cprominent one is hunter e biden. I believe companies build their boards with a variety of reasons and not only to promote their business plans. Was hunter biden a corporate
governance expert . I had no idea. I have no awareness or knowledge of what his background was and what he may have done on the board. So you dont know whether he has any Business Experience in ukraine prior to joining burisma board. Do you know if he speaks crew ukrai ukrainian . No, i do not. Did you notice whether i have no knowledge of hunter biden. You would agree to raise questions, right . He was getting paid 50,000 a month to sit on the board. Did you know he relocated to
ukraine . Did you know if hunter biden relocated to ukraine . No knowledge. Mr. Ken . Again, no knowledge. Hes getting paid 50,000 a month but we dont know whether he had any experience or had any spoke the language or whether he moved to ukraine, correct . Correct. Biden was taken a specific interests of ukraine, was he . He was. While he was Vice President , he made a total of six visits to ukraine. One is the old regime and that would make five visits after he started february 2014. And you were the dcm of that mission at the time . Starting in 2015, yes. Did Vice President come i
missed several. You see Vice President biden sort of given a speech and folksy how he went into ukraine and if they dont fire their prosecutors, theyll lose 1 billion. I have. He also said hes been there ukraine 13 times. Do you know thats accurate . He made six visits. Did the State Department ever expressed any concerns to the Vice President s office or his role at the time, engaging on ukraine presented in any issues . No. The Vice President s role is critically important. It was top cover to help us pursue our policy agenda. Okay, but you know hunter biden, at some point you testify
in your deposition, you express or concerns of the president. What did they do about that . I have no idea. I reported my concerns to the office of the Vice President. That was the end of it . You would have to ask people work ing in the office of the Vice President in 2015. The Vice President engaged in ukraine and ukraine did not decrease, did it . The Vice President was burisma did not seize, did it . To the best of my knowledge, it did not. Concern there was a possibility of a perception of a conflict of interests. Baas ambassador taylor. I want to turn to the discussion of the irregular channel and in
fairness, this irregular channel of diplomacy, it is not o outlandiou outlandish as it could be, is that correct . Yes, i agree with you. We have ambassador volker, a former senate confirm, nato and State Department and diplomat. You have known him for somebody with good knowledge of the region. And the best interests of the United States and ukraine . Yes, i am sure you are right. His First Priority is clearly the United States. To the extent that ukraine has an implication for that, yes. Okay. Second member of the ambassador sondland who is Senate Confirmed, ambassador of the eu, so his involvement here
while not necessarily part of his official dutieduties, it is certainly not outlandish for him to be interested or engaged or pursuant to secretary pompeo. It is unusual for the ambassador of the eu play a role in ukraine policy. It may be deregular but it is not certainly outlandish. Secretary perry is the third member of the irregular channel. Certainly a Senate Confirmed official and somebody with deep experience and energy and he was pursuing the Flanatural Gas Prot in ukraine . Perrys involvement is perfectly acceptable . It is. This irregular channel has it
develops, when did you determine that if tbecame problematic. Appropriately is the leader of the regular channel. At least the participant. There is another lead other the regulators. When did you develop concerns of the irregular channel was being problematic . I arrived in late september. I had a couple of phone call with you arrived in june, right . Sorry, mid june. By the end of june, e hi had be to hear references to investigations as something would have to happen prior to
the meeting that President Trump had offered to zelensky. That began to raise questions for me. Now, you have done baas to volker and you have a reasons to know about baas to i didnt try to rush control of the regular channel why not though . Because at the time, as secretary kent testified, both channels, both channels were interested in having a reading between President Trump and zelensky. There is no reason to kind of rush control if we are going
antonio t into the same direction. Your Opening Statements was here and you are the impeachment witness number one and number two. For impeaching of the president of the United States, you testified about the regular channel. I was concerned, the irregular channel going against the direction of and purpose of the regulator channels. I understand the record or whatever. You had the support of the Secretary Counsel of the deal, is that correct . Thats correct. They assured you if you have any ken, you will be able to contact them and have you back. You know going in the Rudy Giuliani element presented some
omnivore plaintiffs exhibitt complexities, correct . Yes. I was concerned of Rudy Giulianis statements. When it became concerned for you, what did you do to engage sondland and Rudy Giuliani and perry. By the way, did you ever meet Rudy Giuliani . No, mr. Rudy giuliani visited ukraine one time when i was there in 2007 or 2008. You never had any communications with Rudy Giuliani as part of this irregular Channel Business . Thats correct. And anyway, getting back to my question, did you try to engage fuel or the secretary during this time . I know you said you had an obvious 21st or 22 telephone call. Thats correct. Is that sort of the universe initiatives you took inside the State Department to raise your concerns about Thor Regulaoor i channel. I raised concerns early on where i mentioned this phone call that was odd in that, it did not include the normal staff, professor sondland staff and that struck me as unusual. I con sukted with mr. Kent and his sugts made a note of this. I think at thp point i had a
conversation with mr. That was a june 28th call. Thats correct. In your Opening Statement, you expressed concerns. So the June The 28th call did not play out or presented any problems to you. The president where presid call. That again was irregular and it did not have the staff. It was almost in that precall, that 15 minutes before president zelensky ot gone the phone wearing a vest or volker told the rest of the participant that
he was planning to have a conversation with president zelensky in toronto in three or four days. Where hell outline president zelensky the important components of the phone call that we are trying to establish. You didnt have an issue with that, did you . There was reference to investigation. I have to check my notes on that. The raised issues for me that i did not understand what ambassador volker had in mind that he was going to raise with mr. Zelensky. That was a little bit of concerns. The president expressed interests in his investigation. And relating to this corrupt
burisma. That was not consistent with the president s message, right . I am not sure. Can you ask you to repeat the question . The president s concerns about the 2016 election in order to get to the bottom of it, the president is concerned is it multiple relating to the burisma company. Value boar is raising that way with zelensky, consistent with the direction of the president , correct . The president s interest, i would say mr. Rudy giulianis interest. That was very clear at the time. Mr. Rudy giulianis interest in pursuing these investigations
was a concern. Did you know how many times volker met with Rudy Giuliani . I dont. How many would you guess . I dont know. He tested back and forth with the mayor and he had a call or two. But it was not a persuasive investigation for ambassador volker. Were you aware of that . I was aware of one breakfast, i think. That was the only one i was aware of. I want to circle back to the company of burisma, you hesit e hesitathesitat hesitated testified there was an instance where you had engage with parishion you took issue and recommended usaid to pull
back. Ser ptember of 2014. The part of the usa, the nation that worked on economics and government and including Energy Con Spored some sort of contests for young ukrainians. They coupon sor given the pas history of our interests in recovering still an asset from mr. Chesky. It was inappropriate for the embassy to be corespondering a contest with burisma. The u. S