Home Politics Second Ukraine Whistleblower Comes Forward With “Firsthand Knowledge”

Second Ukraine Whistleblower Comes Forward With “Firsthand Knowledge”


A second intelligence community whistleblower who doesn’t think Joe Biden should be investigated for corruption has come forward with “first-hand” knowledge of complaints against President Trump’s efforts to encourage Ukraine to do so.

The second whistleblower, represented by the same team of attorneys as the first one, has reportedly spoken with the intelligence community inspector general, Michael Atkinson. According to ABC News, they have not spoken with Rep. Adam Schiff’s (D-CA) House Intelligence Committee like the first whistleblower. It is unknown if they are also a CIA employee or a registered Democrat.

“I can confirm that my firm and my team represent multiple whistleblowers,” said Andrew Bakaj – lead attorney for the first whistleblower (and who worked for both Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer – and donated to Joe Biden).

Mark Zaid, another attorney representing the initial whistleblower, said that a second whistleblower has come forward with firsthand knowledge of some of the allegations described in the initial complaint, which describe efforts by Mr. Trump to press his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate a political rival. –WSJ

That said, we’ve all read the original whistleblower complaint and the transcript of the phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky in which Trump clearly does not use pressure or offer a quid pro quo as originally claimed. It will be interesting to discover what additional insight the second whistleblower can provide.

Attorney Mark Zaid who represents the second whistleblower said that both officials have full protection of the law.

The New York Times on Friday cited anonymous sources in reporting that a second intelligence official was weighing whether to file his own former complaint and testify to Congress. Zaid says he does not know if the second whistleblower he represents is the person identified in the Times report.

According to the first whistleblower, more than a half a dozen U.S. officials have information relevant to the investigation — suggesting the probe could widen even further. –ABC News

ABC News peddles a recent lie put forward by House Democrats last week about the Trump-Zelensky phone call – namely that Trump asked Ukraine to investigate Biden as a ‘favor’:

“A transcript released by the White House of Trump’s July 25 call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy showed Trump asking a “favor” of the foreign leader and pushing him to launch an investigation into the Biden family. ” -ABC News

Wrong, a reading of the transcript reveals that the ‘favor’ Trump asked for was only in relation to the DNC’s missing server and the DNC contractor Crowdstrike who analyzed it. Biden is mentioned later in the call, and nowhere near the ‘favor’ asked.

Zelensky then responds, noting that he is fighting corruption and has a reliable team of investigators, and approximately 300 words later in the transcript Trump mentions Biden, long-divorced from the “favor.”

“There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son,” Trump says, before suggesting Zelensky’s people contact Attorney General William Barr on the matter. “a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great.”

Notably, the Wall Street Journal did not conflate the ‘favor’ comment with Biden.

And while Congressional Democrats have used the above as part of an impeachment inquiry against President Trump, they seem to be uninterested in allegations against the Bidens. What this does feel like is ‘Kavanaugh 2.0’ where we’re about to meet an endless stream of accusers seemingly trotted out to bolster an original flimsy claim.

via zerohedge



    • The Democrat’s ALL seem very interested in Gun Control….they should prove that by stopping shooting themselves in the foot….This continuous nonsense against Trump isn’t a good substitute for them NOT doing their job.


      • Kurt Volker provided copies of texts messages that describes facts not included in the memo of the call. Google. The text are all over the internet. BTW, it was not a verbatim transcript. The actual transcript Trump had placed into the coded National Security system.

      • Who are you going to believe … another liberal, koolaid drinking, pickleblower with first hand hearsay, or your lying eyes?

    • I’ve thought of that also. I wonder if I could be a whistleblower saying I have second-hand hearsay knowledge that Nazi… er, I mean Nancy, is a covert Russian spy. Who could I call to rat on Pelosi?

    • I don’t think the law considers the name of the whistleblower to be relevant as long as the evidence he/she provides is proven accurate. The law also provides for punishment against making false charges.

      • When does the punishment for lying liberals start?
        Now we have a pickleblower with first hand hearsay.
        I believe the pickleblowers are telling the truth, it’s the COMPLETE WRITTEN transcript of the conversation that is a big lie.

    • Now that’s the best idea I’ve heard all day. I think it’s long past due that the conservative party start fighting 🔥 fire with fire. Time for the gloves to come off

  2. DAH…A guy came forward, who has details against Donald Trump,. The details are secret, the identity is secret, the events are secret…..Just trust us signed the DemonRATS….For 2020
    lets Show the Democrats the door out of America…..Permanently

    • The Dims are all protecting their investments. They are eyeball deep in corruption and HillRot was supposed to win the WH so they could go right on collecting their ill-gotten gains. But the American people surprised them all~~ hee hee. And then Pres. Trump surprised them even more by standing up to them and revealing their rotten, stinking schemes to rip off the American people. Go Trump~~ 2020!

  3. I’m so tired of the insane Liberals and their lies . I’ve seen Schiff lie , I’ve seen Nancy, I’ve seen Nadler lie on national TV ! The Democratic Party is not a reliable source . They will do anything for their Party that is dishonest . I don’t like the thought of these people being in office . They don’t represent the people . They represent themselves and their corrupt selves . Stop with all this nonsense we are not dumb and we do not believe anything you say ! Quit wasting our taxpayer dollars on the nonsense! I’m tired of hearing all the crap and it’s not working ! I support Trump 2020 !


  4. One thing that will never change is that the president withheld beyond the agreed delivery date, Congressionally approved money and military support from our ally, the Ukraine, involved in a war with Russia, our enemy, and when the Ukraine’s new president mentioned U.S. support and the need for it, the president then immediately said “I want you to do me a favor, though.” Then our president asked the president of the Ukraine to use his government resources to investigate the president’s highest polling opponent vs. him, political opponent, Joe Biden.
    No distraction or actions or words from anyone else changes those facts. No opinions. No corruption from any Democrat. Nothing changes these facts and these behaviors.

    • That is a LIE. The Ukrainians didn’t even KNOW about the “withholding”, nor was it mentioned in the infamous “phone call”–so HOW could it have been a factor in “coercing” them to investigate Biden, who by the way, really NEEDS to be investigated after he BRAGGED about how he FORCED them to stop investigating his son by threatening to withhold a billion dollars in aid to our “ally.” Pres. Trump put a temporary hold on aid to Ukraine because he was leery of whether the “new” government in Ukraine was as corrupt as the OLD one.

      And by the way, the missiles mentioned in the conversation were not GIVEN to Ukraine as military aid. They were PURCHASED by Ukraine from the US. The LYING Leftist media didn’t see fit to mention THAT little detail, either!

    • Sounds like you need a new and improved adult diaper for looney liberals.
      Just wrap the diaper around your head and tuck the end back in. 
      This process will not cure anything at all, it will however, completely cover up the nasty symptoms and foul odor of your shit 4 brains.
      In your case, at least two diapers will be needed.

  5. Number of Mueller Investigation indictments, pleas or convictions — 37
    Number of top Trump officials fired or resigned — 28
    Number of times Trump has taken credit for VA bill signed by Obama — 80
    Total number of lies Trump has told in office — 12,018
    Number of miles of new border wall built — 0
    Number of top officials Trump fired in person — 0
    Number of visits to Trump golf resorts — 210
    Total number of lies Obama told in office — 18
    Number of undocumented Trump employees until recently — 40
    Cumulative days of vacant cabinet positions under Trump — 1,397
    Cost to taxpayers of Trump golfing — $109 million
    Number of electoral college wins bigger than Trumps — 45
    Number of women accusing Trump of sexual abuse — 24
    Cumulative days of vacant cabinet positions under George W. Bush — 34
    Number of Trump Doral Gold Club Health Violations 2013-18 — 524
    Most recent ranking of Trump by presidential historians — 42 (out of 45)

    • Documentation of your source and numbers along with those of Obama for his golf, “vacations” for Michelle and entire family (costs), proof that Mueller indictments had anything whatsoever to do with Trump, and all the rest of what you are representing as fact. Obama told way more lies than you have acknowledged and nearly ruined America.

    • Obviously you rode the short bus to your special needs school. Most teachers are trained to stop children from banging their heads into the wall. So it’s obvious your brain damage occured in the pre school years.

  6. Why wouldn’t a person not want him (Biden ) investigated unless they were involved also or have something to lose themselves. Right now they acting like a bunch of school kids and not doing their job of representing the people. Maybe that’s how people want them to act. Other countries sure must be laughing their asses off at us. What a great country, what a lousy government but we voted them in. Ultimately i guess we are to blame. Washington need a big cleaning out and go back with term limits.

  7. One trick pony comes to mind here. Democrats could not make it work with Trump election, Muller investigation, Kavanaugh appointment, Etc… Here we go again. Insane: doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different outcome. Meanwhile the peoples work goes undone. Time to put a stop to this insanity.

  8. Why isn’t anyone after Biden, he’s the one actually on record as saying the US will not give the Ukraine’s their aid if that guy wasn’t removed from the investigation. Thats the real story. NOT TRUMP

  9. who are you. I noticed you left the Clintons out. Because you can’t even keep track of the number of lies they’ve told. The Demorats live in some parallel universe where the truth only has to be what you believe, right or wrong. Like Peter Pan, if you believe. I wish they’d all fly away with tinkerbell.

  10. Funny how when one fake story gets debunked they immediately have another one to take the focus off the REAL issues like Biden’s Ukraine and China corruption.

  11. Wow, another “whistle blower”! What are the odds? And now its reported that more “whistle blowers” are (waiting in the wings)!!!! Like I said,WOW! Will dems never stop? Gets OLD after awhile!!!

    • Yes, and the whistleblowers have no additional information. The same information all over again that was not accurate to begin with. Will they ever learn? I’m guessing not. Best we can hope for thei constituents will not re-elect.

  12. It is quite clear the Democratic party in cooperation with mainstream media outlets such as CNN,ABC,CBS,NBC are blatantly spreading lies to the American people just to undo the 2016 election. If this is accurately reported then perhaps the truth will prevail. What’s disturbing is the fact that our foreign policy trade initiatives will be adversely affected. Due process demands the accused should be allowed to face the accusers and that they be subject to cross examination. Where is the fairness?

  13. When I first read about a second whistleblower, the article said it was over Trump’s Taxes. NOW they’re saying it’s over Ukraine!!
    What about the fact HILLARY, the BIDENS and SCHIFF are waist high in this Collusion with the Ukraine, and it’s a bad thing that President Trump wants to get to the bottom of the corruption?? He has every right to especially with the Election coming up.
    And boy is there tons of information coming out of Ukraine!!!

    • Can we assume there are at least two more whistleblowers? Another one on the Ukraine story and one on the IRS audit story.

  14. Well, the Socialists have spun sp many lies that they could not make a damned thing stick to Trump even with their lies. Eventually, going with the odds, the communists (the Socialists) have got to get better with the lies and eventually get something the weak can believe in. It appears that time is nearing for matters to be handled. Let’s see now… the “Whistle blower” rules have changed to fit the Socialist’s agenda because they knew they would loose out of the starting block if they had not changed the “rules” to fit their “way of thinking” (corruptness). Maybe it is time to sink the attacking ship(s) attacking before they do to much damage. Break out the Republican investigations going on and take down who they can. Also, do some old fashioned investigations into how many “representatives” are millionaires and where their money truly came from!

  15. What an amazing coincidence. The Dems’ MADE-UP whistleblower with second- and third-hand information didn’t fly–despite the SNEAKY rule-change to ALLOW second- and third-hand whistleblower information–so they have now manufactured a “FIRST-HAND” whistleblower, just like they manufactured all those “found” ballots and demanded ENDLESS recounts until they converted enough Republican seats in the House to Democrat seats, enabling these conniving, America-hating SCUM to take control of the House of Representatives.

    There is apparently NO DEPTHS to their corruption and lies in their frenzied attempts to wrest power and control of the Federal Government away from a legally elected President. The question IS, how long are the rest of us going to put up with their BS? VOTE THEM OUT in 2020. ALL OF THEM. They are an existential threat to this country and OUR liberties!

  16. This couldn’t get anymore halarious… This wreaks of the democrats sheer desperation to try and save crooked Joe Biden, but there’s lots more Ukrainian democrat corruption to come folks! This is why democrats, deep staters and the MSM propaganda machine pathological liars are desperately trying to hide this from the American public! Big name democrats and deep staters are peeing in their pants on this one!

  17. must be nice , a Whistleblower comes forward, but has no identity, from a lawyer who is a paid friend of many democrats. Creates all this scandel so our nation can dispose of the best president in my life time that this nation has ever had. Just terrible. I beg the attorney general to look into these guys please

  18. So, this tells me that the dems have tapped the phone lines of the White House! I think it is time to start arresting and trying people for treason. Maybe a few idiots swinging in the wind will put an end to this BS!

    • Humm. I missed the phone tapping part. Where is that? That would definitely be illegal since no Democrats have the authority to tap lines.

  19. We all saw the transcript from the actual call. What does it matter how many anti-Trump deep staters come forward with “knowledge”? He said what he said. There is nothing impeachable in what he said. AND if we had a VP who abused his power, shouldn’t we know about it? Even if he IS in the party who should not be punished (“Democrats”)? I am so tired of every little thing a Republican does being blown out of proportion while the left gets away with everything. It’s time for accountability – gee, isn’t that what all this hysteria is about? They just might have to answer for some of their wrong doings? Investigate them all. Trump has been investigated to tears – let’s investigate the whole lot of them as thoroughly by a team of lawyers that are directly opposed to them just like Trump was subjected to a team of rabid anti-Trump attorneys. What’s good for the goose…

  20. To think we poor working class slobs have to actually work to make a living. We don’t get life-long tax payer funded appointments.
    If I hear one more liberal moron declare that they are mauvering to save our “democracy” I think I’ll cry. This misconception of our government is being purposely pounded into the heads of our youth so that we all might forget that we don’t have a democracy. We have a representative REPUBLIC for good reason. I guess Nancy, Chuck and every other loud mouthed leftist skipped civics and government 101 to smoke or something. There was a good reason our framers specifically did not construct a democracy. In fact our constitution wasn’t intended as a means of prescribing citizen rights but rather as a means of LIMITING the power of a federal government. Out right to bear arms wasn’t provided for sport or hunting but rather a means for the citinzenry to protect themselves from oppressive governance. Mind you I am certainly NOT advocating taking up arms to harm any one. But we have been fed a whole bunch of falsehoods and skewed narratives for the better part of the last century. It’s all part of the plan to dupe regular law abiding folks into signing away any and all rights. Yeah I think it’s time we set term limits as well as following the wealth that many politicians accumulate in office. Like Pelosi and the Clintons. There are still too many rats and not enough cats or Jack Russell’s to take them down. I am very worried for the future of America. The leftist aren’t liberals. They are extremist whackjobs that have no business in office . It is sad.

  21. Sounds eerily like the Kavenaugh debacle. If one accuser doesn’t work let’s bring in another and another. The lawyers are the same for all the whistleblowersers just as Anennati was the lawyer for all Kavenaughs accusers. Do these people think we are all as stupid as they are? Surely you would think that they would see it doesn’t work, guess we are talking about democrats though and nobody ever have them credit for being smart. This is the third time,(at least) that they have tried these kind of lies all to no avail. Keep it up democrats, you are giving Trump a win.

  22. How many liars can Democrats hide behind a “whistleblower curtain?” Ans: It is a line four abreast and continues for up to 8 years.

  23. Think they should bring to whole room out and parade them in front of the house. We already have the transcript, so what the hell is anyone going to bring to the table? His opinion of what was said? I say i dont care about your opinion, this is a moot point, let it go and get to work. Biden , needs to be looked at, so does clinton! Lets dig that hole up again! Maybe it will such that bitch up!

  24. Your article quoted ABC as reporting the memo of the call “showed Trump asking a “favor” of the foreign leader and pushing him to launch an investigation into the Biden family. ” Then you wrote that was “wrong”, because “the ‘favor’ Trump asked for was only in relation to the DNC’s missing server and the DNC contractor Crowdstrike who analyzed it. Biden is mentioned later in the call, and nowhere near the ‘favor’ asked.”

    Actually, if you quoted ABC correctly, they did not tie the “favor” to investigating Biden. Your quote identifies two actions Trump requested: (1) a favor, and (2) investigation of the Bidens

  25. You stated that “Trump clearly does not use pressure or offer a quid pro quo” in the memo of the call. I think you are right. But you have to look beyond the memo of the call, and look at all the evidence. If you read the texts Trump appointee, Kurt Volker, gave to the House Intelligence Committee, they certainly give the appearance that Trump will neither release the security funding to Ukraine, nor accept a visit from the new president unless Ukraine agrees to specific conditions dictated in the texts by Trump’s diplomatic officials.

    The documents show the transaction was not so much as “quid pro quo” as it was extortion.

    Trump-appointee, and Ukraine Ambassador under GW Bush, Republican William “Bill” Taylor, believed the scheme was improper, and called it for what it was – assistance with a political campaign.

    Bill Taylor 12:08 p.m. “Are we now saying that security assistance and WH meeting are conditioned on investigations?”

    Bill Taylor 1:45 a.m. “Gordon, one thing Kurt and I talked about yesterday was Sasha Danyliuk’s point that President Zelenskyy is sensitive about Ukraine being taken seriously, not merely as an instrument in Washington domestic, reelection politics.”

    Bill Taylor 12:47 a.m. “As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.”

    • There’s more to the story than your are posting, just like all the demonrat whores purposely leaving out what ends in their claims being unfounded. They are cherry-picking texts and half-sentences from other liberal news outlets and internet websites to prove their case.

      You say “look at all the evidence.” But you are doing the same thing as the media by distorting the facts and posting partial statements.

      The Taylor and Johnson texts are available. Read all of them.

      The full Volker testimony;

      Testimony before the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and Committee on Oversight

      Amb. Kurt Volker Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations

      October 3, 2019

      Thank you very much for the opportunity to provide this testimony today.

      Allow me to begin by stressing that you and the American people can be reassured and proud that the Department of State and the Department of Defense, and the professionals working there—civil and foreign service and military—have conducted themselves with the highest degree of professionalism, integrity, and dedication to the national interest. That is a testament to the strength of our people, our institutions, and our country.

      As a former member of the Senior Foreign Service, and in conducting my role as U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, I have similarly acted solely to advance U.S. national interests, which included supporting democracy and reform in Ukraine; helping Ukraine better defend itself and deter Russian aggression; and leading U.S. negotiating efforts to end the war and restore Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

      Throughout my career, whether as a career diplomat, U.S. Ambassador to NATO, or in my other capacities, I have tried to be courageous, energetic, clear-eyed and plain-spoken—always acting with integrity, to advance core American values and interests. My efforts as U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations were no different.

      In carrying out this role, I at some stage found myself faced with a choice: to be aware of a problem and to ignore it, or rather to accept that it was my responsibility to try to fix it.

      I would not have been true to myself, my duties, or my commitment to the people of the United States or Ukraine, if I did not dive in and try to fix problems as best I could.

      There are five key points I would like to stress in this testimony, and I would like to submit a longer version and timeline of events for the record. Let me be clear that I wish to be complete and open in my testimony in order to help get the facts out and the record straight.

      First, my efforts were entirely focused on advancing U.S. foreign policy goals with respect to Ukraine. In this, we were quite successful. U.S. policy toward Ukraine for the past two years has been strong, consistent, and has enjoyed support across the Administration, bipartisan support in Congress, and support among our Allies and Ukraine. While I will not be there to lead these efforts any longer, I sincerely hope that we are able to keep this policy strong going forward.

      You may recall that in the Spring of 2017, when then-Secretary of State Tillerson asked if I would take on these responsibilities, there were major, complicated questions swirling in public debate about the direction of U.S. policy toward Ukraine.

      Would the Administration lift sanctions against Russia? Would it make some kind of “grand bargain” with Russia, in which it would trade recognition of Russia’s seizure of Ukrainian territory for some other deal in Syria or elsewhere? Would the Administration recognize Russia’s claimed annexation of Crimea? Will this just become another frozen conflict? There were also a vast number of vacancies in key diplomatic positions, so no one was really representing the United States in the negotiating process about ending the war in eastern Ukraine.

      Caring deeply about supporting Ukraine; recognizing that it stands for all of us in building a democracy and pushing back Russian aggression on their soil; and seeking to make sure American policy is in the right place, I agreed to take on these responsibilities. Then-Secretary of State Tillerson and I agreed that our fundamental policy goals would be to restore the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, and to assure the safety and security of all Ukrainian citizens, regardless of ethnicity, nationality or religion.

      I did this on a voluntary basis, with no salary paid by the U.S. taxpayer, simply because I believed it was important to serve our country in this way. I believed I could steer U.S. policy in the right direction.

      In two years, the track record speaks for itself.

      • I was the Administration’s most outspoken figure highlighting Russia’s ongoing aggression against Ukraine, and Russia’s responsibility to end the war. • We coordinated closely with our European Allies and Canada, to maintain a united front against Russian aggression, and for Ukraine’s democracy, reform, sovereignty, and territorial integrity. Ukraine policy is perhaps the one area where the U.S. and its European Allies are in lock-step. • This coordination helped to strengthen U.S. sanctions against Russia, and to maintain EU sanctions as well. • Along with others in the Administration, I strongly advocated for lifting the ban on the sale of lethal defensive arms to Ukraine, advocated for increasing U.S. security assistance to Ukraine, and urged other countries to follow the U.S. lead. • I engaged with our Allies, with Ukraine, and with Russia in negotiations to implement the Minsk Agreements, holding a firm line on insisting on the withdrawal of Russian forces, dismantling of the so-called “People’s Republics,” and restoring Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity.
      • In order to shine a spotlight on Russian aggression and to highlight the humanitarian plight suffered by the people in the Donbas as a result, I visited the war zone in Ukraine three times, with media in tow. • Together with others in the Administration, we kept U.S. policy steady through Presidential and Parliamentary elections in Ukraine, and worked hard to strengthen the U.S.-Ukraine bilateral relationship under the new President and government, helping shepherd a peaceful transition of power in Ukraine.

      In short, whereas two years ago, most observers would have said that time is on Russia’s side, we have turned the tables, and time is now on Ukraine’s side.

      Second, in May of this year, I became concerned that a negative narrative about Ukraine, fueled by assertions made by Ukraine’s departing Prosecutor General, was reaching the President of the United States, and impeding our ability to support the new Ukrainian government as robustly as I believed we should. After sharing my concerns with the Ukrainian leadership, an advisor to President Zelenskyy asked me to connect him to the President’s personal lawyer, Mayor Rudy Giuliani. I did so. I did so solely because I understood that the new Ukrainian leadership wanted to convince those, like Mayor Giuliani, who believed such a negative narrative about Ukraine, that times have changed and that, under President Zelenskyy, Ukraine is worthy of U.S. support. I also made clear to the Ukrainians, on a number of occasions, that Mayor Giuliani is a private citizen and the President’s personal lawyer, and that he does not represent the United States government.

      Third, at no time was I aware of or took part in an effort to urge Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Biden. As you will see from the extensive text messages I am providing, which convey a sense of real-time dialogue with several different actors, Vice President Biden was never a topic of discussion.

      Moreover, as I was aware of public accusations about the Vice President, several times I cautioned the Ukrainians to distinguish between highlighting their own efforts to fight corruption domestically, including investigating Ukrainian individuals (something we support as a matter of U.S. policy), and doing anything that could be seen as impacting U.S. elections (which is in neither the United States’ nor Ukraine’s own interests). To the best of my knowledge, no such actions by Ukraine were ever taken, at least in part, I believe, because of the advice I gave them.

      Notably, I did not listen in on the July 25, 2019 phone call between President Trump and President Zelenskyy, and received only superficial readouts about that conversation afterwards. In addition, I was not aware that Vice President Biden’s name was mentioned, or a request was made to investigate him, until the transcript of this call was released on September 25, 2019.

      Fourth, while executing my duties, I kept my colleagues at the State Department and National Security Council informed, and also briefed Congress, about my actions. This included inperson meetings with senior U.S. officials at State, Defense, and the NSC, as well as staff
      briefings on Capitol Hill, and public testimony in the Senate on June 18, 2019. I have an extensive record of public commentary about our Ukraine policy. I have no doubt that there is a substantial paper trail of State Department correspondence concerning my meetings with Ukrainians, Allies and so forth. As a matter of practice, I did not edit or “clear” on these messages, but told the reporting officers just to report as they normally would.

      Fifth and finally, I strongly supported the provision of U.S. security assistance, including lethal defensive weapons, to Ukraine throughout my tenure. I became aware of a hold on Congressional Notifications about proceeding with that assistance on July 18, 2019, and immediately tried to weigh in to reverse that position. I was confident that this position would indeed be reversed in the end, because the provision of such assistance was uniformly supported at State, Defense, NSC, the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the expert community in Washington. As I was confident the position would not stand, I did not discuss the hold with my Ukrainian counterparts until the matter became public in late August. The position was indeed reversed, and assistance allowed to continue, within a few weeks after that.

      I would now like to turn the matters of specific interest to this Committee.

      Contacts with Mayor Giuliani

      In the early months of 2019, I was aware of an emerging, negative narrative about Ukraine in the United States, fueled by accusations made by the then-Prosecutor General of Ukraine, Yuriy Lutsenko, that some Ukrainian citizens may have sought to influence the U.S. 2016 Presidential election, including by passing information they hoped would reach the Hillary Clinton campaign that was detrimental to the Donald Trump campaign.

      There was a second narrative, also fueled by the then-Prosecutor General, that the company, Burisma, had sought to garner influence with then-Vice President Biden, by paying high fees to his son Hunter Biden.

      Mr. Lutsenko made these allegations in conversations with U.S. media, which gave them wide circulation, particularly among conservative media viewers.

      I was well aware of the situation in Ukraine, and had met Mr. Lutsenko once, during one of my visits to Ukraine in 2018. Ukraine has a well-deserved reputation for rampant corruption. Nonetheless, I believed that these accusations by Mr. Lutsenko were themselves self-serving, intended to make himself appear valuable to the United States, so that the United States might weigh in against his being removed from office by the new government.

      In addition, I have known former Vice President Biden for 24 years, and the suggestion that he would be influenced in his duties as Vice President by money for his son simply has no credibility to me. I know him as a man of integrity and dedication to our country.

      In May, 2019, I learned that former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani planned to travel to Ukraine to look into these accusations. I reached out to brief him before his visit – specifically, to tell him that Lutsenko is not credible and will be replaced once a new government takes office, and that I had met with President-elect Zelenskyy when he was a candidate, had subsequently been in touch with his advisors, and was convinced that he was sincerely committed to reform and to fighting corruption in Ukraine.

      We had a brief phone call, which ended as Mayor Giuliani needed to attend to another meeting or call. I texted afterward to offer to finish the conversation, but we did not speak again at that time.

      I later read that he canceled his trip, and that he asserted that President-elect Zelenskyy was surrounded by “enemies of the United States” – something with which I fundamentally disagreed.

      On May 20, I visited Ukraine as part of the U.S. Presidential Delegation to the Inauguration of the new President. Secretary of Energy Rick Perry led the delegation, and we were also joined by U.S. Ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, and U.S. Senator Ron Johnson.

      I do not recall any of the Lutsenko accusations coming up in the course of our meetings with Ukrainian officials. Instead, we had a very productive meeting with President Zelenskyy about his commitment to reform. He announced early Parliamentary elections that same day. We came away convinced that he was sincere about massive reform in Ukraine, would face significant internal opposition, and that he deserved strong U.S. support. We decided to seek a meeting with President Trump upon our return to the United States to brief him on our impressions and recommendations following the visit.

      We met as a group with President Trump on May 23. We stressed our finding that President Zelenskyy represented the best chance for getting Ukraine out of the mire of corruption it had been in for over 20 years. I argued that how the next 3-6 months played out would determine the future of Ukraine for the next 5 years. We urged him to invite President Zelenskyy to the White House.

      The President was very skeptical. Given Ukraine’s history of corruption, that is understandable. He said that Ukraine was a corrupt country, full of “terrible people.” He said they “tried to take me down.” In the course of that conversation, he referenced conversations with Mayor Giuliani. It was clear to me that despite the positive news and recommendations being conveyed by this official delegation about the new President, President Trump had a deeply rooted negative view on Ukraine rooted in the past. He was clearly receiving other information from other sources, including Mayor Giuliani, that was more negative, causing him to retain this negative view.

      Within a few days, President Trump indeed signed the congratulatory letter to President Zelenskyy, which included an invitation to the President to visit him at the White House.

      In the weeks that followed, I and several others sought to nail down a specific date for that visit, without result. No reason was given, but I believed that the President’s long-held negative view toward Ukraine was causing hesitation in actually scheduling the meeting.

      Nonetheless, I continued to believe that once the two Presidents actually sat down together, President Trump would quickly conclude that President Zelenskyy is sincere in his commitment to reforming Ukraine, is a charismatic politician who enjoys the support of his people, and is worthy of U.S. support.

      On July 2, I met with President Zelenskyy and his delegation in Toronto, Canada, as I was the senior U.S. Representative attending a conference about reform in Ukraine. At the end of that meeting, I had a private conversation with President Zelenskyy, in which I explained that I believed that Mayor Giuliani continues to have a negative view of Ukraine based on assertions of actions that happened in 2016, and that this viewpoint is likely making its way to the President. I made clear that Mayor Giuliani does not speak for the U.S. government, but is a private citizen and the President’s personal attorney.

      I stressed that those of us on the Presidential Delegation at his Inauguration understood that President Zelenskyy and his team had nothing to do with anything that happened in 2016, and that the best thing would be to have a bilateral meeting with President Trump. I said that as soon as that meeting would take place, I was confident that President Trump would be as impressed with President Zelenskyy as I and the others on our delegation had been, and that our bilateral relationship would flourish.

      It was clear to me that we had a growing problem in the negative narrative about Ukraine, built on these earlier accusations by Mr. Lutsenko, that was impeding the development of our bilateral relationship and the strengthening of our support for Ukraine. I therefore faced a choice: do nothing, and allow this situation to fester; or try to fix it. I tried to fix it.

      On July 10, 2019, I met a close aide to President Zelenskyy, Andrey Yermak, for coffee in Washington DC. We followed up the conversation about Mayor Giuliani, and he asked me to connect to him with Mayor Giuliani. I agreed to reach out to Mayor Giuliani and ask if he would agree to be connected.

      I did so – on July 10 writing to Mayor Giuliani to seek to get together, and finally on July 19 meeting for breakfast for a longer discussion.

      At that breakfast, Mr. Giuliani was accompanied by Ukrainian-Amercian businessman Lev Parnas. We had a long conversation about Ukraine. To my surprise, Mr. Giuliani had already come to the conclusion on his own that Mr. Lutsenko was not credible and acting in a selfserving capacity. He mentioned both the accusations about Vice President Biden and about interference in the 2016 election, and stressed that all he wanted to see was for Ukraine to investigate what happened in the past and apply its own laws.

      I stressed my view that the current President of Ukraine is sincerely committed to rooting out corruption and reforming Ukraine. It is the best chance Ukraine has had to move forward in a generation, and he deserves U.S. support.

      Concerning the allegations, I stressed that no one in the new team governing Ukraine had anything to do with anything that may have happened in 2016 or before – they were making TV shows at the time. Mr. Lutsenko, however, would remain in place until a new government was seated in a month or more. It was important to reach out and provide strong U.S. support for President-elect Zelenskyy.

      I also said at that July 19 meeting that it is not credible to me that former Vice President Biden would have been influenced in anyway by financial or personal motives in carrying out his duties as Vice President. A different issue is whether some individual Ukrainians may have attempted to influence the 2016 election or thought they could buy influence: that is at least plausible, given Ukraine’s reputation for corruption. But the accusation that Vice President Biden acted inappropriately did not seem at all credible to me.

      I followed up on the request from Andrey Yermak to be connected to Mayor Giuliani directly, and the Mayor said he would indeed like to connect. I stressed that I thought it was important that he get the facts straight from the new team, not from the outgoing Prosecutor General or others who have a different self-interest.

      That day, July 19, I connected the two of them by text message, and facilitated a phone conversation which took place on July 22. During that conversation, they agreed to meet in Madrid in early August, 2019.

      In a few follow up messages, Mr. Yermak was concerned that he had not heard back from Mayor Giuliani about scheduling the meeting in Madrid, so I stepped in again to put them back in touch so the meeting would be scheduled. It took place on August 2, 2019.

      After they met, both Mayor Giuliani and Mr. Yermak called me to give me their impressions. Both were positive. Neither said anything about Vice President Biden. Mayor Giuliani said that he had stressed the importance of Ukraine conducting investigations into what happened in the past, and Mr. Yermak stressed that he told Mayor Giuliani it is the government’s program to root out corruption and implement reforms, and they would be conducting investigations as part of this process anyway.

      Later, possibly on August 7, Mayor Giuliani called both me and Amb. Gordon Sondland to provide a more detailed readout. We expressed our hope that Mayor Giuliani would convey to the President his positive impression of the new leadership in Ukraine, and reassure the President that the advice he was getting from us – to schedule the White House visit of President Zelenskyy – was the right thing to do.

      Mayor Giuliani then said he believed the Ukrainian President needed to make a statement about fighting corruption, and that he had discussed this with Mr. Yermak. I said that I did not think this would be a problem, since that is the government’s position anyway.

      I followed up with Mr. Yermak, and he said that they would indeed be prepared to make a statement. He said it would reference Burisma and 2016, in a wider context of rooting out corruption anyway. There was no mention of Vice President Biden. Rather, in referencing Burisma, it was clear he was only talking about whether any Ukrainians had acted inappropriately.

      On August 16, Mr. Yermak shared a draft with me, which I thought looked perfectly reasonable. It did not mention Burisma or 2016 elections, but was generic. I conveyed this draft to Amb. Sondland, who agreed it was an excellent statement. We had a further conversation with Mayor Giuliani, who said that in his view, the statement should include specific reference to “Burisma” and “2016.” Again, there was no mention of Vice President Biden in these conversations.

      Amb. Sondland and I discussed these points, and I edited the draft statement by Mr. Yermak to include these points to see how it looked. I then discussed further with Mr. Yermak. He said that for a number of reasons – including the fact that Mr. Lutsenko was still officially the Prosecutor General — they do not want to mention Burisma and 2016. I agreed – and further said that I believe it is essential that Ukraine do nothing that could be seen as interfering in 2020 elections. It is bad enough that accusations have been made about 2016 – it is essential that Ukraine not be involved in anything relating to 2020. He agreed and the idea of putting out a statement was shelved. The point about Ukraine avoiding anything that could play into U.S. elections in 2020 is a message that I know our Chargé in Ukraine, Amb. Bill Taylor, reinforced in other meetings.

      During this time, I informed Secretary of State Pompeo, Counselor Brechbuhl, National Security Advisor Bolton, NSC staff, and Chargé Amb. Bill Taylor on various occasions that I was engaged in these conversations, and was seeking to steer them in a way to reinforce an accurate picture of the Ukrainian leadership’s commitment to reform and fighting corruption..

      According to my records, the last contact I had with Mr. Giuliani about any of these things at that time was August 13. The next contact between us was his attempt to call me, after the current news cycle broke, on September 20. I did not return the call right away. I consulted with the Counselor of the State Department, Ulrich Brechbuhl, on September 21. Mr. Giuliani sent a number of text messages to me on September 22.

      I spoke with Secretary of State Pompeo on September 22. Secretary Pompeo said that he had been called by Mayor Giuliani, who asked that the State Department confirm that it had arranged the meeting between himself and Mr. Yermak. I told the Secretary that the State Department Spokesperson had already confirmed this, in a statement given to the press on
      August 22. Secretary Pompeo asked me to call Mr. Giuliani back, tell him this, and share a copy of that statement. I did so.

      U.S. Security Assistance

      As is well documented, I had long supported lifting the ban on lethal defensive assistance to Ukraine, advocated for the supply of javelin anti-tank systems, advocated for an increase in U.S. assistance, and urged other nations to provide more assistance as well.

      The issue of a hold placed on security assistance to Ukraine also came up during this same time I was connecting Mr. Yermak and Mayor Giuliani. I did not perceive these issues to be linked in any way.

      On July 18, I was informed that at an interagency (sub-PCC) meeting, OMB had said that there was a hold being placed on Congressional Notifications about security assistance to Ukraine. No reason was given.

      A higher level interagency meeting (PCC) was then scheduled to take place to discuss the issue on July 23. I met in advance with the individual who would represent the State Department at that meeting, Assistant Secretary of State for Pol-Mil Affairs, R. Clarke Cooper. I stressed how important it was to keep the security assistance moving – for Ukraine’s self-defense, deterrence of further Russian aggression, as a symbol of our bilateral support for Ukraine, and as part of having a strong position going into any negotiations with Russia. He fully agreed and intended to represent that position at the PCC meeting. I also had separate conversations with the Pentagon and NSC staff to reiterate the same position.

      I was told later that there was no outcome from the PCC meeting. That said, I was not overly concerned about the development because I believed the decision would ultimately be reversed. Everything from the force of law to the unanimous position of the House, Senate, Pentagon, State Department, and NSC staff argued for going forward, and I knew it would just be a matter of time.

      July 25 Phone Call

      I departed for a long-planned trip to Ukraine on July 23. I had avoided going to Ukraine during the course of the Parliamentary election campaign, just as I had during the Presidential run-off, to avoid any possible perception of U.S. intervention in the Ukrainian elections. The Parliamentary election took place on July 21, so I felt I could visit afterwards, congratulate the President, and visit the conflict zone in Eastern Ukraine, something I did each year. I particularly wanted to support President Zelenskyy’s decision to pull back Ukrainian forces at Stanitsia Luhanska and to urge Russian forces to do the same.

      During this time, I had also been urging that the President make a congratulatory phone call after the Parliamentary election – especially since we still did not have a date for a White House visit. A congratulatory call would keep the relationship warm.

      On July 24, I had meetings in Vienna at the OSCE, and then continued on to Kyiv, arriving just after midnight. Even though I had been pressing for a Presidential congratulatory phone call, I still did not know whether or when such a call was to be scheduled until I was already en route to Kyiv.

      We had meetings all day in Kyiv on July 25, including lunch with Mr. Yermak, and then met with President Zelenskyy on July 26. U.S. Chargé Amb. Taylor and I then visited the conflict zone later that same day. We spoke to the press in Stanitsia Luhanska on July 26, and I gave a press conference in Kyiv on July 27.

      The Presidential phone call took place on July 25, the day before I met with President Zelenskyy, along with Amb. Sondland and Amb. Taylor.

      I was not on the July 25 phone call. I received a general readout via our Chargé and my own State Dept. staffer, as well as from Mr. Yermak. All said it was a good, congratulatory call, that they discussed the importance of fighting corruption and promoting reform in Ukraine, and that President Trump reiterated his invitation to President Zelenskyy to visit the White House. I was not made aware of any reference to Vice President Biden or his son, which I only learned about when the transcript of the call was released on September 25, 2019.

      No mention of security assistance was made in the readouts either, and I said so in my press remarks on July 27, 2019, in Kyiv.

      Ambassador Yovanovitch

      I have known Ambassador Yovanovitch since we served together in London in 1988. Throughout our careers, we have worked together at various times. When I was serving as the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, I recommended her strongly to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, which she did quite capably.

      I have always known her to be professional, capable, dedicated to the national interest, and of the highest integrity.

      Avoiding Conflicts of Interest

      Before accepting the position as U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, I worked carefully with Department of State lawyers to identify and prevent any possible conflicts of interest.

      Given my commitment to building the McCain Institute at Arizona State University, as well as a number of other personal considerations, I did not want to accept a full-time, paid position in the Department of State. Rather, I preferred to work on a part-time, voluntary, and noncompensated basis, which allowed me to continue with my other duties.

      I therefore set out a detailed set of ethics undertakings with the Department, and recused myself from any Ukraine-related activities elsewhere – particularly at BGR Group, where I serve as a senior international advisor to the firm. Per prior agreement when I joined Arizona State University, I do not do any client-specific work for the firm, nor do I engage in any representational activities. Upon becoming U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, I immediately notified the firm that I was recusing myself from all Ukraine-related activity. All of these documents are available to the Committee.

  26. How much have the dems paid he or she to come forward ???????Just more Dumbocrat bull crap!!!!Time to blow the whistle on all the crooked dealing the dems have been getting away with! more cia crap.trying to have a coop with the dems blessing…Time to have them checked out as well!

  27. Same old bull crap!!!!!Time for all of these so called whistle blowers to be brought to court to explain Who set them up to lie like this.$$$$$$$$$ is what it’s all about Democrats are afraid they are going to get caught for their crooked dealings..Question I have is WAGES start $175 thosand dollars a year,yet they are all worth millions???? HOW do you get that rich being honest on that pay scale???

  28. Einstein said that repeating the same act over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity! These so-called Whistleblowers and their handlers are not geniuses and definitely insane!

  29. The DEMOCRATS are the crooked enemies of AMERICA who keep coming forward with lies. Adam Schiff has done nothing but lie for the past three years. Hopefully, Barr will find evidence against Schiff in his investigation. Would be happy to see all the Crooked politicians in prison. There are some Rhinos, like Romney, Sanford, and Flake, who seem to be enemies of AMERICA too.

  30. I’m sure that all the former Trump employees have paid Schiff’s office a visit regarding information on Trump.That’s what you call loyalty:however ,it will interesting when the dust settles to see this is another Russian Hoax.The Whistleblower’s are probably friend’s Of John Brennan and i would en be surprised if he didn’t talk with Schiff.

  31. President Zelenskyy: I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense.(That really sounds like Trump withheld something don’t it) We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.
    The President: I would like you to do us a favor though(not I want you to do ME a favor though) because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike…(to find out where the fake russian collusion charges against Trump started from)
    (skipped down to where biden is first mentioned)
    There’s 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. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me. (there’s video proof of that allegation and Not paranoid says “no corruption from any democRAT”) Joe Biden telling the President of Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating the company where his son works for corruption or Ukraine won’t get the $1 billion in aid the obama administration promised Ukraine, and he only had six hours to do it in. The Ukraine President told Joe Biden that he would call obama and tell him about Biden’s extortion threat and Biden said, “call him”. Sounds like obama was in on it also. That sounds like corruption, looks like corruption, and fits the description of corruption, so it must be corruption, right? But wait, it was democRATS doing it so it’s not really corruption, right? Oh what big hypocrites those dirty democRATS are today.

  32. Sounds like #2 is a republican plant? Trump supporters are reminiscent of 1930’s Germans. They believe the beautiful lies but ignore the ugly truths. Republicans are traitors, Vote out all Republicans from dog catcher to president. They are bad for hard working honest Americans. REMEMBER the HUGE trump/Republican tax cuts for THE RICH don not expire while the MINISCULE tax cuts for the WORKING class do expire. Sounds like a lot of Russian bots on this site.

  33. This ‘additional’ whistleblower is nothing more than the original source for the first ‘whistleblower’.
    It’s what CIA calls a “feedback loop”, disinformation recycling. They have nothing, so they rework what they have through alternate means, or individuals. They’ll keep this up until the 2020 election, hoping to influence the lemmings of society. This has Brennen all over it.

Leave a Reply