A: And my understanding at the time was that even though he agreed in the meeting that we had with him, say, okay, I'l invite him, he didn't really want to do it. And that's why the meeting kept being delayed and delayed . And we ended up at a point in talking with the Ukrainians -- who we'll come to this, but, you know, who had asked to communicate with Giuliani that they wanted to convey that they really are different. And we ended up talking about, well, then, make a statement about investigating corruption and your commitment to reform and so forth.
Q: Is that the statement that you discussed in your text messages
A: Yes
Q: around August of 2019?
A: Yes
Q: Okay
A: Yeah. To say make a statement along those lines. And the thought behind that was just trying to be convincing that they are serious and different from the Ukraine of the past.
Q: I believe in the text messages, and we'll probably go through it, but you sent a proposed statement to Mr. Yermak for President Zelensky to release. Is that correct?
A: It was the other way around. He sent it to me.
Q: Okay. And in at least one version of that statement include references to investigations into Burisma Holdings , correct?
A: That i s correct.
Q: And also into the 2016 election interference?
A: That is correct.
Q: Why did you single out those two specific allegations
A: Right.
Q: for the statement that President Zelensky was going to release
A Yes.
Q: in order to get the White House visit?
A: Right. He sent a draft statement to me, and I discussed it with Gordon SondIand, our ambassador to the European Union, and with Rudy Giuliani, we had a conference call together, because I was hoping that this would be convincing, that this is --
Q: Convincing to who?
A: To Giuliani, and therefore that information flow reaching the President would be more positive than it had been. And Rudy did not find that convincing. He said that if they're not willing to investigate those things, Burisma --
Q: Referring to the two allegations we were discussing?
A: Burisma correct -- Burisma and 2016, then what does it mean? And so we talked about it, and I said, well, if it said Burisma, let's be clear, we' re talking about the Ukrainian company and Ukrainians that may have violated Ukrainian law or whether any Ukrainians may have tried to influence U. S. elections, that's what we' re talking about. And that was yes, you know, that is what we were talking about. I then wrote a version I added that to the statement that Mr. Yermak had sent me so we could look at i and say Gordon and I, i believe, looked at it say, is this what we're talking about? Gordon says, yes. I sent that to Andrey Yermak and discussed it with him. And in that conversation with Andrey and a subsequent conversation I advised him, this is not a good idea.
Q: Why did you think what specifically was not a good idea?
A: To --
Q: And why did you think that?
A: Yeah. I advised him that making those specific references was not a good idea, that a generic statement about fighting corruption and, you know, if anyone had tried to interfere in U.S. domestic politics, it's unacceptable, we have to make sure that never happens again, that's fine. But making those specific references, I said, is not a good idea. Andrey's argumentation, let me start with that, was that, first off, he didn't want to see any evidence destroyed by --
Q: What do you mean by that?
A: By--yes. Very important point. Prosecutor General Lutsenko was at this time still in office, and so the one who's making these allegations, which, you know, there is no-- no evidence was brought forward to support. I thought they were very self-serving and not credible.
Q: And not only that, since Prosecutor General Lutsenko made those allegations, didn't he later come out and retract the allegations as completely false?
A: Yeah. I believe that he did.
Q: Okay.
A: Yeah. And so he said, first off , we don't want to if there is any evidence here, we don't want to say this and then have Lutsenko destroy it. Secondly, we don't want to commit to anything that we might do as an investigation without having our own prosecutor general in place, that is the new team that took office. And my comment back to hjm was I think those are good reasons. And in addition, I just think it's important that you avoid anything that would look like it would play into our domestic politics, and this could. So just don't do it. I agree with so I told Andrey, I agree with you, don't do it.
Q: So you believe that if the Ukrainians were to announce that they were pursuing investigations into what we've been describing as the two allegations, that could have an impact on U. S. domestic politics?
A: Yeah. For the reason that you highlighted earlier, which is that it was known that Hunter Biden was a board member of Burisma, so it could be interpreted that way.
Q: And would it be fair to say that if the Ukrainians announce that they were opening an investigation into those two allegations, it could accrue to the benefit of President Trump's reelection campaign?
A: We didn't discuss that.
Q: Do you believe that it could be perceived that way here in the United States?
A: Clearly, because it has now been perceived that way.
