And her woman of courage award stemmed from her anticorruption efforts in ukraine . Yes. That is true. Was it ever determined who threw the acid and killed her . There have been investigations, but while some of the lowerranking individuals that were involved in this have been arrested, those who ordered this have not yet been apprehended. After you stepped away from this anticorruption event to take this call, what did the director general tell you . She said that there was great concern on the seventh floor of the State Department. Thats where the leadership of the State Department sits. There was great concern. They were worried. She just wanted to give me a heads up about this and things seemed to be going on. So she wanted to give me a heads up. Hard to know how to react to Something Like that, i asked her what was it about, what did she
think it was about. She didnt know. She said that she was going to try and find out more, but she wanted to give me a heads up. In fact, i think she may have been instructed to give me a heads up on that. So i asked her kind of what is the next step here, so she said she would try to find out more and she would try to call me by midnight. What happened next . Around 1 00 in the morning she called me again and she said that there were great concerns, there were concerns up the street, and she said i needed to get come home immediately, get on the next plane to the u. S. And i asked her why, and she said she wasnt sure, but there were concerns about my security. I asked her my physical security, because sometimes washington knows more than we do about these things, and she said no, she had ent gotten that impression that it was a physical security issue, but
they were concerned about my security and i needed to come home right away. I argued this is extremely irregular, and no reason given. But in the end, i did get on the next plane home. You said there were concerns up the street. What did you understand that to mean . The white house. Did she explain in any more detail what she meant by concerns about your security . No, she didnt. I did specifically ask whether this had to do with the mayor giulianis allegations against me and so forth, and she said she didnt know. It didnt even actually appear to me that she seemed to be aware of that. No reason was offered. Did she explain what the urgency was for you to come back on the next flight . The only thing thats pertinent to that was that when she said that there were
concerns about my security. Thats all. But it was not further explained. Now, prior to this abrupt call back to washington, d. C. , had you been offered an extension of your post by the State Department . Yes, Under Secretary the secretary for Political Affairs had asked whether i would extend for another year, departing in july of 2020. When was that request made . In early march. So about a month and a half before this call . Yes. Did anyone at the State Department ever express concerns about your Job Performance . No. Now, after you returned to washington a couple of days after that, you met with the Deputy Secretary Of State, and at your deposition you said that the Deputy Secretary Of State told you that you had done nothing wrong, but that there was a Concerted Campaign against
you. What did he mean by that . Im not exactly sure, but i took it to mean that the allegations that mayor giuliani and others were putting out there, that thats what it was. And who else was involved in this Concerted Campaign against you . There were some members of the press and others in mayor giulianis circle. And who from ukraine . In ukraine, i think well, mr. Luschchenko, the Prosecutor General and mr. Shokin. And at this time mr. Luschchenko was the Prosecutor General . Yes. Thats right. And had president zelensky indicated whether he was going to keep him on after the election . He had indicated he would not be keeping on mr. Luschchenko. You believe you testified earlier that mr. Luschchenko had a reputation for being corrupt, is that right . Thats correct. During this conversation did the Deputy Secretary tell you about your future as the ambassador to ukraine . Well, he told me i needed to leave. What did he say . He said that i mean, there was a lot of back and forth, but ultimately he said the words that every Foreign Service officer understands, the president has lost confidence in you. That was a terrible thing to hear. And i said well, you know, i guess i have to go then. But no real reason was offered as to why i had to leave and why it was being done in such a manner. Did you have any indication that the State Department had lost confidence in you . No. And were you provided any reason why the president lost confidence in you . No. Now, you testified at your
deposition that you were told at some point that Secretary Pompeo had tried to protect you, but that he was no longer able to do that. Were you aware of these efforts to protect you . No, i was not, until that meeting with Deputy Secretary sullivan. And did you understand who he was trying to protect you from . Well, my understanding was that the president had wanted me to leave and there was some discussion about that over the prior months. Did you have any understanding why Secretary Pompeo was no longer able to protect you . No, it was just a statement made that he was no longer able to protect me. So just like that, you had to leave ukraine as soon as possible . Yes. How did that make you feel . Terrible, honestly. I mean, after 33 years of service to our country, it was terrible. Its not the way i wanted my career to end. Now, you also told this Deputy Secretary that this was a dangerous precedent. What do you mean by that . I was worried i was worried about our policy, but also personnel, that and i asked him how are you going to explain this to people in the State Department, the press, the public, the ukrainians . Because everybody is watching. And so if people see somebody who and of course it had been very public, frankly, the attacks on me by mayor giuliani and others, and mr. Luschchenko and ukraine, if people see that
i, who have been, you know, promoting our policies on anticorruption, if they can undermine me and get me pulled out of ukraine, what does that mean for our policy . Do we still have that same policy . How are we going to affirmatively put that father, number one . Number two, when other countries, other accountetors ir countries see that private interests, foreign interests, can come together and get a u. S. Ambassador removed, what is going to stop them from doing that in the future in other countries . Often the work we do, we try to be diplomatic about it, but as Deputy Assistant secretary george kent said, sometimes we get people really angry with us. Its uncomfortable. And we are doing our jobs, but sometimes people become very
angry with us. And if they realize that they can just remove us, theyre going to do that. How did the Deputy Secretary respond . He said those were good questions and he would get back to me. Did he ever get back to you . He asked to see me the following day. What did he say to you then . Really the conversation was more you know, again, im grateful for this, but really more to see how i was doing, and, you know, what would i do next, kind of how could he help. But he didnt address the dangerous precedent that you flagged for him . No. Now, you understood, of course, that the president of the United States could remove you and that you served at the pleasure of the president , is that right . Thats right. But in your 33 years as a Foreign Service officer, have you ever heard of a president of
the United States recalling another ambassador without cause based on allegations that the State Department itself knew to be false . No. Now, you testified in your Opening Statement that you had left ukraine by the time of the July 25th Call between President Trump and president zelensky. When was the first time that you saw the call record for this phone call . When it was released publicly at the end of september, i believe. And prior to reading that call record, were you aware that President Trump had specifically made reference to you in that call . No. What was your reaction to learning that . I was shocked. Absolutely shocked and devastated, frankly. What do you mean by devastated . I was shocked and devastated that i would feature in a phone call between two Heads Of State in such a manner, where President Trump said that i was bad news to another world leader, and that i would be going through some things. So i was it was a terrible moment. A person who saw me actually reading the transcript said that the color drained from my face. I think i even had a physical reaction. I think even now words fail me. Without upsetting you too much, i would like to show you the excerpts from the call. And the first one where President Trump says the former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the ukraine were bad
news, so i just want to let you know. What was your reaction when you heard the president of the United States refer to you as bad news . I couldnt believe it. Again, shocked, appalled, devastated, that the president of the United States would talk about any ambassador like that to a foreign head of state, and it was me. I mean, i couldnt believe it. The next excerpt, when the president references you, was a short one. But he said, well, shes going to go through some things. What did you think when President Trump told president zelensky and you read that you were going to go through some things . I didnt know what to think, but i was very concerned. What were you concerned
about . Shes going to go through some things. It didnt sound good. It sounded like a threat. Did you feel threatened . I did. How so . I didnt know exactly. Its not a very precise phrase. But i think it didnt feel like i was i really dont know how to answer the question any further, except to say that it kind of felt like a vague threat. And so i wondered what that meant. It concerned me. Now, in the same call where the president , as you just said, threatens you, to a foreign leader, he also praises the Corrupt Ukrainian prosecutors who led the false Smear Campaign
against you. I want to show you another excerpt, or two, from the transcript the call record, rather, where the president of the United States says, good, because i heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and thats really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that. The way they shut your very good prosecutor down, and you had some very bad people involved. And he went on later to say, i heard the prosecutor was treated very badly and he was a very fair prosecutor. So good luck with everything. Now, ambassador yovanovitch, after nearly three years in ukraine where you tried to clean up the Prosecutor Generals Office, was it the u. S. Embassys view that the former Prosecutor General was a very good and very fair prosecutor . No, it was not. And, in fact, he was rather
corrupt, is that right . That was our belief. The Prosecutor Generals Office is a longrunning problem in ukraine, is that right . Yes. So how did you feel when you heard President Trump speak so highly of the Corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor who helped to execute the Smear Campaign to have you removed . Well, it was disappointing, it was concerning. It wasnt certainly based on anything that the State Department would have reported, or frankly, anybody else in the u. S. Government. There was an intraagency consensus that when mr. Luschchenko came into office we were very hopeful that he would actually do the things that he said he would set out to do, including reforming the Prosecutor Generals Office. But that did not materialize. So this was not the uniform
position of the official u. S. Policymakers, is that right . Right. Now, lets go back to the Smear Campaign that you referenced, and in march when you said it became public. And you previously testified that you had learned that rudy giuliani, President Trumps lawyer and representative, who was also mentioned in that July 25th Call, was in regular communication with the corrupt Prosecutor General in late 2018 and early 2019. And at one point in your deposition, you said that they that being giuliani and the corrupt foreign Prosecutor General, had plans to, quote, do things to me. What did you mean by that . I didnt really know, but thats what i had been told by ukrainian officials. Did you subsequently understand a little bit more of what that meant . Well, now with the advantage of hindsight, i think that meant removing me from my job in ukraine. Who did you understand to be working with mr. Giuliani as his associates in ukraine . Well, certainly mr. Luschchenko, mr. Shokin. I believe that there were also ukrainian americans, mr. Parnas and mr. Fruman who have recently been indicted. Those are the two who have been indicted in new york . Southern district of new york. Now, at the end of march, this effort by giuliani and his associates resulted in a series of articles in the hill publication that were based on allegations, in part from luschchenko, the corrupt Prosecutor General. And just to summarize some of these allegations, there were, among others, three different categories. One category included the attacks against you, which you referenced in your Opening Statement, including that you had badmouthed the president and had given the Prosecutor General a do not prosecute list. There was another that included allegations of ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. And then there was a third that related to allegations concerning burisma and the bidens. Is that accurate . Yes. Were these articles and allegations then promoted by others associated with the president in the United States . They seemed to be promoted by those around mayor giuliani. Im going to show you a couple of exhibits, including a tweet here by President Trump himself on march 20th, which was the first day that one of these articles was published. It appears to be a quote that
says, john solomon, who is the author of the articles, as perusing collusion fades, a ukrainian plot to help clinton emerges, at sean hannity at fox news. And then if i could go to another tweet four days later, this is the president s son, donald trump jr. , who tweets we need more at richard grinnels who is the ambassador of germany, is that right . Thats correct. And less of these jokers as ambassadors, and its a retweet of one of John Solomons articles or an article referencing the allegations that says calls grow to remove obamas u. S. Ambassador to ukraine. Were you aware of these tweets at the time . Yes. What was your reaction to seeing this . Well, i was worried. What were you worried about . That this didnt seem
these attacks were, you know, being repeated by the president himself and his son. And were you aware of whether they received attention on prime Time Television on fox news as well . Yes, i did. Now, was the allegation that you were badmouthing President Trump true . No. Was the allegation that you had created a do not prosecute list to give to the Prosecutor General in ukraine true . No. In fact, Didnt The Corrupt Prosecutor General himself later recant those allegations . Yes. Now, when these articles were first published, did the State Department issue a response . As you said, there was a series of articles. So after the first article, which was an interview with mr. Luschchenko, and was only really about me and allegations
about me, the State Department came out the following day with a very strong statement saying that, you know, these allegations were fabrications. So the statement addressed the falsity of the allegations themselves . Yes. It didnt say anything about your Job Performance in any way . Honestly, i havent looked at it in a very long time. I think it was general probably not, but i cant recall. Did anyone the the State Department raise concerns with you or express any belief in these allegations . No. I mean, people thought it was ridiculous. Now, after these false allegations were made against you, did you have any discussions with anyone in leadership in the State Department about a potential statement of support from the department or the secretary himself . Yes, after the tweets that
you just showed us, i moan, it seemed to me that if the president s son is saying things like that, that it would be very hard to condition in my position and have authority in ukraine unless the State Department came out pretty strongly behind me. And so, you know, over the weekend of like march 22nd, i think thats about the date, there was a lot of discussion on email among a number of people about what could be done. And Under Secretary the Under Secretary for Political Affairs called me on sunday and i said, you know, its really important that the secretary himself come out and be supportive. Because otherwise its hard for me to be the kind of representative you need here. And he said he would talk to the
secretary. I mean, thats my recollection of the call. That may not be exactly how it played out, but that was my recollection. This is david hale, the Under Secretary of Political Affairs, the number three person at the State Department . Yes. Did he indicate to you that he supported such a statement of support for you . I think he must have, because i dont think he would have gone to the secretary if he didnt support it. I mean, you wouldnt bring a bad idea to the secretary of state. And your general understanding is that you did have the full support of the State Department, is that right . Yes. And, in fact, during your 33year career as a Foreign Service officer, did you ever hear of any serious concerns about your Job Performance . No. Was the statement of support ultimately issued for you . No, it was not. Did you learn why not . Yeah, yes, i was told that there was a concern on the seventh floor that if a statement of support was issued, whether by the State Department or by the secretary personally, that it could be undermined. How could it be undermined . That the president might issue a tweet contradicting that or something to that effect. So let me see if i get this right. You were one of the most senior diplomats in the State Department, youve been there for 33 years. You had won numerous awards. You had been appointed as an ambassador three times by both republican and democratic president s. And the State Department would not issue a statement in support of you against false allegations because they were concerned about a tweet from the president of the United States . Thats my understanding. If i could follow up on that question. It seems like an appropriate time. Ambassador yovanovitch, as we sit here testifying, the president is attacking you on twitter and i would like to give you a chance to respond. Ill read part of one of his tweets. Everyone Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in somalia, how did that go . He goes on to say later in the tweet, is that u. S. President is absolutely right to appoint ambassadors. First of all, ambassador yovanovitch, the senate has a chance to confirm or deny an ambassador, do they not . Yes. Advise and consent. Would you like to respond to the president s attack that everywhere you went turned bad . Well, i mean, i dont think i have such powers. Not in somalia and not in other places. I actually think that where ive served over the years, i and others have demonstrably made things better for the u. S. , as well as for the countries that ive served in. Ukraine, for example, where there are huge challenges, including, you know, on the issue that were discussing today of corruption, huge challenges. But theyve made a lot of progress since 2014, including in the years that i was there. And i think in part the ukrainian people get the most credit for that. But a part of that credit goes to the work of the United States and to me as the ambassador in ukraine. Ambassador, youve shown the courage to come forward today and testify, notwithstanding the fact you were urged by the white
house or State Department not to, notwithstanding the fact that as you testified earlier the president implicitly threatened you in that call record. And now the president in realtime is attacking you. What effect do you think that has on other witnesses willingness to come forward and expose wrongdoing . Its very intimidating. Its designed to intimidate, is it not . I mean, i cant speak to what the president is trying to do. But i think the effect is to be intimidating. Well, i want to let you know, ambassador, that some of us here take Witness Intimidation very, very seriously. Mr. Goldman. Ambassador yovanovitch, you indicated that those same
articles in march that included the Smear Campaign also included allegations related to ukraines interference in the 2016 election and the Burisma Biden connection, right . Yes. So im going to end my questioning where we were before, which was the July 25th Call. And President Trump not only insults you and praises the corrupt Prosecutor General, but he also, as you know by now, references these two investigations. First, immediately after president zelensky thanks President Trump for his, quote, great support in the area of defense, unquote, President Trump responds, i would like you to do us 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. I guess you have one of your wealthy people, the server. They say ukraine has it. And then he goes on in that same paragraph to say, whatever you can do, its very important that you do it, if thats possible. Now, ambassador yovanovitch, from your experience as the ambassador in ukraine for almost three years, and understanding that president zelensky was not in politics before he ran for president and was a new president on this call, how would you expect president zelensky to interpret a request for a favor . The u. S. Relationship for ukraine is the single most important relationship, and so i think that president zelensky, any president , would, you know, do what they could to lean in on a favor request. Im not saying that thats a
yes. Im saying they would try to lean in and see what they could do. Fair to say that the president of ukraine that is so dependent on the United States, would do just about anything within his power to please the president of the United States, if he could . You know, if he can. I mean, im sure there are limits and i understand there were a lot of discussions in the Ukrainian Government about all of this. But yeah, i mean, we are an important relationship on the Security Side and on the political side. And so the president of ukraine, one of the most important functions that individual has, is to make sure the relationship with the u. S. Is rock solid. Now, are you familiar with these allegations of ukrainian interference in the 2016 election . I mean, there have been rumors out there about things like that, but, you know, there
was nothing hard, at least nothing that i was aware of. There was nothing based in fact to support these allegations . Yes. And, in fact, who was responsible for interfering and meddling in the 2016 election . Well, the u. S. Intelligence community has concluded that it was russia. Ambassador yovanovitch, are you aware that in February Of 2017Vladimir Putin himself promoted this theory of ukrainian interference in the 2016 election . You know, maybe i knew that once and have forgotten, but im not familiar with it now. Let me show you a Press Statement that President Putin made in a joint Press Conference with victor orban of hungry on february 22nd of 2017, where he says, second, as we all know, during the president ial campaign
in the United States, the Ukrainian Government adopted a unilateral position in favor of one candidate. More than that, certain oligarchs certainly with the approval of the political leadership, funded this candidate or female candidate to be more precise. Now, how would this theory of ukraine interference in the 2016 election be in Vladimir Putins interest . Well, i mean, President Putin must have been aware that there were concerns in the u. S. About russian meddling in the 2016 elections, and what the potential was for russian meddling in the future. So classic for an Intelligence Officer to try to throw off the scent and create an Alternative Narrative that might get picked up and get some credence. An Alternative Narrative that
would absolve his own wrongdoing . Yeah. And when he talks about an oligarch and he talks about the support of the Ukrainian Government, theres also a reference in the July 25th Call to a wealthy ukrainian. Is it your understanding that what Vladimir Putin is saying here in this Press Statement in February Of 2017 is similar to what President Trump says on the July 25th Call related to the 2016 election . Maybe. Now, let me show you another exhibit from the call related to the bidens, which im sure youre familiar with. President trump says, the other thing, theres a lot of talk about bidens 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. Now, are you familiar with these allegations related to Vice President biden . Yes. Do you know whether he ever went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution of anyone . No. And, in fact, when Vice President biden acted to remove the former corrupt prosecutor in ukraine, did he do so as part of official United States policy . Official u. S. Policy. That was that was endorsed and was the policy of a number of other international stakeholders, other countries, other monetary institutions, financial institutions. And, in fact, if he helped to remove a Corrupt UkrainianProsecutor General who was not prosecuting enough corruption, that would increase the chances
that corrupt companies in ukraine would be investigated, isnt that right . One would think so. And that would include burisma, right . Yes. Now, at the time of this call, Vice President biden was the frontrunner for the democratic nomination for president , and President Trumps potential next opponent in the election. Is it your understanding that President Trumps request to have Vice President biden investigated, was that part of official u. S. Policy as you knew it . Well, i should say that i had at the time of this phone call, i had already departed ukraine two months prior. Right. But youre familiar with it didnt change that much in two months, right . It certainly would not have been the policy in may when i left. And were these two investigations part of the anticorruption platform that you championed in ukraine for
three years . No. And these investigations, do they appear to you to be to benefit the president s personal and political interests rather than the National Interest . Well, they certainly could. Now, just returning to the allegations in the hill publication in march that were promoted by mr. Giuliani, the president s lawyer, were those two allegations similar to the two allegations that the president wanted president zelensky to investigate . Yes. So ultimately in the july 25th phone call with the ukrainian president , the president of the United States endorsed the false allegations against you and the bidens, is that right . Yes. I yield back, mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, i have a
parliamentary inquiry . The gentleman will suspend. Votes are fairly imminent. Were going to take a brief recess. I would ask everyone to remain seated to allow the witness to exit the room. And we will resume after votes. Mr. Chairman, i have a point of inquiry. The gentleman can seek recognition after we resume. Hi, everyone. Im nicole wallace. Weve been watching the testimony of Marie Yovanovitch in front of the House Intelligence Committee overseeing Donald Trumps impeachment proceedings. Im joined by Chris Matthews here in new york. What do you think of what weve been watching . I think weve seen news made in realtime here with the chairman basically accusing the president of the United States in realtime again of Witness Intimidation by putting out that tweet. Basically undercutting the credibility of this witness by saying that wherever she goes in the world, she causes trouble, which is in a way an inane
assessment of her role as ambassador, that they can create hovic in countries by posting there. But it would be a way of frustrating the witnesss testimony. Which is a crime. Well, this is a witness who is there not just as a fact witness, as the witness on tuesday, but as a victim, sort of of the Smear Campaign orchestrated by donald trump and rudy giuliani. So to see her smeared in realtime. Youve used a great word. Because in order to get her out of the way so they could carry out their escapade, if you will, to use ukraine to make their case politically against the bidens and backing up their 2016 theory about ukrainian involvement in our elections, they wanted her out of the way. She was an inconvenient ambassador and they smeared her and the president of the United States said that shes going to have some things coming her way,
which sounds pretty intimidating. In fact, a bit frightening. We are very lucky to be joined here by an amazing team of legal eagles, political analysts and a former senator just for good measure. Msnbc ms. Wiley is here and she worked in the civil Attorneys Office in the Southern District of new York District of new york, investigating the aforementioned rudy giuliani. Former u. S. Attorney as well as former fbi chief of staff, msnbc contributor, Chuck Rosenberg also joins us. Former democratic senator from missouri, and our political analyst, we are lucky to say our msnbc and nbc, claire mccaskill, politics editor and msnbc political contributor Jason Johnson is here and who served as Russian Ambassador to the Obama Administration is here. He too is now an msnbc International Affairs analyst. Let me start with you,
ambassador, your reaction to chriss observation of what is obviously the news of the hour, realtime witness tampering, Witness Intimidation by the president into the testimony, live testimony of former u. S. Ambassador to ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch . The first thing i want to say is i think shes doing a fantastic job. I know ambassador yovanovitch. Cool and calm. Sticking to the facts. Under very difficult circumstances. But that tweet was just outrageous. I dont know what the legal implications are. You have a lot of legal people there that can talk about it. But as somebody who has served this country and somebody who knows what the state Department People do, for him to go after her while she is testifying and lets just be clear, completely crazy stuff, like somehow some lowlevel diplomat is responsible for what happened in somalia . And then just to correct the record, when she was in ukraine, things got better in ukraine and
she was Fighting Corruption effectively, and then he took her out because he didnt like the work that she was doing on behalf of the United States. Im sorry, i just found it really outrageous and im deeply disappointed in the president of the United States. Lets unpack all of this point by point. Let me start with the allegation that an American Ambassador in a war zone was doing anything other than improving a very dire situation. How does that land to other current sitting American Ambassadors, most of the time in these Hardship Posts . They are career Foreign Service officers. What did you hear if youre sitting doing diplomatic work in syria or iraq or afghanistan from the president this morning . Hes the commander in chief. Theyre all appointed by him. Ambassadors are they personally represent the president of the United States when theyre appointed. You get a letter from the
president that you are the president s representative. Its just incredibly demeaning and it obviously also underscores the president of the United States doesnt understand what diplomats do, doesnt understand what ambassadors do. And then the last point, these are americans who 33 years ambassador yovanovitch has served this country. Democrats, republicans. Ive known her for 25 years. I couldnt tell you if shes a democrat or republican. And you heard the places shes served. That is not some cushy overpaid job with a bunch of lovely drinks for ambassadors. These are hard places to serve. Ukraine was at war and is at war during the time shes serving there. And for the president to go after somebody like that, its just wrong. Its just deeply wrong and i hope hell be held accountable for that. I hope there will be pushback, not just from me, but i hope
from other republicans who love our country as much as i do. This is not the american way. You know, Chuck Rosenberg, theres so much that happens because trump does such a Volume Business of debasing the office he fills, we dont pause and analyze Every Little Thing he does. Lets pause on this. Is there any policy at the United StatesJustice Department where what he did if you were anybody else would be addressed . Well, sure, there are statutes that criminalize conduct. Really . Obstruction of justice, obstruction of congressional hearings, title 18 of the United States code section 1505. Look it up. You know, prosecutors love timelines and so i have a question about a timeline. Something that happened today. Ambassador yovanovitch, as Michael Mcfaul testified with great dignity and reserve, thoughtfully, but that she was intimidated by the president s earlier tweets, earlier
statements about her, that she was going to go through something. Was he listening . Did he know she had been intimidated and did he then tweet that she had served poorly . Was he sticking the knife in the back of a witness who already acknowledged that she was intimidated . Because that compounds it in my view. If it was just Out Of The Blue and lots of things are with this president , thats bad. If it was in response to her earlier testimony at this hearing today that she had been intimidated previously, thats awful. People that have covered donald trump for years as a Reality Tv Figure and i guess attempted business person, i dont know what he describes himself as in that category, describe him as a counterpuncher. Its very different when youre punching against a witness in your own impeachment. Its very different. And what youre saying, nicole, building on what chuck said, actually goes straight to his motivation. This is a witness that has
clearly undermined his one defense, which is that i wasnt doing this for my personal gain. I was doing this because i was generally concerned with corruption. And based on her experience in the ukraine, having been there since 2016, what she laid out was not only that the ukrainians had made progress and that it was a significantly important time in the fight against corruption and in her efforts there, that the very people he was listening to were the folks who were corrupt and the people maligning her were the people who had been removed or were about to be removed from office for their corruption. And one of them, luschchenko himself, is currently under investigation in the ukraine today for abuse of power in his position. By his former office. This is who were talking about, and that is why she has been a critical witness today. And the fact that we have a
president who, when he tweets these things out, also knows that peoples lives become threatened. Because in addition to what chuck said, its not just that the president is intimidating her directly, its also putting her in danger because others who support him, unfortunately, may now threaten her life. I think that she scared the hell out of him. I think her power, her passion, her loyalty and credibility was so powerful and so careful. Notice how she began by saying heres what i dont know. How, does that establish your credibility. Heres what i dont know, what happened before me, after me, i dont know some things that happened while i was there. That is a missionly affirming of your determination to tell only the truth. And i think trump doesnt understand that kind of discipline, but he was afraid of it. And thats why he jumped in. Remember, they put out a white house statement just minutes before. Hes only going to watch nuness comments because theyre affirming of him and playing to him. And then he somehow is watching
this Star Witness Today and he feels that she has gotten a high road on him and hes got to come back. She was provoking him by her credibility. And im sorry, were going to jump in and listen to chairman schiff. But you saw it today, Witness Intimidation in realtime by the president of the United States. Once again, going after this dedicated and respected career Public Servant in an effort to chill her and others who may come forward. We take this kind of Witness Intimidation very seriously. Do you think its an impeachable offense, Witness Intimidation . I believe we are looking for our own garrett haake. Garrett, are you hearing us yet . Garrett . Reporter hey, im with you, nicole. Hello. Garrett, what was the go
ahead. Reporter well, a couple things from the room that i dont know how well they carried on tv. The first is Yovanovitch Is such a soft speaker, it really demands the attention of all these lawmakers. They handed out her Opening Statement on paper before hand and you had folks pouring over it as she was speaking and eventually having to lean in to everything she was saying, just to hear her. So she commanded the room in a different way than bill taylor did on wednesday, just by requiring lawmakers to pay such close attention. And then i imagine this was probably more palpable on television, the frustration of republicans at the way that adam schiff controlled that hearing. He was locking down the room any time they tried to raise a point of order. And in fact, there was by calling the recess here exactly when they did, the break in this hearing, republicans now wont even get a crack at yovanovitch for probably at least an hour. They have a long series of votes that they have to take first. So yovanovitch gets to give her Opening Statement, theres long questioning by democrats, and
now a significant break before republicans can present any kind of counternarrative. And its obvious what that will be just from the reactions of the folks in the room, which is so what . She gives this powerful testimony, but that it doesnt relate directly to what would be theoretically the impeachable conduct. And i think thats what youre going to hear all afternoon when the questioning resumes with the republican side. Garrett haake, thank you. Claire mccaskill, the idea that Yovanovitch Is somehow unrelated, Yovanovitch Is, as i said to chris, patient zero. She is the first evidence of Donald Trumps involvement in a Smear Campaign. Hes the architect of it. Rudy giuliani, lev parnas and his guys on the ground in ukraine were carrying it out. Absolutely. So heres the deal. Rudy giuliani and trump cooked up this plan to find a way to go after biden and giuliani had all these contacts on the dark side. All around the globe, including some of the ones that are
currently being prosecuted in this country, those two nuts from down in florida. And then this bad guy in the ukraine. So they had to gin up some Dirt On Biden coming from ukraine and rudy had friends that could help him do that. Corrupt friends, bad guys. So who was in the way . I am so proud of this woman. She was the most senior, highest ranking woman diplomat in the State Department. Now, saying that is something, because the State Department historically over the last 30 years has not exactly been where you go to find all the powerful women in washington. Usually it was a lot of men, a lot of white men. And the fact that she has served and she was in the way, this is who they had to get rid of to complete their scam, they had to get rid of this woman. So they set about to do it with an assist from sean hannity and
ridiculous pretend journalism outlets. They went after her, and the president now, not staying in the shadows for this bad act, but rather hes out there today with his phones tweeting to trying to intimidate her realtime. Im so proud of her. And every woman in america who has fought in a maledominated career should cheer for this woman today. Her guts, her accomplishments and the fact that shes the one that stood in their way. Ive been on tv with you hours and hours and hours. Ive never seen this much emotion in your voice. What is it about yovanovitchs experience . She seems to me like she ran into the wood chipper of trumps corruption. What is it about her experience that has you i can get choked up when i think about what this woman has given. If you really walk in her shoes, the countries shes gone to, the loneliness that comes from
postings like this in the State Department, her accomplishments, the respect she gained over decades and decades of service, and to have these Jerks Mall Line the office of the presidency and play this kind of game for political purposes, it should infuriate every american. We cant walk in her shoes, but we can live in her words, Jason Johnson. What she said today was, if maligned foreign actors basically, if maligned foreign actors can orchestrate the removal of an American AmbassadorFighting Corruption, what else can they do . Shes basically laying out the homeland script. But in this version, donald trump is the useful idiot. There were so many things that were striking. I also thought of sally yates. Another example. If youre a powerful woman, regardless of how you ended up getting into your position, they hate you, they want you gone, they want to intimidate you. There are a couple of things that are so disturbing when i heard her speak about how
frightened she was. This isnt about finding out your name is in a High School Slam book. The president of the United States is insulting you to another world leader and then lies about it and say, oh, he called you a bad person. No, youre the one who said shes bad news. Hes parroting it back to you and he has to because thats the only way to negotiate with this president of the United States. This demonstrates this is an administration that simply removes people whenever they need to in order to engage in whatever corrupt behavior they want to get into. I think this will be key going forward. Very difficult for the republicans to go after someone with her kind of resume and say she is a partisan or she doesnt make sense when clearly she was in a position of power and influence and support within that country, and no one seems to have an explanation for why shes removed. Between that and the fact that we basically saw an impeachment version of celebrity mean tweets while were going through an Impeachment Hearing is an indicator of how frightened this
administration is and what depths they will go to, regardless of how many people get destroyed in the process. Having grown up in the cold war where we hid under our desks because the russians were coming, and i was at the wall when it happened. I was in budapest when it happened. We were the good guys. The people that Fight Corruption and fought communism and tyranny a young kid came up to me at the berlin wall that said freedom to him was talking to me. How did the president jump on the other side and attacking americans, the horrors of somal somalia, dragging an american soldier through the streets. Shes responsible for that . Blaming America First was the taunt of the far left. They would attack us for everything. Here the president of the United States blames an American Ambassador for the horrors of the third world, the evils behind the iron curtain hes helping to restore. If i were a republican im not a republican, i admit it. If i were a republican i would say what happened to my god damned party . Right now today, you can call him a joker, when he calls up through a tweet to try to intimidate a live witness to prove the argument that hes above the law, to prove the argument that hes able to call a witness, humiliated her, blame her for all the wrongs of the world and somehow this proves hes right . It proves hes the bad guy. Its extraordinary to talk like this, but its right in our face. By the way, the chairman was quick witted enough to move by the way, Danny Goldman is the best counsel ive seen. He knows how to keep his place, doesnt act like a congressman. Doesnt show a lot of personality. Hes damn good at using the witness to be the witness. My Bottom Line A couple minutes ago, this president is afraid of that witness. Thats why hes going a little crazy right now. Lets show him going crazy. We dont seem to amplify the
toxic things he disseminates through his twitter feed. This may ultimately be evidence against donald j. Trump, his effort at Witness Intimidation this morning delivered via tweet. Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started in somalia, how did that go. Fast forward to ukraine where the ukrainian president spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with her. It is the u. S. President s right to appoint ambassadors. The u. S. Has a stronger Foreign Policy, much different than proceeding i dont think thats the word he meant. Its called, quite simply, America First. Well stop right there. Let me ask you this, chris. Donald trump is now squarely on the side of the corrupt actors in ukraine. It would seem that, if republicans want to make this pleasure of the president argument, its weakness is what causes him, what brings him pleasure is siding with bad actors and autocrats. To use a phrase of the left, ill say a deep history. After the fall of the iron curtain, tremendous amounts of economic power fell into the hands of the oligarchs. They were ones under the power of the big shots of the soviet world. Then the power fell to the oligarchs. All that money, looking for ways to use that money and clean it up, launder it. In the United States on k street we have people like bob livingston, rudy giuliani, all kinds of people looking for incomes after their public service, if you will. Where do they find income . From the sleaze balls of the world who have to improve their image in the United States. The good countries of the world dont need to buy us. The bad guys have to buy us. So they find willing sellers to the keys of the city of washington. Theyre there on k street. Working for president moye of kenya, all the bad guys. The sleaze balls have to buy good representations. Giuliani is over there, hes got his till out for himself. You think hes doing this pro bono for the president . You said a few minutes ago or somebody did, he has so many contacts among the sleaze balls behind the iron curtain wall because thats where the money is. Theyre all working against us. Theyre working against the Straight Arrow woman i shouldnt call her woman thats the president s language, this State Department hero. Shes standing up as the only tree in the forest Still Standing against all this sleaze and all this money sloshing around, getting into the hands of american sellouts who are trying to make a buck over here. Its a horrendous situation. We find ourselves in the crosshairs of it right now in a hearing where the president of the United States jumps in on the side of the bad guys in realtime for all to see. This is reality tv, ladies and gentlemen. He may be hoisted on his own pit tarred here because hes walking right into a real situation of the show. Remember the mccarthy hearings. Remember what mccarthy did when he tried to destroy that young lawyer, and thats when joe walsh jumped on him and said, until this time i didnt realize how indecent you are. Somebody should say to the president , if he has anybody in the loop that could say it, shut up. Who would it be . Theyre all gone. The people who would say that to him, hes gotten rid of them. Now hes got sick ka phones. Weve been watching compelling testimony this morning from career Foreign Service officer, former American AmbassadorMarie Yovanovitch. Im Nicolle Wallace in new york. We heard a damning indictment of Rudy Giulianis shadow Foreign Policy in ukraine, acting on behalf of his client, donald trump something fell. Were all okay. We also heard a gripping