She also implicates Mick Mulvaney, makes Sondland look like a fool, and shows how Giuliani tried to game Ukraine.
I read Fiona Hill’s deposition. Here are what my followers on Twitter renamed my Over the Cliff Notes.
First, Fiona Hill’s impressive academic credentials:
Hill testified that Ambassador Yovanovitch’s removal was a turning point because there was no basis for the removal—her removal was based on a “mishmash” of baseless lies.
She understood that Giuliani was responsible for these lies.
She also understood that pushing for an investigation into Burisma was part of a “package of issues” for Giuliani that included promoting the business interests of his associates.
Her “jaw dropped” when she heard about the indictments of his associates Fruman and Parnas, but she’d already heard that they were up to no good. She also knew they had financial interests in Ukrainian energy.
She testified that in April, Bolton said “Giuliani is a hand grenade that is going to blow everybody up.”
However Bolton didn’t think there was anything he personally could do about the Giuliani situation.
Ambassador Sondland (businessman appointed by Trump) told Hill that Trump gave him “broad authority” and he was the “President’s point man” on all matters regarding Europe.
Hill received messages from officials who had been told by Sondland to meet with her.
Sondland failed to follow protocol by briefing her about what she was supposed to do. He also gave out her personal phone number.🤦♀️
She described him as a “counterintelligence risk.”
At a crucial July 10 meeting with Ukrainian and White House officials, Sondland “blurted” out: “Well we have an agreement with the chief of Staff for a meeting if these investigations in the energy sector start.”
Bolton stiffened and ended the meeting.
As Sondland was leaving, Sondland told Volker, Perry and the Ukrainian officials to come with him to the Ward Room to talk about “next steps.”
Bolton told Hill to go find out what they were talking about.
Hill entered the room as Sondland was saying he had an agreement with Mulvaney for a Trump-Zelenskyy meeting if the Ukrainians “were going forward with the investigations.”
Yermak, one of Zelenskys’ top official, didn’t appear surprised. [Narrator: and we know why!]
Hill told Sondland that they couldn’t make “commitments at this particular juncture.”
Sondland cut her off and repeated that he and Mulvaney had an “agreement.
Hill reported back to Bolton, who told her to report this to NSC counsel, and to John Eisenberg.
Then he said, “You go and tell Eisenberg that I am not part of whatever drug deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up on this.”
Hill explained that by “drug deal” he meant “an improper arrangement to have a meeting at the White House predicated on Ukrainians agreeing to restart investigations that had been dropped.”
She reported to Eisenberg, who “was also concerned” and said he’d follow up.
She testified that Eisenberg “wasn’t aware” that Sondland was “running around” conducting his own independent foreign policy.
She and Bolton warned Volker to stop meeting Giuliani. She said, “the more you engage with someone who is spreading untruths, the more validity you give those untruths.”
Volker thought it better to try to “manage” Giuliani.
She testified that Volker behaved with integrity.
Hill testified that during her first year, she received “hateful calls” including death threats because she wasn’t sufficiently pro-Trump (she saw herself as non-partisan).
The threats began again when she gave the deposition.
Hill warned Kupperman (Deputy National Security Advisor) that, “Ukraine was going to be played by Giuliani in some way as part of the campaign.”
She also said Giuliani was “creating a kind of a story. .. that was being packaged.”
She said the July 25 Trump-Zelensky call “do us a favor though” was her “worst fears and nightmares.”
[Narrator: Trump really slipped up in that call because “do us a favor though” and the mention of Biden rules out the tried-and-true “I didn’t know what my underlings were doing” defense.]
Rep Zeldin (R-NY) questioned her about “Ukrainians attempting to interfere with the U.S. election,” when she delivered a remarkable warning. The entire page is worth reading:
A lot of these depositions have touched on the history: Most Ukrainians want to break free from Russia, embrace rule of law, and join the western democracies.
Russia wants to retain control of Ukraine.
Career diplomats have spent years helping Ukraine get rid of Russian influence and embrace rule of law.
The depositions touch on the history: Under the Soviet Union, the state owned all the industries and resources.
When the SU broke up, before rule of law could be put into place, a few people seized (“privatized”) the nation’s wealth, and became billionaires and oligarchs.
They created what are basically Mafia states.
Fiona Hill asked: Is the GOP OK with Russia making fools of the U.S. again?
A: Yes. Because the reactionaries in control of the GOP are carrying on a love affair with Putin and Russia. What? See this post.
Trump & pals are on Russia’s side.
Trump wants to BE a Putin-style oligarch.
To accomplish this, Trump & pals tried to game Ukraine in order to:
- get💰
- set Trump up for 2020, and
- compromise Ukraine.
And here we are.
To see how Hill’s testimony fits into the narrative, see my notes here.
I’ve wondered who the mastermind was who thought up the whole Ukrainian scheme. The scheme really kicked off right after the 2018 midterms, when Trump saw the writing on the wall.
I tried to imagine Rudy and Trump sitting around concocting this scheme, but I’m just not seeing that.
My guess is that Manafort was the mastermind–he’s the one who really understands Ukrainian politics and devious strategy.
What else does Manafort have to do all day, sitting there in that prison cell but come up with a plan to undermine Mueller, compromise Ukraine, help his Russian pals, rehabilitate his image, and seek general revenge on the Ukrainians who helped bring him to justice.
