1

UNCLASS

I FIED

PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE,

joint with

the

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM

and the
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

U.S.

HOUSE

OF REPRESENTATIVES,

WASHTNGToN, D.C.

DEPOSITION

OF:

LAURA KATHERINE COOPER

Wednesday, Octoben

23,

Washington, D.C.

UNCLASS

I EIED

20L9

 2

UNCLASS

I FIED

in the above matten was held in Room HVC-304,
Capitol Visitor Centen, commencing at 2:58 p.m.
Pnesent: Repnesentatives Schiff, Himes, Sewe11, Carson,
The deposition

Speien, Quig1ey, Swalwe11, Heck, Maloney, Demings, Knishnamoonthi,

Stefanik, and Ratcliffe.
Also Pnesent: Repnesentatives
Meadows, Wnight, McCaul,

Cicilline,

Ke11y, Rouda, Jondan,

Perry, Roy, and Zeldin.

UNCLASS I

FIED

 3

UNCLASS

IF]ED

Appeanances:

Fon

the

PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE:

UNCLASS

I FIED

 UNCLASS

TF]ED

Fon

the

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM:

Fon

the

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS:

Fon

LAURA COOPER:

DANIEL LEVIN,

White & Case

ESQ.

LLP

701 Thinteenth Stneet,

NW

Washington, D.C. 2O005-3807

UNCLASS

T

FIED

4

 5

UNCLASS

I FIED

THE CHAIRMAN: The House Panliamentanian

will

statement about the House nules, stating that any

will

be

Membens

that

a

nemain

in violation of the House nules.

We've alneady dispensed with enough time

going

be delivening

to fonego my opening statement. I

of this witness, so I'm

would unge the minonity to

do the same so we can begin the questioning.
Mn. Goldman, you ane necognized.
MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you, Mn. Chainman.

This

is a deposition of

Permanent Select Committee on
impeachment

inquiny

Launa Coopen conducted by

the

House

Intelligence, pursuant to the

announcement by

the Speaker of the

House on

Septemben 24th,

Ms. Coopen, we apologize

of

to you fon the 5-houn delay as a nesult

some unauthonized Republican Membens being pnesent,

appneciate

that you ane here today

and

but

we

that you waited to take

youn

testimony.

If

you could, please state youn

full

name and

speIl it for the

necond.

MS. COOPER: My name

is

Launa Kathenine Coopen, L-a-u-r-d,

Kathenine, K-a-t-h-e-n-i-n-e, Cooper, C-o-o-p-e-n.

you. Along with othen pnoceedings in
funthenance of the inquiny, this deposition is pant of a joint
MR. GOLDMAN: Thank

investigation led by the Intelligence Committee, in coondination with
the Committees on Foneign Affains and Oversight and Refonm. In the
noom

today ane majonity and minonity
UNCLASS

staff

I EIED

fnom

all

thnee committees.

 6

UNCLASS

I FIED

This is a staff-Ied deposition, but

members,

of

counse, may ask

their allotted time, as has been the case in eveny
deposition since the inception of this investigation.
My name is Daniel Goldman. I'm the Dinecton of Investigations
questions duning

for the HPSCI majonity staff.

And

I

want

to do some bnief intnoductions

night now. To my night is Nlcolas Mitche11, Senion Investigative
Counsel

fon HPSCI. Mr. Mitchell will be doing the bulk of the

questioning today fon the majonity.
And

I'11

now ask my countenpants on

the minonity staff to

intnoduce themselves.
MR. CASTOR: Steve Caston, Republican

staff of the

Ovensight

Committee.

I.
MR. GOLDMAN:

unclassified

This deposition

level.

will

Howeven, we ane

in

be conducted

entinely at the

HPSCI secune spaces, and

the pnesence of staff with appropniate secunity cleanances.

in

It is the

committee's expectation that neithen questions asked of you non answens

provided by you

will

requine discussion

of any infonmation that is

at any point, could be pnopenly classified unden
Executive Onder 13526. You ane neminded that E0-13526 states that,
quote, "In no case shall infonmation be classified, continue to be
maintained as classified, on fail to be declassified, " unquote, fon
the purpose of concealing any violations of law on pneventing
cunnently, or

UNCLASS I

FIED

 7

UNCLASS I PIED

of any person on entity.
If any of oun questions can only be answened with classified

embanrassment

information, please infonm us of that
Today's deposition

of the sensitive

because

and matenials

deposition
Unden

the

memben

that

will

House

will

and we

will

adjust accondingly.

is not being taken in executive
and

confidential natune of

be discussed, access

some

of the topics

to the tnanscnipt of the

to the thnee committees in

be limited

session, but

attendance.

deposition nu1es, no Memben of Congness, non any staff

can discuss the substance

of the testimony that

you pnovide

to

neview the

today
You and youn attonney

tnanscnipt

at a laten

Befone we begin,

deposition.

We

will

will

have an oppontunity

date.

I

would

like to

go oven the gnound nules fon

this

be following the House negulations for

depositions, which we have pneviously pnovided to youn counsel.
deposition
houn

to

will

follows:

pnoceed as

The majonity

ask questions. Then the minonity

will

will

The

be given one

be given one houn.

Theneaften, we will aLtennate back and fonth between majority

and

minority in 45-minute rounds until questioning is complete.

will

take periodic bneaks, but
us

if

you need a bneak

at

any

We

time, please Iet

know.

Unden

the

House

deposition nules, counsel fon othen pensons or

govennment agencies may

not attend. You ane allowed to have

attonney pnesent duning this deposition, and
one.
UNCLASS

IEIED

I

see

that

an

you have bnought

 8

UNCLASS

if

At this time,
the

I FIED

counsel could please state his appeanance for

recond.
MR. LEVIN: Daniel Levin.
MR. GOLDMAN:

is

said in onden to

necond

to

is

There

make a

be c1ean, please

a stenognapher

taking down evenything that

wnitten recond of the deposition. Fon the
wait until each question is completed befone

you begin your answen, and we will endeavon

to wait until

you

finish

youn response befone asking the next question.
The stenognaphen cannot necond nonvenbal answens, such as shaking

youn head, so

it is

important that you answen each question with

an

that you give complete neplies to
questions, based on youn best necoltection. If a question is unclean,

audible venbal answen.

on you ane uncentain

in

do not know the answen

We

ask

youn response, please

let

to a question on cannot

us

know.

nememben,

And

if

simply

you
say

so.
You may

only nefuse to

necognized by

answen a

the committee.

the basis of pnivilege, staff

If
may

question to pnesenve a pnivilege

you refuse

to answen a question

on

eithen pnoceed with the deposition

on seek a ruling from the chairman on the

objection. If the

ovennules any such objection, you ane nequined

to

answen

chain

the question.

Finally, you ane'neminded that it is unlawful to delibenately
pnovide false information to Membens of Congness on staff. It is
impenative that you not only answen our questions

tnuthfully, but that

fuI1 and complete answers to all questions asked of
Omissions may also be considened as false statements.
you give

UNCLASS

I EIED

you.

 UNCLAS

As

this deposition is

9

] FIED

under oath, Ms. Coopen, would you please

stand and naise youn night hand
Do you swean on

S

to

be swonn.

affinm that the testimony you ane about to give

is the whole tnuth and nothing but the tnuth?
MS. COOPER: I do.
MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you.

will neflect that the witness has been swonn, and you
may be seated. With that, Ms. Coopen, if you have any opening remanks,
The necond

now would be

the time.

MS. COOPER: Thank

you. I look fonward to

questions. I do not have any opening
MR. GOLDMAN:

I'11

now

answening youn

nemanks.

yield to Mn. Mitchell fon the majonity's

1-houn nound.
EXAMINATION

BY MR. MITCHELL:

a
A

Good
My

aftennoon, ma'am. Would you please state youn tit1e.

title is Deputy Assistant

Secnetany of Defense

for

Russia,

Uknaine, Eunasia.

a

Can you

nesponsibilities

A

My

just genenally

descnibe youn duties and

?

pontfolio spans finst Russia, and the Russia pontfolio

includes cunnent events, cunnent policy towands Russia, as well
long-tenm stnategy on Russia fon the Depantment

I

as

of Defense.

also coven a numben of countnies that ane fonmer states of the

Soviet Union, panticulanly Uknaine, also Geongia.
UNCLASS I

FIED

f also coven

 10

UNCLASS I

FIED

Azenbaijan and Armenia as well as Moldova and Belanus.

Fina1ly, in tenms of the negional pant of
handle the countnies

of the Westenn Balkans.

my

So

pontfolio, I also

this

includes

Bosnia-Henzegovina, Albania, Cnoatia, Serbia, North Macedonia, and

fina11y,

Montenegno, and Kosovo. And then,
anms

I

handle the conventional

for the Department of Defense.
a Today we'ne going to be focusing pnimanily on

contnol pontfolio

Uknaine-nelated

issues.

What pencentage

of youn pontfolio would you

S?y, on how much time do you spend on Ukraine-nelated matters?

A
a

So

I would say it fluctuates

And

oven

time, but

up

to 25 pencent.

within the uknaine pontfolio, in that 25 pencent of the

time, what types of mattens ane you wonking on within

A

So my pnimary

Uknaine?

focus is on building a stnong relationship with

Uknainian Ministny of Defense and Uknainian Anmed Fonces, and building

the capacity of the Ukrainian

Anmed Fonces

aggression. So, aS pant of that,

I

to resist Russian

ovensee DOD's secunity assistance

to Uknaine.
a I think we'ne going to get into more detail duning the counse
of this deposition, but can you just genenally descnibe whethen you
have any intenactions, specifically in connection with the Uknainian
pontfolio, with membens of the Depantment of State?
A Absolutely. I talk with my State Department countenpants
quite fnequently about Uknaine and, realIy, the whole nange of my
portfolio.

a

And what about OMB,

specifically with regand to

UNCLASS I

FIED

Uknaine?

 11

UNCLASS I

A I
counse

FIED

do not noutinely intenact with OMB, although oven the

of the summen, panticipated in a couple of meetings with

penhaps mone than a

couple --

had one phone convensation
summen. But

a

I'd

have

OMB,

to double-check the numben --

with an official

that would not be typical of

What about National Secunity

fnom

my

OMB

oven

this

and

past

position.

Council, again, fon the

Uknaine-nelated mattens?

A

So

fon Uknaine-nelated mattens,

fnequently, at least weekly, with

I cornespond, on speak quite

NSC countenpants.

a And that's a matten of noutine. Is that night?
A That's just noutine.
a And is that because you coondinate with the National Secunity
Council neganding U.S. policy with negand to Uknaine as well as other
geognaphic negions?

A Absolutely.
a What about the Office of the Vice Pnesident?
A It has been quite some time that I have intenacted with the
Office of the Vice President. And it has depended oven time on
panticulan staff

membens and

the Defense Depantment

I actually
months

cannot

is

thein intenest in

my

pontfolio

and what

wonking on.

recall any instances within the past, say,

6

to a yean of dinect intenaction with one penson fnom the Office

of the Vice Pnesident, but it's impontant to note that the Office of
the Vice Pnesident

a

is usually

pnesent

at intenagency policy meetings.

Like the ones that you wene descnibing that took place duning
UNCLASS

I FIED

 L2

UNCLASS I

the

F]ED

of this summen?
A Yes, that is connect.

counse

And, again, we'11 get

a

into

mone

detail a little bit laten.

What about White House counsel?

A I

have not had any

dinect intenactions that

I

can neca1l with

in the foneseeable past, although I would not be
surpnised if they were panticipating, at least by sitting in on some
of these intenagency meetings, but I can't nealIy recall anything that

White House counsel

they've said in these meetings necently.

a And what about dinect contact with Uknainian officials?
A So, I have nelatively fnequent dinect contact with Uknainian
officials. I cochain a Bilatenal Defense Consultation Fonum eveny
yean

to 18 months,

and

in the lead-up to those meetings,

have contacts

with Ministny of Defense officials.

I
When

also tend

they

come

panliamentarians fnom Uknaine.

to Washington, they'11 stop by the

Those ane

a

to neceive visiting

just

Pentagon and see

me.

examples.

And do you have any contacts

with Ukrainian officials about

secunity assistance specifically?

A

With the Ministny

of

Defense, my consultations relate to

setting pnionities fon security assistance and pnogness in
implementing secunity assistance.

I think today we'ne going to focus on two diffenent types
of secunity assistance to Uknaine. The first is the DOD-administened
Uknaine Secunity Assistance Initiative, which I undenstand is USAI,

a

So

UNCLASS I

FIED

 UNCLASS

13

] FIED

as well as the state-administened Foneign Militany Financing, which

is

FMF.

A
a
for

Uh- huh.

Can you

just genenally descnibe those two different

pnognams

us?

A Centainly. I

would

finst stant by, of counse, noting

obvious of the diffenent ovensight

the lead when it

comes

the

authonity. State Depantment is in

to FMF. So for

the Defense

FMF,

Depantment

is

playing an implementing nole and a coondinating nole with nespect to

policy,

whereas

authority.

the Uknaine Secunity Assistance

So we ane

in the lead fon the policy

and the State Depantment

Initiative is

and

DOD

the implementing,

is in a coondinating nole.

authonities alLow us to support Uknainian

a

But both

Anmed Fonces

-- both

in defending

themselves against Russian aggnession.

a

And so what types

of things

does Uknaine get from

secunity assistance? And you can talk about
as

to

it

this

U.S.

both as to USAI as well

FMF.

A Sure. So fon me, I pnobably can't give you a veny
compnehensive list just off the top of my head, and I'm centainly mone
familian with the Uknaine Secunity Assistance Initiative. But just
to give an example of
package

fnom

some

of the things that

we included

in the USAI

fon this yean was a very wide nange of capabilities, nanging

night vision goggles and vehicles to counten-batteny

sniper

nifles.

some examples

Those ane

nadans,

just -- medical equipment. Those ane just

of the kinds of things that
UNCLASS

I EIED

were included

in this year's

 1.4

UNCLAS

Ukraine Secunity Assistance
The most notable item

S

I FIED

Initiative package.

that

we funded thnough FMF

in the necent

past, although this is going back beyond this yean's tnanche of
was

the lavelin anti-anmon system, which

we used FMF

money,

to fund.

a Was that in 2OL7?
A I'd have to double-check the date. I believe it was.
a wene you involved in that FMF funding fon Javelins in 2@77?
A So -- yes. I was involved in the interagency pnocess that
nesulted in the decision and then the implementation of it.
Again, we'lL have mone questions about that

a

1aten.

Do othen

to

Uknaine,

countnies also pnovide economic and secunity assistance

just like the U.S.

A

?

Thene ane

a

numben

of other countnies that pnovide

both

economic and secunity assistance.

A Including the EU?
A I actually am not familian with the EU as an institution,
but a numben of EU memben states, I am familiar with thein panticular
contnibutions. The EU funds tend to be on the economic side;
because

I

and

focus on defense and secunity, I'm Less familian with those.

of assistance provided by the u.s.
Vensus othen Eunopean countnies, for example, are you familian with

a

those

hJhat about

the

amounts

numbens?

A I couldn't give you the specific
U.S. contributions ane fan

countny.

Whethen

mone

numbens, but the

U.S. -- the

significant than any individual

the collective contnibutions outweigh the U.S., I
UNCLASSIFIED

 UNCLASS

15

I FIED

don't have that figune.

a

Now, you

used by Uknaine

A
a
A
able

indicated eanlien that the secunity assistance is

to thwant

Russian aggnession, connect?

Connect.
How

impontant

is

secunity assistance

Secunity assistance

is vital to

to

Uknainians?

helping the Uknainians

be

to defend themselves.

a
A

Can you

WeI1,

if

explain a

little bit

you go back

to

mone?

2@14, when Uknaine found

itself

attack by Russia, the state of the Uknainian

Anmed Fonces was

significantly less capable than it is today,

and

unden

that capability

is largely the nesult of U.S. and allied assistance.
And now what you see is a Uknainian anmed fonce that is able to

incnease

betten deten Russian aggnession, and you've seen a dnop in the kinetic

action, although not -- not a complete lack of hostilities, centainly.
We

still
a

have casualties on
So

a negulan basis.

the secunity assistance that's pnovided by the U.S. is

within the Uknainians' national intenest, obviously. Is that night?

A Absolutely.
a And what about within the U.S. national interest?
A It is also within the U.S. national interest to pnovide
secunity assistance to Uknaine.

a

Given

this is

an unclassified intenview, with that

constnaint in mind, can you explain
secunity intenest

to

pnovide

how

it's within the U.S. national

this aid to Uknaine?

UNCLASS

I EI

ED

 16

UNCLASS

A

I FTED

Uknaine, and also Geongia, ane the two fnont-line states

facing Russian aggression. In onder to deten funthen

to

aggnession, we need

be abte

to

shone up these countnies'

to defend themselves. That's, I think,
behind oun strategy

of

Russian

pune and simple,

supponting these countnies.

abilities

the rationale

It's in oun

interest to deten Russian aggression elsewhere anound the world.
a And would you also agnee that the U.s. security assistance
to Uknaine is also helpful to
any sont

of

Eunope as a whole

with regand to thwarting

Russian aggnession?

A Absolutely.
a In 2OL8 and 20L9, has Uknainian

security assistance neceived

bipantisan suppont?

A It has always neceived bipantisan support, in my expenience.
a And that's both in the House and the Senate?
A Absolutely, in my exPerience.
a And what about at the intenagency leveI?
A I have witnessed, even in the necent past, ovenwhelming
consensus

a

in

of

favon

And when you say

the counse of this

A
a
mattens

pnoviding Uknaine secunity assistance.

"within the necent pastr " you mean even

oven

yean?

Even oven

the course of the

Can you descnibe

summen.

your own involvement in USAI and

FMF

?

A Sure. I

mean,

I think the finst pant is with the pnocess

of defining what the nequinements are for the Uknainian Anmed Fonces,
UNCLASS I

FIED

 UNCLASS

and looking

at what authonities

t7

] FIED

and what nesounces we can use

to suppont

those nequinements.

field, fnom Eunopean
Command, and fnom our team at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv as to the
So, in my role, I'm receiving input fnom the

nequinements; and then,

I

am

ovenseeing a team

a package packages, neally

via

-- to

Uknaine Secunity Assistance

suppont

that's putting
thein

needs

togethen

via

FMF and

Initiative.

I delve into much gneaten detail with nespect to Uknaine Secunity
Assistance Initiative than I do with FMF, because of my nesponsibility
as a defense official.
MR. HECK: Mn.

Mitchell, on behalf of the eldenly at this

end

of

I nespectfully nequest you both eat
youn mics? We'ne nea1ly having difficulty heaning.
MS. COOPER: This is betten? I apologize.

the table, myself included, could

BY MR. MITCHELL:

a

But with negand to FMF, you also have some exposune and

of that pnognam as we}I,
nesponsibilities at DOD?
knowledge

A Absolutely.
a In layman's

Ievel

all

based on youn nole and

at a high leve}, can you
milestones for USAI funding fnom

tenms and penhaps

genenally descnibe the nelevant
appnopniation

some

the way thnough to obligation of the funds, at a high

?

A Centainly. I will attempt to do so.
ane two pieces

Because USAI

that I'11 discuss, the conditionality piece,
UNCLASS

I EIED

--

thene

and the

 18

F]ED

UNCLASS I

actual allocation of
The

nesounces.

conditionality piece nelates to the

NDAA

pnovision that

that half of the funding be conditioned on Uknaine making
sufficient pnogness in defense nefonms. So that pant of the process

nequires

involves my office veny closeIy.

At the beginning of the year,

will

be neceiving, we take stock

a set of cnitenia that

we want

when we know how much

funding

we

of Uknaine's nefonm needs, and develop

to

use

to gauge progness in

defense

nefonm.

Last year,

I

delivened that set of bnoad cniteria to the Uknaine

in December, when I visited them.
a So this is aften Congness has done the -A This is aften.

Defense Ministny

authorization and the appnopriation, connect?

a

MR. LEVIN: Let him

finish the question.

BY MR. MITCHELL:

a

So

the funds,

A
So

this is aften

Congness has authonized and appnopriated

connect?

Cornect, connect.

at that point,

we convey

to the Uknainians

oun expectations

fon nefonm, and we suppont them in the nefonm process, so that later

in the yean we will

a
Is that

A

So

be able

to centify the nefonms.

there is engagement with the Ukrainians during this stage.

connect?

Yes, there

is

engagement

with the Uknainians thnoughout this

UNCLASS I

FlED

 19

UNCLAS

S

I EIED

stage.

a Is thene also --

ane thene

also intenagency meetings

hene

in the United States duning this phase as well?
A Yes. And if I could conrect the notion of a phase, these
ane neally pana11e1 pnocesses, but they occun over the span of the
entine yean. So we'ne having convensations intennal to the

Defense

Depantment with the Uknainians and acnoss the intenagency about defense

refonm, and about what oun expectations ane fon pnogness
nefonm fnom the moment

Iast year it
we

was

in

that

we

Decemben

sufficient

defense

outline those conditions - - in this case,

-- all

the way thnough to the point that

actually centify to the U.S. Congness that

made

in

we believe Uknaine has

pnogress.

So we discuss oun assessment

of pnogness. We discuss what the

conditions should be, and then we discuss what the assessment of
pnogness

is intennal to the Defense Depantment, but also with oun

intenagency colleagues.
And

then, in panallel with that,

we wonk

the actual pnocess of

identifying the specific equipment requinements
needs.

And when we ane prepaned

and

with the pnecise packages, we notify

the U.S. Congress, and we do that in two tnanches,

conditionality
So

the

specific funding

because

of

the

nequinement.

finst tnanche, this

past yean, we notified in the spning,

I can't neca1l the exact date off the top of my head; and then the second
tranche was notified in May.

a

And

the notification process that you're describing, these
UNCLASS I

FIED

 20

UNCLASSIETED

ane Congnessional
connect

Notifications, also

sometimes

called CNs. Is that

?

A Yes.
a Does DOD give the CN to OMB befone it goes to Congness?
A No. Thene's a diffenent pnocess fon DOD than thene is fon
State with the

a
A

FMF pnocess.

Can you descnibe

that diffenence?

So State Depantment

--

Depantment cotleagues and fnom
has

to

appnove

my undenstanding fnom State

this past summen is that OMB actually

the Congnessional Notification befone

it

comes oven

to

the Hil1.

is not the case fon Uknaine Secunity Assistance Initiative.
We certainly coondinated this conditionality defense nefonm language
That

and

the assistance content with oun intenagency colleagues, but thene

was no nequirement

through

fon

DOD

to

nun

the Congnessional Notification

OMB.

a A11 night. So once DOD gives the CN to Congness, is thene
a -- it sounds like you want to say something.
A State Depantment. 0h, once DOD gives the USAI?
a Cornect.
A Okay.
a Once DOD gives USAI CN to Congness, what happens next?
A We11, thene's a panticulan waiting peniod. I want to say
15 days, but you may connect me if I have that wnong. And then we ane
able

to obligate funding aften that peniod of
UNCLASS

I FIED

time.

 UNCLASS

2t

IF]ED

In the case of this past yean, I necall that for the late May
notification of tnanche two, HAC-D had some questions. I don't
nememben

some

the exact natune of the questions, but

I

nememben

they

had

questions. So it kind of -- it took us past that 15-day mank.

But aften that point, we were able to go ahead and stant obligating
funding.

a I think, again, we'11 get into some detail as to what happened
of 2@L9, but
MR. ROY: May I ask, who had questions ? I didn 't

duning the counse

undenstand

that

acnonym.

MR. MITCHELL: HAC-D.

MR. ROY:

0h, thanks.

I didn't

hean you.

BY MR. MITCHELL:

a

So

after the

15 days have elapsed on Congness gneen

lights

on cleans the CN, what happens aften that?

A

The Defense Department stants

to obligate funding,

and

that's the punview - - the lead fon that is Defense Secunity Coopenation
Agency.

a Ane you involved in that process?
A I am a step nemoved fnom the actual pnocess of obligating
funding.

a
A
a

And

OMB

does appontionments as

well. Is that night?

That is connect.
And what do you know about OMB's nofe

apportionments

?

UNCLASS

I EI

ED

in

doing

 22

UNCLASS

I F]ED

until this past summen, I didn't know anything about
it, but I will -- I can say that my undenstanding as a policy
official -- and f'm not a comptnoller -- is that OMB essentially gives

A

Well

penmission fon the flow

guidance about

a
funds,

A
a

and can pnovide, you know,

needs

DOD

can put moneys onto contnact or obligate the

to do an appontionment?

That is my undenstanding.
Now, you mentioned, duning

this

peniod pnion

thene's a Iot of work that's done on youn end to

is

specific

that flow of funding.

So befone

OMB

of funding

institutional

meeting the various

make sune

to the CN,
that

Uknaine

nequinements, nefonm

nequinements. Can you descnibe what those are?

A Yes. I want to emphasize that, fnom my penspective as a DOD
official managing Uknaine security assistance, we appneciate the
pnovision in the NDAA that ca1ls fon defense reform progress, and it
al1ows us

to

have a veny

pnactical tool to encourage defense nefonm.

in the NDAA is not specific to exact refonms that
must be accomplished but, nathen, is a bnoad call for refonm. So we
The language

e1ect, intennal to the Defense Depantment and in consultation with
intenagency colleagues,

to

come up

with loose

benchmanks

that

we can

then describe to the Uknainian Ministny of Defense and moniton pnogress
toward.

In the past yean, the

will

benchmanks were

different from what they

be fon the next yean, because we'ne always looking

next impontant set

of

refonms would be.
UNCLASS I

FlED

at

vilhat the

 23

UNCLASS

So

I

can give you a quick

at a few things.
nefonm.

We wene

neform.

We

We wene

I EIED

example. This past year,

looking at pnogness on

we wene

looking

command and

contnol

looking at a commitment to punsue defense industny
looking to the Uknainian Govennment to pass a law that

wene

would enable govennment-to-government pnocunement. This would enable

them

to

use oun

FMS

system. And these ane examples of

some

of

the

benchmanks.

The year befone,
them

to codify in

1aw,

it

had

just

categony.

We wanted

thein }aw on national secunity, the key nefonms

that they would need to take to
So each yean

been one bnoad

become NATO

intenoperable.

it's diffenent, depending on what we think ane the

most impontant steps, but also the most practical steps

to

advance

nefonm.

a
A

Wene

there anticonnuption

benchmanks

within the last

yean?

all of these nelate to anticornuption. Thank you fon
naising that. The FMS 1aw, as we loosely calI it, the 1aw that allows
them to do govennment-to-government procunement, will enable
significant anticonruption effonts, because it will bneak the
So

stranglehold that Uknobononprom has on govennment pnocunement

and

allow fon a tnuly competitive envinonment fon govennment punchases.
So

that's

one example

of

how

these neforms ane intninsic with

anticonnuption.
MR. SWALWELL: Do you mind

spelling that?

MS. COOPER: Uknobononprom? Okay,
MR. MITCHELL: Usual spel1ing.
UNCLASS I

FIED

let

me

wnite

it

down.

 UNCLASS I

MS. COOPER:
U

-

Okay.

Sometimes

24

FIED

it's called UOP fon short. It's

k- n-o- b- o- n-o- n - p - n-o- m.
BY MR. MITCHELL:

a
A

And who detenmines whethen these benchmanks have been met?

by a numben
judgment

that is a question for intenagency

So

of things, to include

of the U.S.

Embassy team,

assessment infonmed

my own judgment,

to

include the

to include the judgment of

oun key

advisens on defense nefonm. Genenal Dayton, netired Genenal Dayton,

is

oun senion advisen on defense nefonm.
So we'ne

pulling in all the views of the key experts on Uknaine

defense, and coming up with a consensus view, and then we nun that

the chain in the Defense Department, to ensure

in this case, in

May

of this yean, it

we have

appnoval.

was Unden Secnetany

of

up

And

Defense

fon Policy, John Rood, who pnovided the centification to Congness, but

that

was

aften coondination with the State

Department.

that you'ne descnibing ultimately
nesults in the centification and the CN that was by John Rood this yean.
But pnion to that, is thene memonialization of how Uknaine has met the

a

So

the

consensus view

vanious diffenent benchmanks when you

A

The

float it

up the chain?

only memonialization that I'm necaLling at this

moment

is, in fact, the package fon the Congnessional
Notification, although it's fain to say on each of these individual

that is in

one document

nefonms, we have a
and

lot of connespondence

back and fonth with the

field

within the intenagency about progness thnoughout the counse of the

yean.
UNCLASS

I FIED

 25

IF]ED

UNCLASS

in

a
A

And how long have you pensonally been involved

a

So since 20L6, during youn tenune, has Ukraine always met

I took my position as pnincipal
Russia, Ukraine, Eunasia Office back in 2@16.
Since

the nequined

benchmanks

in

onden

to

USAI?

dinecton fon the

neceive USAI funds?

A Yes. tnJe'ne only talking about 2 years, though.
a And would you agnee or disagnee that Uknaine has genenally
made fonward pnogness,

again, oven the course of youn tenune

when you

have been monitoring these benchmanks?

A Yes. I see significant fonward pnogness.
a Now, you mentioned that USAI funds come in two diffenent
tnanches. Is that night?

A

That is connect, although we divide

tnanches, based on a

it into

two diffenent

of pnactical considenations.

numben

long lead time for centain equipment

One

is the

items. So the items that we notify

eanlier in the yean tend to be those that have a veny long lead time
fon actually getting them on contract.
And

the othen is because of this conditionality pnovision,

to allow the yean to play out
neforms befone we come back

so

that

Uknaine can continue

to

we want

make these

with the second notification.

a What do you mean by items that nequine significant lead time?
A I am not a pnocunement expent, but my - - the advice that I
have neceived fnom Defense Secunity Coopenation Agency is that, you
know, some items, panticulanly those

Javelin, fon instance, that

that

ane highen technology

was something
UNCLASS I

FIED

that

was pnocuned

--

the

via FMF,

 26

FIED

UNCLASS I

to take advantage of that longen lead time.

So

I think it

depends on

the specific contnacting pnocess.
IMajority Exhibit No. \
was manked

for identification.l

BY MR. MITCHELL:

1. It's a multipage document,
but I'm neally only going to focus on the finst page hene. Do you
I'm going to

a

hand you

this document?
A Yes. I think it's
Notification. Yes.

exhibit

recognize

our

finst -- it's

oun

finst

Congnessional

a And what's the date of this panticulan CN?
A WeIl, strangely, it has two -- it has two dates on it,
I'm not sune which is the authonitative

it

was, you know, closen

to March,

date.

My

so

necollection is that

but

a

And those two dates are Febnuany

A
a

Yes,

A
a

Yes,

28th, 20L9' and Manch 5th,

20L9?

that is correct,

And wene you involved

on the document anyway.

in putting togethen this

panticular

CN?

conrect

And

I

appnoved

this is

it

on

its

waY uP.

signed by Unden Secretany of Defense lohn Rood,

?

A
a
package

Connect.
What was

his nole in

pnepaning on evaluating

that goes behind it?
UNCLASS I

FIED

the CN and the

 27

UNCLASS

A

So, as the

necommendations

on

final

] F]ED

signatune authonity, he neviewed the

of his staff,

and

I

would be one

of his

key advisers

this.

a

Acting Assistant Under Secnetany

Wheelbargen, what

is

A I'I1 just
Secnetany

of

Defense Katie

hen nole?

It's the Acting Assistant
of Defense fon Intennational Secunity Affains. She is the
connect hen tit1e.

official in the chain of command in between me and Unden Secnetany Rood.
Now, thene is also a Deputy Unden Secnetany of Defense fon Policy who
is ln between ASD Wheelbangen and Unden Secnetany Rood.
that penson's name?
We1}, that position is in an acting capacity night now.

a
A

And what's

the most of the past year, that position
Trachtenbeng, the

DUSDP

Fon

was occupied by David

position.

Ms. Wheelbangen's nole with negard to this

a

And what was

A

So, the nonmal pnocedune would have been fon hen to neview

Manch

CN?

this

on

its

way

whethen she,

to Unden Secnetany Rood. I can't tell

in fact,

neviewed a number

a

And

Congness

fon the

this exact package, but she, you know,

of Uknaine-nelated

actions.

eanlien, you indicated thene was a 15-day window fon

to act.

Manch

neviewed

you fon centain

Do you know what happened duning

that 15-day window

CN?

A I cannot necall anything significant.
a So, to the best of youn necollection, that
UNCLASSIF]ED

 28

UNCLASSIEIED

A That's just my necollection.
a So, to the best of youn recollection, the CN was cleaned by
Congne

ss?

A

--

That was

faulty - - the only

so as

I necall it --

again,

my memony

could

questions that we neceived that caused a delay

be

wene

for the May notification. This one, I don't recalI any specific
questions, but thene could have been.

a

Ane you awane

elections

that thene was the finst

nound

of Pnesidential

in Uknaine at the end of Manch of 2Ot9?

A

Abso1utely.

a

Do you know whethen those Pnesidential

the cleaning of this

Manch

elections affected

CN?

A I do not necall anyactual hindnance

and, you know, that

-- I

just don't necall any.
Of course, the othen thing
we wene

on

would say

is,

you know,

at the time

pnetty focused on the elections themselves, not necessanily

this.
A

So

I'm not

I'm just not sune.

Do you know whethen

onto contnact with negand to

A
a
A

I

We11,

ultimately,

Pnion

to

the Depantment of Defense put any funds

this finst

tnanche?

yes.

Septemben

of this

Yean?

I don't have the specific infonmation
on each case and when each case was obligated. AII I can say is my
undenstanding is that by -- by July timeframe we had stanted to
obligate, but I don't know which specific items. And
Pnion

to

Septemben?

UNCLASS

I FIED

 29

UNCLASS

a

So those

T

EIED

obligations could have gone to the finst

tnanche

on the second tnanche?

A At my 1evel, you know, I pensonally was not tnacking exactly
which item was obligated. I was merely looking fon pnogness, and the
that

assunance

the fiscal

we would be able

to obligate evenything by the

yean.

And do you know how much money had been

a

July time peniod, whethen it's the finst on the

A I don't. It wasn't

obligated by this

second tnanche?

veny much, though.

I

again, because the process fon obligating funding,
of it

end of

fnom oun expents

know

that

much,

my undenstanding

is that it just takes quite some time.

So because

the eanlien notification, this notification neflected a lot of long
lead time items, they wene only

just stanting to

be

in the window in

which we'd be obligating by midsummen.

a
does

Now, you

indicated, I believe eanlien, that the finst tnanche

not nequire the certification fon the benchmarks. Is that

connect

?

A
we decided

is to centify half. So it -- you know,
to pnesent a notification of half, and then wait to centify

So

the

nequinement

the pnogress for the second half.
I'm tnying to be caneful to not mischanactenize the actual
pnovision, but, you know, I tnust that

we

can refen to

that specifically

as needed.

IMajonity Exhibit No.
was manked
UNCLASS

2

fon identification. l
I FIED

NDAA

 30

UNCLASS

I FIED

BY MR. MITCHELL:

a I'm going to hand you exhibit 2.
document

this

?

I

A

Yes,

a
A

And what
So

document

do.

is it?

this is the second notification

that, you know -- that

sufficient

pnogness on defense

certification

document, and

this is the

descnibes the centification of

refonm.

the specific equipment items, this

a
A

Do you necognize

So

in addition to notifying

document

also descnibes the

pnocess.

Can you

point us to that centification in this

document?

if you if you look at the bottom panagnaph, that
descnibes it says, "the pnimany methodology used to infonm this
centification. " That paragnaph gives you a mone detailed backgnound
on what I descnibed to you eanlien.
And at the veny top of the letten, it outlines that the govennment
So

of Ukraine has taken substantial actions to
nefonms

fon the

punpose

of decreasing

accountability, and sustaining
And

make defense

institutional

connuption, incneasing

improvements

of

combat

capability.

that is the cnux of the centification night thene.
a And you just quoted from the veny finst sentence of this

lette

n?

A I did. If

you look

at the finst sentence

and then you look

at the bottom paragnaph, togethen that's kind of the discussion
centification.
UNCLASS I

FIED

about

 UNCLASS

a

And you

31
ED

indicated that the Depantment of State played

coondinating nole with regard

A
a

I FI

to USAI. Is that

that is connect.
So would this centification

a

conrect?

Yes,

in

have been done

coondination

with the Secnetany of State as well?

A f

it with the State
Depantment, but I do not know which official -- which official at the
State Department coondinated. It was in coondination with the
can

te1I you that

we coondinated

of State.
But just as Unden Secnetany Rood was signing fon the Secnetany

Secnetany

of Defense, I just don't

know

if it

was Secnetany Pompeo on

if it

was

official who had been delegated the nesponsibility.
a A11 night. But suffice to say that this centification
memonializes that Uknaine had met all the necessany anticonnuption
an

nequinements as
unden U.S. Iaw

well as othen benchmanks that you descnibed eanlien

in order to obtain this

second tnanche

of USAI funding?

A That is connect.
a And what was the total amount of the two tnanches?
A The total amount was 250.
a $250 million?
A Yes. I'm sonny.
a Now, you indicated that thene may have been some delay with
regand

to the

A
a

15-day cleaning peniod.

Is that

night?

That is my necollection.
But it eventually was cleaned by
UNCLASS I

FIED

Congness?

 32

UNCLAS

A It
it

was

S

I FIED

eventually cleaned. And by mid June, we had announced

and wene moving out on

it.

a Okay. And when you say, "by mid June, we had announced it,
ane you nefenning

"

to the lune 18th public release by the Depantment

of Defense?

A

That is exactly what I'm neferning

a

Wene

nelease

in

you involved,

any way,

to.

Thank you.

in the issuance of that public

?

A Yes. I coordinated on the content of it.
a And when you say "coondinated on the content, " does that
mean -- what does that mean?
A So that means so in this case, I believe that my staff
helped dnaft it, in consultation with our public affains staff. Then
they provided me with the dnaft fon neview, and I appnoved it.
a

And

that

nelease essentially said

Defense was planning on pnoviding $250

that the

Depantment of

million to Uknaine in secunity

coopenation funds fon tnaining, equipment, and advisony effonts to

build the capacity of Uknaine's

Armed

Forces. Is that consistent with

your recollection of the nelease?

A
a

That would be the
And what was

nelease on June

A

t8th

the -- I guess, what was the effect of this

bY

DOD?

Well, one effect

Govennment thanked us

gist of it.

was

that the Uknaine

fon making that

Embassy and

public.

the Uknaine

They had been looking

fon a public acknowledgement of the assistance, not because this
UNCLASS I

FIED

was

 UNCLASS

unusual, just they appreciate

of

it

33

I FIED

when

allies publicly

note what kind

suppont we're pnoviding Uknaine.
So

that

was an immediate

neaction.

We

got a thank you phone call

staff did, anyway -- fnom the Uknaine Embassy; and oun
team in Kyiv, in the Defense Attache Office, heand appneciation.
the --

fnom

my

But the second potential effect

I

am

speculating hene

fnom my chain

of

believe,

the

fnom

-

--

and

I

want

- was that a few days laten,

command fonwanded down fnom

Depantment

of Defense,

to

we

be clean that

got a question

the chief of staff, I

asking fon follow-up on

a

meeting with the President.

it said, there ane thnee questions. I

And

think

it

was thnee

believe

it

was

-- I

questions fon follow-up fnom this meeting, no funthen

infonmation on what the meeting was.
And

the one question was nelated to U.S.

U.S. industny pnoviding any of
The second question

this

industny.

Did U.S.

-- is

equipment?

that I necall

was nelated

to intennational

contnibutions. It asked, what ane othen countnies doing,

something

to that effect.

I don't necalL -- I mean, with any
of these I don't necaLl the exact wonding, but it was something to the
effect of, you know, who gave this money, on who gave this funding?
And then

the thind question,

So when my office nesponded

to these questions,

we speculated

that

perhaps someone in the White House had seen oun pness nelease and then
seen an

that

anticle that

came

came

out aften the pness nelease.

And

the anticle

out aftenwards had a headline that could have been a
UNCLASS

I FIED

little

 UNCLASS ]

bit

misleading, because the headline said something

U.S. gives

is

34

F]ED

25O

million to Ukraine,

equipment and

it's,

something

Iike, you know,

that didn't explain this

you know, U.S. industny and

all that

sont of

thing.
So, again,

I'fi

speculating hene a little

bit, but we did get that

senies of questions just within a few days after the pness release and

after that one anticle that had the headline.
a Who was this email fnom? You mentioned the chief of staff.
A yes. It came through a numben of people befone it neached
my desk. I don't recall exactly how many people. But it came fnom
the chief of staff to the Secnetary of Defense, in oun building, anyway.

a

And pnion

to

office

youn

nesponding

to these series of

questions, did you seek any furthen clanity on who was asking these
questions on what these questions were about?

A
offices,
Did

this

nobody

So

I think we asked.

You know, we asked oun vanious fnont

do you have any mone insight? Do you have any mone detail?
come fnom

that

news

anticle?

that we spoke with --

is just front office staff
pnincipals.

and

it

You know, we kind

was

as opposed

No one had any

-- to my necollection, this

to

additional

convensations

insight.

to that email with some fact
a Was thene a response to youn nesponse?

dutifully

responded

A I neven neceived a nesponse.
a Pnion to the issuance of this
thene any talk

of asked, but

lune 18th

among

So we, you know,

sheets.

DOD

statement,

of a potential hold on USAI on FMF funding?
UNCLASS

IFIED

was

 UNCLAS

A No.
talk

just to

And

on on about June 18th

be

and, frankly,

a
popped

in

just

moved on

cIear, I'm not suggesting that thene
A11

that I received at

and then we nesponded

with the

So when you neceived those

youn mind was not

35

I F]ED

of a ho1d.

that senies of questions,

was

S

that this

was

my leve1

to those questions

nonmal pnocess.

questions, the
was a

first thing that

potential hold coming down

the pike?

A Not at all.
a Okay. When you said chief of staff,
that

what did you mean by

?

A
office.
a

Thene's a position

in the Secnetary of Defense's front

Enic Chewning is the cunnent incumbent.
But you indicated that you thought

White House. Did

I

this

mishean you?

A No. The way the email was phnased, it
POTUS

might come fnom the

said follow-up

fnom

meeting, so follow-up fnom a meeting with the Pnesident.

you know, I'm thinking

that the questions

I

So,

wene pnobably questions from

that subject 1ine.
a Did you even get any mone clanity on what this POTUS meeting

the Pnesident. That's

was

how

intenpneted

?

A I neven did.
a This nesponse that you sent back, this email, how was it
communicated back to the White House, if you know?
A I do not know how it was communicated back to the White House.
a So when was the finst time that you leanned that there was
UNCLASSIFIED

 UNCLASS I

36

F]ED

a hold on USAI funds?
THE CHAIRMAN:

WeII, fon clanity, so you get this email. And I

think we've talked about two diffenent chiefs of staff, which might

bit confusing. There's the chief of staff at the Defense
Depantment and then thene's a chief of staff of the Pnesident.
be a

MS. COOPER:

YCS.

THE CHAIRMAN:

Did the emails seem to oniginate fnom the chief

of staff of the Pnesident?
MS. COOPER: No, sin. The email oniginated fnom the chief of
staff to the Secnetany of Defense, but it
THE CHAIRMAN: Chief of staff of the Pnesident on chief of staff
of the Defense Depantment?
MS. COOPER: 0f the Defense Depantment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Okay.

MS. COOPER: But

it did nefen to follow-up fnom a meeting with

the Pnesident.
THE CHAIRMAN: So somebody had

House

to

communicate fnom

the White

to the chief of staff of the Defense Depantment?
MS. COOPER: Yes, on someone would have

to

have been

in

a meeting

with the Pnesident and come out of that meeting and told the chief of

staff to the Defense Depantment,

of that

hene are some questions

that

came out

meeting.

I think you gave us youn best necollection of
the questions. Can you tell us what youn answens wene?
MS. COOPER: Yes, sir, but only partially, because I just -- it
THE CHAIRMAN: And

UNCLASSI FIED

 was a volume

of infonmation that

37

FIED

UNCLASS I

pnovided, so

we

I

simply don't recaLL.

But in tenms of U.S. industny, what we wene able to delineate in

caneful detail, wonking with the Defense Secunity Coopenation Agency,
was

that,

you know, the vast majonity

of

companies

equipment unden the Uknaine Secunity Assistance

that

ane pnoviding

fnitiative

ane U.S.

companies. So we wene able to give a list of U.S. companies that are

in this.

involved
And

of this

in terms of bunden-shaning,

gnoup

of five nations that

Commission, co-chained by

EUCOM

we wene

fonms

and

able to highlight the nole

the Multinational Joint

the Uknainians, but with the

panticipation of the U.K., Canada, Lithuania, Poland, and I'm

sonny,

I fonget -- oh, the United States. We'ne the fifth.
this panticulan gnoup, not only do the countnies in this
group panticipate in the pnocess of identifying requinements fon
And so

Uknaine secunity assistance, each

individual countny is contributing

tnaining on equipment to the Uknainian
So

in this panticulan fact sheet,

Anmed Fonces.

we wene

able to describe that.

I don't necaLl the specific content that we pnovided nelated to bnoaden
assistance beyond that specific secunity assistance domain.
THE CHAIRMAN: And

I'm sonny, what

was

the thind question that

you received?
MS. COOPER: So

the question was -- this is the one that

was the

tnickiest fon me to nememben the phnasing, because it was kind of
stnange phrasing. It was something along the lines of who pnovided

this funding, on where did this funding come fnom? So, fon that,
UNCLASS

I FIED

we

 UNCLASS

just

38

I FIED

that this was, you know, supponted -- this

answened

was pnovided

by the U.S. Congress and that USAI has stnong bipantisan support.
you sent back

THE CHAIRMAN: And when

all the answers to these

three questions, yoU got no nesponse?
MS. COOPER: That

is

THE CHAIRMAN: And

going

to

you had no neason to believe that thene

be a hold on the funding, but you obviously responded

questions

was

to the

anyway?

MS. COOPER:
nespond

connect.

Absolutely,

to any question that

sin. It

would be noutine

comes down fnom

for

the Secnetary,

us to
and

centainly any question that would come down fnom the Pnesident. That's

nelatively unusual, and we always respond as quickly as we can.
THE CHAIRMAN: Back

to

Mn. Noble

-- Mitchell.

BY MR. MITCHELL:

a This nesponse that you pnovided, was it by email?
A The response to these questions fnom follow-up fnom the
meeting? Yes, it was via email.
a
A
a

And wene

Yes, sir.
Have you

be nesponsive

A

there also attachments to that email?

So

recently been asked to gather documents that

to a congnessional

the

way

that the

may

subpoena?

Depantment

of Defense is

handling the

nequests fon infonmation, both fon the subpoena but also a numben of

of Infonmation Act nequests, as I have seen it
sit, is to have the loint Senvice Pnovider, we caII it
Fneedom

UNCLASS

I FlED

fnom whene

I

JSP, our IT

 39

UNCLASS

I FIED

pnofessionals, do a document puIl.
So we have been asked

of

oun documents are

anymone

of anything.

documents behind

to not

nemove

electnonic.
5o the

anything.

We keep

The vast

majority

almost no papen reconds

fact that the IT staff are pulling these

the scenes means that

we as

individuals, on I

pensonally, have not had to take any specific action.
Without getting

a
had

into

any communications

that you may have

with youn attonney on this topic, pnior to you coming in today,

did you neview any documents that might be nelevant to youn testimony?

A Yes. I

nefneshed my memony on some pnion emails.

a Okay. And was the email that you just descnibed nesponding
to these questions

A
a

one

of the emails that you neviewed?

it was.
So it is -- that email is still in existence,

Yes,

understand

?

A Absolutely. ft's

my

Defense documents should be

a
came

as fan as you

Now, you

belief that all of the

Depantment

of

still in existence.

indicated that the nequest, these thnee questions

of days, I believe, aften this lune 18th DOD
Is that night?

about a couple

announcement.

A It
within

a

was shontly

week.

but within a

So

theneaften. I would say it

was pnobably

I can't -- that I'm not sune of the exact timefname,

week.

a Okay. And can you necall approximately when the response
was sent back?
UNCLASS

] FIED

 UNCLASS

A It
can't te11

40

I FIED

centainly would have been within a week, but

you the exact

I can't -- I

date, but we nonmally ane requined to

respond

very napidly to questions fnom the Secnetary on the President.

a So IikeIy sometime between lune L8th and the end of lune?
A Yes, that's my necollection.
a Okay. When did you finst leann that USAI funds wene
potentially going to be held?

A

So

I

pnobably

finst

leanned

in the middle of Ju1y.

Thene

to. It
was a noutine Uknaine policy meeting. And the penson chaining it, it

was

a meeting, an intenagency meeting that

was

the dinecton fon Uknaine at the

I

NSC,

I

sent my deputy

not the senior dinecton.

sent my deputy.
And

I necall that after that meeting --

got a neadout fnom the meeting
about

--

and

I got, you know, I

the -- about OMB saying that they wene holding the Congnessional

necall,
we

was something we were

-- I

say

"we."

subsequently tnied
guidance being

So

And

was mone bnoadly

that the guidance

tnied to clanify, thene's

connect?

in the meeting,

to clanify, a statement about,

it

applicable,

DOD

thene was guidance that was broadly applicable
UNCLASS I

FIED

because

was

the phnase

applicable.

at this

we wene concenned, because

of,

you know, the

was mone bnoadly

no guidance fon

out, as I

and my staff

they did not have specific guidance for

at that point,

came

tnying to panse the meaning

My deputy heand

to hold --

nemember heaning,

we

in that session

thene was discussion

Notification nelated to FMF. And the language that

I

So

But

time. Is this

DOD

at the time.

this notion that

to Uknaine

secunity

 41.

UNCLASS

I FIED

assistance was a sounce of concenn, but the only specific was nelated

to that

Congressional Notification fon

FMF.

UNCLASS]FIED

 UNCLAS

S

42

] FIED

[3:58 p.m.]
BY MR. MITCHELL:

A

And who was

the deputy that you sent in youn stead?

, she's my pnincipal

A

dinecton.

a Okay. And was this the July 18th sub PCC?
A That's connect.
a But you did not panticiPate
A I did not panticipate -- ho, I panticipated in the subsequent
meetings, but not that one.

a Okay. But you indicated that you saw a readout of it?
A Yes, that's conrect.
a Whene did that neadout come from?
A So fon most of these meetings there ane two neadouts. One
is the readout that the penson who is attending the meeting
So we

noutinely memorialize

all

pnepanes.

of our wnitten notes into an electnonic

that

neadout fnom my staff. And then the other

neadout fnom these meetings

is the summary of conclusions that the NSC

necord.

staff

So

I

neceived

pnepanes, and

it

usually

comes

out a bit laten aften the meeting.

a Okay. That's also known as a SOC?
A Conrect.
a Okay. Did you see both this neadout fnom
as the

as well

SOC?

A

Yes, that's connect.

a Okay. Was there any discnepancies between the two?
A WeI1, the NSC summany of conclusions is typically much less
UNCLASS

I FIED

 43

UNCLASS

I FIED

detailed than, you know, the notes that
lack of connesponding detail, but

we

memonialize.

So thene was

I did not see any that I necaIl,

any

substantlve discnepancies.

a Okay.

Have you looked

at these two specific

documents in

pnepanation fon your testimony hene today?

A YeS.
a Okay. Do they stil1 exist as well?
A Yes.
a Okay. What fonm ane the notes that Ms. Sendak took? In
othen wonds, ane they in a memo, on an email, handwnitten?
A They ane in an emai1. And that's oun routine pnactice fnom
all of oun key meetings, whethen they be intennal, on with foneign
pantnens, on with intenagency, we wnite up a summary and we email it
to the pentinent people in the office and if appnopniate we send it
up the chain.

a Okay. And did the summany that you nead, as well as the SOC,
mention OMB's statement about the hold on

A It

descnibed something along those

necall the exact wonding.
OMB,

it

FMF?

And

lines, but I -- I don't

I'm not sune -- I'm not sune it said

might have said something that was mone just thene

is, you know,

a hold.

a Okay. Well based on youn convensations

with people who wene

actually in the noom, do you know who made that statement at this July
18th sub

A

PCC?

So my undenstanding

is it

was an

UNCLASS] FIED

OMB

nepnesentative, but

I

 44

UNCLASS I

don't

F]ED

know who.

a Okay. Do you know who chained that meeting?
A Since I wasn't thene, I don't want to give you absolute
centainty, but typically the sub PCC would
and

in this

case

be chained by the dinecton

that's Alex Vindman.

a Was thene any other DOD nepnesentative at this meeting?
A I'm not sune. Routinely we have a joint staff
nepnesentative, but I'm not sune if there was one at this particulan
meeting.

a Okay.

Now

you indicated thene was some, that thene

confusion on youn pant as to what effect

this hold might

was

have on USAI?

A Yes, that's conrect.
a And you sought funthen clanification on youn staff dld?
A Yes.
a Following this meeting?
A Yes. And they didn't neally neceive clanification.
a Okay. Who did they seek clanification fnom?
A I don't know fon sune, but I believe NSC staff, wene the
pnimany

with

conduit, because we don't have noutine countenpant intenaction

OMB

dinectly.

a Okay.

Based on youn review

of the

summany and

the

SOC, was

luly 18th meeting?
A I don't recall any neason being provided at the July 18th

thene any neason pnovided fon the hold duning that

meeting.

a Okay. And similanly duning your follow-up it
UNCLASS

IFIED

sounds

like

 UNCLASS

45

I FIED

no neason was pnovided then eithen?

A No.

Although veny quickly, thene was a meeting at the next

Ievel up whene we had anothen discussion about security assistance.

a Okay. And that's the July 23nd, PCC meeting?
A That's conrect.
a I think my time is up. So we'LL stop thene and I will yie1d.
THE CHAIRMAN: t houn to majonity -- minority, excuse me.
BY MR. CASTOR:

a
A
a
A

Was

this

May

I

extnemely unusual?

ask fon

clanification?

The funds were held
So

summer was

the

way

What aspect?

without explanation.

the pnocess played out oven the

counse

A
a
A
a
A

the

veny --

a No. I'm just talking about the 7/!8 meeting.
A It was unusuaL.
a Okay. And wene you unable to get any additional
fnom NSC

of

infonmation

-No.

shontly after the meeting?
No, we did not get clanification.
What
We

did you do to tny to get that clanification?

called around to

NSC,

to State.

Those are oun usual

colleagues.

a
A

And who
So

I

did you call?

pensonally don't necall whethen
UNCLASSIFIED

I called

on

it

was my

--

 46

UNCLASSIEIED

a Sune.
A -- my staff,

but

it

participating in the meeting.

sma]I.

would be the same people who
So

You have Tim Monnison as

the

NSC

directonate involved is veny

the senior director, and you have Alex

Vindman as the dinecton and those ane the two key

is

State Depantment thene

staff

but

my

but

my countenpant

A

connespond

And

is

wene

a Uknaine desk and I

figunes.

don't

know

And

at the

all of them,

with them, and would have called oven to them,

Geonge Kent.

eventually did you get any infonmation about the

sounce

of the hold?

A So the issue stanted to clanify a little bit on the 23nd at
that -- at that PCC meeting. Thene in that meeting I necall I was
advocating fon the release of the FMF, because I still wasn't sune if
oun funds were actually at risk. But thene again the OMB
nepnesentative, again I do not -- this panticulan meeting I'm not sune
who it was.
I believe I was participating via SVTC, but I'm not quite sune.
But in that meeting again there was just

this issue of the White House

chief of staff has conveyed that the Pnesident has concenns
Ukraine and Uknaine secunity

assistance. That was how it

about

was conveyed

in the meeting on the 23rd.
So
know

I

walked away fnom the meeting on the 23rd

thinking okay,

that this is, you know, a langen issue. But I still didn't

we

have

to USAI. That came after that
meeting, the official dinection fnom OMB to the DOD comptnollen who
any specific direction with respect

UNCLASS

I EIED

 47

UNCLASS

then infonmed
we

me

was

] EIED

-- I'm pnetty sune it

got the appontionment notice fon
And then

was on

USAI.

the veny next day, the 26th was the meeting that

the backbencher fon with the deputies'level.
me anyway

in

my expenience,

clearly what -- that yes,

it

hold and that
And

that is

a
placed.

A

it

was

the

And thene

finst time it

it

I

was

was, to

was stated veny

it is FMF and USAI are both affected

by

this

relates to the Pnesident's concenns about connuption.

what

And

the 25th of JuIy that

in that

meeting Mike Duffey from

OMB

said.

the Pnesident is authonized to have these types of holds

Connect?

in that meeting
about how this could be

tde1I, I'm not an expent on the law, but

immediately deputies began

to naise concerns

in a legal fashion because thene was bnoad understanding in the
meeting that the funding -- the State Department funding nelated to
done

an earmark fon Ukraine and

that the DOD funding was specific to

Uknaine

secunity assistance.

in the noom at the deputies' level reflected a
sense that thene was not an undenstanding of how this could legally
play out. And at that meeting the deputies agreed to look into the
So

the

comments

legalities and to look at what was possible.
a 0kay. So is it fain to say the deputies thought the
President was not authonized to place a hold on these funds?
A They did not use that tenm, but the expnession in the noom
that I necall was a sense that thene

to simply not spend money that

r^,as

not an available

has been in the case

UNCLASS

IF]ED

of

mechanism

USAI alneady

 48

UNCLASSl FIED

notified to Congness. And in the case of the FMF that
fon Uknaine.
see how

this

So

was

the senion Ieadens

wene expnessing

legalIy available, but they didn't

was eanmanked

that they didn't

use the terminology

that you've described.

a Okay. And you panticipated in penson at the deputies'
meeting --

A
a
A
a
A
was

the

Yes.

as the backbencher?
Yes.
Who was

in that

Whew. Well
DOD

it

meeting

to the extent that you can recall.

was chained by

pnincipal. I believe it

Charlie

Kuppenman and

lohn

was Unden Secnetany Hale

Rood

fon the

State Depantment, but I'm not L00 pencent sune. Mike Duffey was the
OMB

nep, he was

sitting in the back, as a backbenchen. And I'm just

not necalting the othen agency nepnesentation.

a Okay. What was on the agenda fon that day othen than this
topic

?

A

So

with

all of the Uknaine meetings within that week

timefname, thene was a focus on the elections and on the new Pnesident

in all of these meetings that
that had a lot of promise, that was tackling

Zelensky team. There was a consensus

this

was

a government

conruption, and that

we needed

to suppont this

govennment

with secunity

assistance.
The, you know, planned agenda

I don't necall the specific details,

but centainly the deputies' discussion
UNCLASS ]

I

neca1l

FIED

that while the

sub

PCC

 49

UNCLASS] FIED

and

the

PCC we

might not have

fully

nealized what was happening with

secunity assistance, by the time of the deputies meeting because the
hold had also been placed on DOD - - the discussion was I believe veny
much dominated by

the secunity assistance topic.

Although each
was and how

memben

went around

to talk about

how impontant

it

they assessed the future in Ukraine based on the necent

election nesults.

a

And between

conversations with

7/L8 and 7/26 had you had any pensonal

NSC?

A I don't necaLl any specific convensation, but also I -- you
know, I panticipate in lots of meetings with them.
a Okay.
A So I just -- You know, I don't recall any specifics, but that
doesn't

a

mean

that thene wenen't

Were you awane by

any.

the 26th of the Pnesident's deep nooted

in the Uknaine?
A No. So by the 26th, all I had to go on was that the President

concenns about connuption

is

concenned about connuption

in

Uknaine and somehow thenefone we were

holding secunity assistance. So the convensation at the deputies,

a

lot of the membens wene saying, you know, conruption. Yes, it's been
an issue. Yes, it's a concenn. Yes, thene's a long way to go, but
we'ne on the night path, you know, we can move fonwand. So

Iike a convensation
shouldn't be a

a

And

whene people were

tnying to explain

it felt

how connuption

concenn.

the sub PCC and PCC in the deputies' meeting is the
UNCLASS

I EIED

 UNCLASS I

ondinany stnuctune
connect

FIED

50

of meetings when these issues come up. Is that

?

A
more sub

That is the routine prognession. Although, we have a lot
PCC

meetings and a

lot

mone PCC meetings

than we have deputies

-- gosh the only deputies meeting that I
can even necall on Uknaine in necent memony.

meetings. This is the only

a Okay.
A So we don't have noutine deputies' level meetings.
A Okay. So Uknaine was the topic of the meeting.
A Yes. It was only focused on Uknaine.
a Okay.
A And it was set up following the PCC discussion.
a OkaY.
A As fan as I recall, I don't think it had been previously on
the calendan.

a So it was a meeting that was enabled by this
A Yes.
situation?
a
A Yes.
a Is thene a better tenm?
A I can't think of one.
a Okay. What was the next cnucial date aften the 7/26 meeting?
A So aften the 7 -- the deputies leve1 meeting, I recall
panticipating in anothen PCC leve1 meeting and it was on I believe the
31st of JuIy. And on that meeting it was very much a follow up,
UNCLASSIEIED

 UNCLASS

but -- weII, I

can pause

a Sune.
A Okay.
at least of

my

So

thene.

51

I FIED

Do you

want

me

to descnibe the

meeting?

the meeting on the 31st, the expectation

panticipation in the meeting

was

that

we

would

I think

talk

secunity assistance, but the agenda that was pnepaned by the

about

NSC was

langely focused on just noutine Uknaine business, post election follow

up.

of issues.
So it wasn't -- secunity

Those sonts

agenda

assistance was not actually an explicit

item, but because we had left the deputies wlthout clanity

the legaIIy available
the PCC. And

I

not speakingto

mechanisms,

this was a topic that I

with the

undenstanding

shared
FMF

And

naised at

that fon

USAI,

-- I left that fon the State Depantment -- but fon

USAI, my undenstanding was
mechanisms should

PCC my

on

that thene wene two }egaIly available

the Pnesident want to stop assistance.

the one mechanism would be Pnesidential nescission notice to

the Congness and the othen mechanism, as

I

undenstood

it

and

anticulated

it in that meeting was fon the Defense Depantment to do a nepnognamming
action. But I mentioned that eithen way, there would need to be a
notification to

a
A
a
occunned

And

Congness.

did that

occun?

That did not occun.
How soon was

that notification to

Congness supposed

to

have

?

A I'm not sune when it would have supposed to have occunned.
I thlnk the way I undenstand these pnovisions is that if you reach a
UNCLASS

I FIED

 52

UNCLASS

point

whene you cannot

appnopniated by the end

that is the point
available

I FIED

obligate the funding that the

of the fiscal yean,

whene you have

mechanism you would

to

make

use.

Congness has

once you neach

that point,

that decision about what legaIly

And since we had

-- July 31st.
a Okay. So it wasn't yet time to notify

not neached that

point on July 20

night

Is that

Congness.

?

A It

wasn't yet time that we would be requined.

a Okay. Did you
A As I undenstand it.
a Dld you feel at that point Congness ought to have been
notified

?

A

So

at that point I

obligate the funding.

And

I

wanted

to

ensune

that

was veny much hoping

we could

actually

that the explanations

that the pnincipals would pnovide the President, that this
understanding, this new undenstanding penhaps of what IegalIy
available

mechanisms wene

out thene would create a decision to

the funding. And I pensisted in that

hope

nesume

fon many, many days

thereaften.

a
the

And thene were

penson

other avenues to convince the Pnesident

in the White House that

was behind

on

this decision

such as

ability to

elevate

thnough the NSC, night?

A

We1}, centainly the NSC always has the

within thein chain. Out of the deputies' meeting the
was

to,

you know,

necommendation

finst kind of figune out these lega1 issues with
UNCLASSIEIED

 53

UNCLASSIFIED

respect to the secunity assistance topics specifically.
And then thene wene othen

topics, but they get into classified

infonmation so I'm not going to discuss them hene. But with nespect

to the secunity asslstance topic it was, you know, we have to look at
the legalities and then let's elevate to pnincipals.
agreed to elevate to the

pnincipals' Ieve1, but there

So

the deputies

was neven a fonmaL

of the pnincipals to my knowledge on this topic.
a Do you know if the National Secunity Council was tnying to
wonk it on their end, bniefing the President on the envinonment of
connuption, bniefing the Pnesident on the new political envinonment
meeting

in the Uknaine aften the panliamentary elections?
A My sense is that yes -- my sense is that all of the senion
of the U.S. national secunity depantments and agencies were
all unified in their -- in thein view that this assistance was
leadens

essential, that

we could wonk

corruption, and they

wene

with the govennment of Uknaine to tackle

tnying to find ways to engage the Pnesident

this. But I don't have any specific
engagements if -- with the Pnesident.
on

knowledge

of the actual

Okay. Did you on anyone on youn staff try to

a

with Lieutenant Colonel

Vindman on Dinecton Monnison

communicate

to find out what

they wene doing on their end, whethen this was a genuine issue that
needed

to

be addnessed on whether they thought thene was

some

maneuvenability on thein end?

A

So we

absolutely engaged them

that both Tim --

many

times.

And my sense

Tim Monnison and Alex Vindman undenstood the
UNCLASS

I FIED

is

 UNCLASS

impontance

54

I E]

ED

of obligating the secunity assistance and, you know, the
that I

of Tim Monnison's pensonal
engagement on this is that he did expness to me that he was wonking
veny hand to set up a phone call between the Pnesident and Pnesident

only

knowledge

have about kind

it

Zelensky. And he pnesented

it

as

was

a helpful thing.

to the best of your undenstanding, the National
Secunity Council was tnying to set up the phone call between the

a Okay.

Pnesidents

A
a
A

So

?

the best of

To

my knowledge.

That occunned on July 25th?

Again, to the best

in

involved

any

of my knowledge, but I wasn't dinectly

of that.

Did you get any neadouts

a

at any point of

what happened

on

the 7/25 call?

A I
who

neven

I don't think I

know anyone

in

DOD

got a neadout on that call.

a Okay.
on

got a neadout.

that call

that

So

the

was when

finst

it

A

Yes,

was

the finst time

time you leanned about the developments

became

that's connect.

I

public in
When

had seen

it

September?

was neleased

to the public,

that content.

a Okay. And duning the 7/tB ttnefname to 7/31 is
cunnently ane

in the timeline,

A

the

we

you neven heand anything from

Mn. Monnison on Lieutenant Colonel Vindman
between

where

that thene was a call

Pnesidents?

Wel1, I'm not sune

that's accunate. I think that -- I think
UNCLASS I

F]ED

 UNCLASS

f

was awane that thene would be

a

55

] EIED

call

and

that

penhaps thene was

a

ca11, but no content.

a Okay. Was thene any infonmation communicated
the Pnesident's concenn about connuption

was

from

NSC

that

a pant of the call?

A I got no readout on the caII.
a Okay. So then maybe we could just go back to the deputies'
meeting on July 31st. What happened next?
A No the deputies was
A July 31st?
A No, July 31st was the PCC.
a Okay. The deputies meeting was the -A The 26th.
a 26th, I'm sonny. And then you went back to the PCC?
A Yes. That's cornect.
a 0n the 31st?
A Yes.
a I'm sonry, I'fi sorny. What happened next?
A So aften the 31st, the focus of my office in Ukraine, we wene
working on a lot of othen things at the same time, but on Uknaine
specifically was tnying to figune out how could we get the funds
neleased, what -- you know, what wene the pnocess mechanisms that would
be appnopniate. And just pnactically speaking, how long could we delay
obligation and still be able to obligate the entinety of the funding
pnion

to

September 30th.

So thene wene

a

number

of kind of

UNCLASS I

quenies going back and fonth

FIED

 56

UNCLASS I

FIED

staff, the comptnollen's staff, and the Defense Secunity
Cooperation Agency to tny to figure out what to do and what was
between my

happening.
We

also had the unden secretany of defense fon policy

at his level.
the

PCC

So

the

same comments

leve1, he shared those

Same

that I

made

concenns

was engaging

at the, you know, at

with Chanlie

because thene wasn't anothen deputies'meeting planned so

point-to-point communication about these two available
rescission or the

neprognamming

just to

make sune

Kupperman,

this

was

a

mechanisms, the

that

evenyone was

on the same page.
And

in the meantime,

OMB

was

issuing these appontionment notices.

So

it is pnobably wonth me just saying a wond about this now, because

it

gets veny confusing in the

timeline.

Oven

the peniod of time fnom when we got the

the entinety of, you know,

finst notice in July to when

the funds wene neleased and we could begin obligating again on September

tzth, thene wene eight
wasn't

awane

And

I

of

sepanate apportionment notices, but

each one as

it

would hear based on

still

came
me

in. I

I personally

would hean aften the

talking to

my

fact.

comptnollen colleagues

to not spend? Can we spend? So
in these appontionment notices in the eanly ones, duning this peniod
of time this late July, eanly August peniod of time going out to I think
saying ane you

August

unden guidance

5th, I believe, something

around thene, the apportionment notice

it that this pause in funding -- and I'm not quoting venbatim
obviously, but basically it said that the pause in funding would allow
said in

fon an intenagency pnocess and would not effect the ultimate
UNCLASS

I FIED

prognam

 UNCLASS

I F]

57

ED

execution.

In

we wene

DOD

tnying to figune out if that was -- you know,

how

Iong that would be

tnue.

we wene, you know,

tnying to figune this out. It's not a science to

know

was

exactly

that

the counse of the month of

August

long it takes to obligate vanious pnojects, so that

a big pant of sont of the day-to-day back and fonth.

a
And

how

And oven

then

the mind-set was 1et's figure out

So

if

we'ne not going

to

do

it,

if

we can

still

do

this.

then how do we 1egaIIy effectuate

?

A That's night.
a

And so

did you ever get to the point

nescission pnocess on the

A Not to

a
A
don't
OMB

whene you stanted the

neprognamming?

my knowledge.

Okay.
We

did get to a point though whene the

know who

Depantment

--

and

pnecisely, but the comptnollen was most engaged with

as the natunal countenpants. The Department of Defense had

sufficiently

I

clean to

OMB

that

we had passed

not be impact to pnognam execution that in

made

the point where thene would

-- laten in August that caveat

in the appontionment footnote about not affecting the execution
disappeaned.
So

at

some

an undenstanding
whene we'ne

point thene

that

was an undenstanding

we were, you know, we were

not going to be able to do

fiscal yean, and at least at the
UNCLASS

that

we had conveyed

getting to the point

all of this by the end of the

I don't
I FIED

know who issues

 58

UNCLASS I FIE

D

appontionment notes at the OMB, but whoever does nemove

that

that to neflect

undenstanding.

Okay.

a

So from

that point

evenyone involved was hopeful

A Yes.

Although

I

we wenen't going

fiscal

to

be able

to

Septemben 12th,

that this would get

have

know, August 20th on so we wene

fonwand

to

nesolved?

say aften pnobably about,

neally losing hope because

I don't

we knew

to obligate evenything by the

end

that

of the

yean so we wene concenned about the actual pnogram impacts.

a Okay. And were you ultimately able to obligate evenythi-ng?
A So by the end of the fiscal yean we ultimately obligated - - it
was upwands of 80 pencent and, you know, thanks obviously to the
Congness we got the language in the continuing nesolution that
thankfully will enable us to obligate all of the funding ultimately.
a Okay. What was the next key event after the 31st?
A

So

the next

a Other than the appontionment notices, which I got that.
A So I'm pnobably fongetting things, but
a It's okay.
A -- the thing I pensonally nememben is my only convensation
with OMB because it's not a noutine thing fon me to be calling OMB.
But in that July 31st meeting,

I

had expnessed

that,

YoU know, because

thene ane only two legally available options and we do not have

dinection to punsue eithen, aften the appontionment notice expires,
which was noughly August
something anound

6th, I think it

was

eithen the 5th or the 6th,

thene. Aften it expines, I said the Department would
UNCLASS

IF]ED

 UNCLASS

have

59

I FIED

to stant obligating the funds.
And Tim Monnison neponted

that to Mike Duffey at OMB. And Mike

like, I don't know what she's talking about on
he needed clanification somehow. And so Tim asked me to call Mike

Duffey said something

Duffey to explain what I'm talking about with

this deadline of August

6th or 5th.

I called - - you know, I corresponded with email with Mike
and then he called me. And I just explained to him kind ofwhat

And so

Duffey

I explained to you that,
to obligate and that,

you know,

at a centain point we won't

you know, the guidance

be able

that we'ne under it's only

to a centain point. And, you know, we finished the convensation, I
kind of explained my piece.
He wanted mone

it take to obligate,

infonmation on the pnecise natune of how long does
and how many cases, and

that sont of thing.

I'm not a comptrollen, so f nefenned him to the comptnollen
And

it

was my undenstanding

that thnoughout the

wene many such conversations whene OMB was

month

and

to

And

DSCA.

of August thene

tnying to see if

we could

to obligate, but keep pushing the
obligations until laten in the yean and still complete them.
Comptrollen was tnying to figure out if that was possible. Defense
push, you know, keep planning

Secunity Coopenation Agency was tnying
what

--

what

is possible.

And along

to figune out, you know,

the way, Defense Secunity

Coopenation Agency was expnessing doubt

a
August

And so

this

that they could do it.

convensation was befone the 5th on the 6th of

?

UNCLASS

I FIED

 UNCLASS

A
close

it

yeah,

was probably

it

was pnobably veny

like the 5th, it

was pnetty

to the deadline.

a
A
that

--

Yeah, the convensation was

close to the 5th on the 6th,

60

IF]ED

And what was
Some

kind

happened much

the next key event?

Do you nememben?

of - - I 'm dnawing a blank.

I 'm thinking of things

laten at the end of August.

It did kind of go a

littte bit dank whene we wenen't getting guidance, we wenen't
a Wene thene any other PCC meetings?
A I can't neca1l any fonmal additional meetings that wene, you
know, specific fonmal meetings on Uknaine.

a The deputies' meeting you descnibed and the PCC and the sub
PCC, this is all nelating to Ukraine?
A Yes.
a So thene's a whole set of meetings, thene was a whole
infnastnuctune

of interagency

communications when something

of this

sont occuns?

A Yes. And just to kind of descnibe the pnocess a littIe bit,
it is absolutely
deputy on even

at

noutine
my

to

level

have meetings

on Uknaine

at the level of kind of

my

events.

taJe

to check in

on majon

of thing in the spning when they were having
thein Pnesidential election. And we just meet on a neasonably routine

were doing the same sont

that's all very typical. It is less typical to have
meetings above oun level unless thene's a majon policy decision.

basis.

a

So

Had anyone

at the NSC on anyone eLse communicated to you about

this effont nelating to Mr. Giuliani
UNCLASS I

and

FIED

his nontnaditional

fonm of

 UNCLASS

d

iplomacy

A
that

?

So

the only convensations about Giuliani nelated to material

was

in the

a

Okay.

press.

A In no meetings that,
do

61

I FIED

you know, no meeting

that I've attended

I necaII a specific discussion about Giuliani.

a
A

Okay.

Thene wene

centainly infonmal convensations within the

national secunity community about whethen on not he played a pivotal
nole in the necall of Ambassadon Yovanovitch. So that was definitely
a

topic of convensation just informally,

NSC, and othen counterpants

was

State Depantment,

and

in the kind of May, June timefname as she

recalled sunpnisingly.
With nespect to

a
A
was

me and

othen

-- I fonget how you descnibed it.

Nontnaditional fonm of diplomacy?
Nontnaditional form of diplomacy. My pensonal intenaction

only with

visited

this

Ambassadon Kunt

me and

this

was

Vo1ken. So on about August 20th

not unusual because he was

-

he

- he was working

on the peace negotiations and peace pnocess. So we were actually
supponting him

in

tenms

of developing concepts fon potential

peacekeeping openations, you know,

nelates to the possible
many

militany --

political settlement so I

how

the militany

had met

with him many,

times pneviously.
But towands the end of August when he met with me fon what, you

know,

I

thought was going to be you know just a routine touch base on
UNCLASS ]

FIED

 62

UNCLASS

I FIED

I thought it was going to be a stnategizing session
on how do we get this secunity assistance released knowing that we
both -- we both wanted the funding neleased.
Uknaine, but also

in that meeting he did mention something to

So

was

if

finst

the

about

somehow

an effont

that

thene was a statement that the govennment

me

that,

he was engaged

of

YoU know,

in to

Uknaine would make

see

that

in U.S. elections and would
of any individuals involved in election

would somehow disavow any interfenence
commit

to the

pnosecution

intenfenence. And that was about as specific as

a Okay.

Did he indicate to you that

working was successful

it

might lift

it

if that

got.
channel he

was

this issue?

A Yes.
a Okay. Had you known Ambassadon Volker before?
A Yes, yes. I basically met him fon the finst time kind of
in penson when he was appointed -- shontly aften he was appointed in
this nole on Uknaine.
okay and your dealings with him had alneady been pnofessional

a
and

he's

somebody

of integnitY --

A Yes.
a -- to youn knowledge?
A Yes absolutely.
a And he's veny knowledgeable
cornect

about the issues

in the

?

A
a

Yes.

He has

a

lot of

nelationships with Uknainians?
UNCLASS

I FIE

D

Uknaine,

 63

UNCLASS

A
a

Absolutely.
thene any othen, we'ne talking about the 5th on the 6th

Wene

and the apportionment

a

little

dank and you

miLestone
between

I FIED

event.

notices,

didn't

Was

and then you

have a

indicated that things went

specific necollection of another

the Vo1ken meeting

--

was thene anything in

the Volken meeting and the 5th on the 6th

communicating

A

when you wene

with Mike Duffey?

So pant

of it is that I

was

also on vacation for a week so

I don't neca11. And we wene prepaning for a majon round of bniefings
on Russia within the Depantment. So some of it is just I had a lot
on my plate. Thene might have been things on Uknaine but I just don't
nememben duning that peniod of time. That's not what I recall.
a The news I think the wond used yestenday was I think leaked
out about the hold on the assistance?

A Yes, yes.
a 0n the 29th?
A Yes. Actual1y, yes.
a Does that help you recall any events in that timefname?
A So the othen -- the othen kind of theme duning that time
peniod was -- that was when vanious folks in the Depantment stanted
to get phone calls fnom industny. And the firm I nefenenced eanlier
aI1 of these U.S. firms that wene implementing

USAI

they were getting

concenned.
So duning

that timefname, I don't

kind of mid- to late August, a

numben

UNCLASS I

nememben

exact dates but

of people

FIED

my

it

was

fnont office, in

 UNCLASS I

64

FIED

the Assistant Secnetany office just the staff we'ne getting phone calls
fnom

industny. I neceived a call
So befone

were signs

the kind of pness bnoke on it,

of concern.

to get questions

it
And so I
know,

Thene

fnom

was around

And fnom my

staff

much we

staff

-- I

neven

It

was

the

wonld?

A
a

We1I,
Once

Commence.

late August, late August.

OMB

--

pnobably, you

dnaft

nesponses.

has placed a hold on

up the

chain.

And

got authonization to be able to send anything

And once

PCC

staff

had pnepared hene

could say othen than

hene, and then you did stant

a

of

hearing that thene

we wene

fnom congnessional

and we, you know, sent those neplies up
neven

Chamben

part, I think -- I think I stanted

that timefname.

had pnepaned, and my

wasn't

the

fnom

to

see

the

I
oven

news bneak.

the news bnoke, did that

Wene

this

change

the envinonment in

thene any othen intenactions with that gnoup?

I think --

the

news bnoke

I think

Senatons stanted

calling the

to be other extennal fonces affecting
the situation. Is that fain to say?
A I think that's fain to say and I mean I want to emphasize
that thnoughout this whole summen the people that wonk fon me, the
people that I wonk with at the Depantment of Defense wene tnying to

White House and thene stanted

get the funding neleased and were hopeful that

we would

get the funding

released.
As

it

got to be veny late in the game, we wene wonnied not

fnom

a question of extennal pnessune being bnought to bean, centainly
were hopeful

that someone could advise the Pnesident and explain
UNCLASS I

FIED

we

why

 65

UNCLASS

this

to

was so impontant and

seem veny concenned

that

just

that we simply couldn't --

I FIED

he would be pensuaded. But we stanted

fnom
we

the timing, because we wene wornied

wouldn't have enough time to obligate

all the money.
a Duning this timefname, did you have any communications
Ukrainians

with

?

A I would have to say I'm sune I did, but I don't recall -a About this?
A But not about this. No, no, I did not speak with them about
this. And no Uknainians naised this issue with me on my team.
a Okay. So to the best of -A To my knowledge, to my knowledge.
a

To

the best of youn knowledge, they didn't

funding was possibly being held up

know

that this

until --

A 0h, that's not what I'm saying.
a Okay. What ane you saying?
A So I pensonally was not -- sonny, I apologize. I did not
mean

to

be intennupting you.

So

I

pensonally did not have Uknainian ministny

the ministny of defense,
But I knew fnom

of the

alanm

none

my Kunt

bells that

them naised

this issue with me.

Volker convensation and also fnom sont

who knew about

Okay.

They

deal with

wene coming from Ambassadon Taylon and

that thene wene Uknainians

a
A

of

-- I

just wenen't talking to me.
UNCLASS ]

F]ED

this.

his

team

 UNCLASS

66

I F]ED

a Okay. taJhat did you know that the Uknainians
Volken communicate

A

that to

knew? Did

you?

hte11, Ambassadon Volken descnibed

talking to an advisen to

Pnesident Zelensky about making such a statement, making a statement,
you know, disavowing election

intenference.

And

the way he descnibed

it to be a discussion that wasn't going to
occur in the futune, but that had occunred in the past. That was my

the statement

I

undenstood

undenstanding.

a
anothen

Do you know

--

A
visit

by

anound

anothen activity such as a White House meeting?

So

Govennment

if that statement was built

I

of

know

that thene wene two specifics things that the

Uknaine wanted duning

this

timefname and the one was

-- a hosted visit at the White House.

security assistance, but

I

And

a

the othen was Ukraine

do not know --

a Okay.
A -- which issue was being tnacked with the othen.
a Okay. Okay. But you don't have any finsthand knowledge
that the

Uknainans knew

--

A I .a -- that the assistance was on hold, you had just heand that?
A Yes.
a okay. To youn knowledge, when do you believe the Uknainians
became awane that the assistance had been subject to a hold? Was it
befone the Volken meeting on August 20th?

A I'm not sune pnecisely,

because

UNCLASS I

FIED

I can't necall when some of

 67

UNCLASS I EIED

the convensations with oun

embassy

in

Kyiv occunned.

a Okay. What wene youn communications
this time peniod

A

on

this topic?

WeI1, my staff wene mostly the

defense attache

noutine.

We

with the embassy during

folks

communicating

office. I can't necall specifically,

have email communications

but

it

with

was

oun

fainly

with the embassy that ane fainly

noutine.

a Okay. And what was the genenal infonmation
fnom

the

A
needed

getting

embassy?

cleanly and consistently that

The embassy was expnessing

to get the secunity assistance funds neleased

cause a majon majon challenge

in

secunity, and that the Pnesident
Zelensky much earlien,
June timefname, and

up on

you were

that

I

want

to

and

we

that this would

in the Uknaine
had sent an invite to President

oun nelationship

say May,

it

might have been May on

that the fact that the Pnesident hadn't followed

was causing

a

lot of concenn.

Those wene

the consistent

themes fnom oun embassy.

a Okay. After the Volken meeting, what was the next key event
that you rememben?

A

WeII, we were hopeful this whole time that Secnetany Espen

and Secnetany Pompeo would be able

to

meet

with the President and just

explain to him why this was so impontant and get the funds neleased.
And you know, fnom a

vaniety of

both Secnetany Espen and Secnetany
and wene

I think

Pompeo had

out of town at different times.
UNCLASS I

FIED

mostly scheduling neasons

diffenent tnips in August

 UNCLASS I

I

neven leanned

68

FIED

that the meeting took place until the

end of

August, and I don't remember the exact date, but the end of August thene
was an email

that I neceived that

was from

the Secnetany

Espen down

to - - I'm not sure who he addnessed it to, but I got a copy of it

it

it said -- it

the Pnesident

refenenced

somehow

a meeting with the President on some discussion, and he

and

that thene was
said, no --

no

decision on Ukraine.

is

Next step
And he included

a Vice Pnesident meeting with Zelensky

a note in there about holding on any memo that the

Department would send

meeting.

And

to

OMB

on

this

matten pending the Vice Pnesident

that's the entinety of

additional context, but

a

in Wansaw.

what

I saw. I tried to seek

I did not neceive additional

context.

Did you neceive feedback on a neadout fnom the Vice

Pnesident's meeting

in

Wansaw?

A I only got veny fnagmentary so I did not get a cohenent
neadout. Oniginally Secnetany

tnavel got

a

Espen was supposed

to join but his

changed.

When

did this envinonment stant to change? Like when did

you get a sense

that the aid would be neleased? Was that on the

12th

on --

A It was the 11th.
a Okay.
A And it neally came quite out of the blue.
a It was abnupt?
A It was quite abnupt. We got -- I believe we got an email.
UNCLASS

I FIED

 69

UNCLASS

I think it

came from again

I EIED

the Secnetany of Defense's chief of staff

it just said, OMB has lifted the hold and then
we could stant obligating on the !2th, which was I think the last
so Enic Chewning. And

appontionment expined.

a Okay. Wene thene any othen milestone
discussed

that

ane matenial and nelevant

finsthand infonmation

events that we haven't

to the facts that you have

about?

A I can't think of any.
a Okay. You indicated that no fonmal effont was expended fon
the nescission on nepnogramming of these moneys?

A I'm not sune what that means. The fonmal -a You didn't begin the rescission -- the nescission pnocess
did not begin, did it?

A
a
A

To my knowledge, ho.
And

the reprognamming effont did not begin?

Again, to

the actual

my knowledge,

ho.

The people who'd have pnepaned

papenwonk pnobably would have been

in comptnollen

so.

a Right. But you had no awareness that that was
A No, no awaneness.
a So to the best of youn knowledge, evenyone was hopeful that
this would lift?
A I don't know about evenyone. I can't speak fon evenyone.
I was hopeful until we got to the point whene DSCA was telling us we
can't spend all of this. And because I didn't undenstand any othen
mechanism than to obligate the money'by the end of the yean, I don't
UNCLASS I

FIED

 70

UNCLASS

think

anyone had thought

of --

I FIED

no one

I

spoke

with had thought of the

idea of the Congness doing, You know, anothen authonization

essentially.

in

No one

that I talked to

DOD

was

talking about that as a

mechanism. So once we got that point whene

didn't think they could
stanting to
MR.

this to

do

DSCA was

telling

us they

it, that's when the hope in my team was neally

wane.

CASTQR:

some

of

Okay.

oun

We

have about 15 minutes and

I'd like to pivot

membens.

Mn. Jondan?
MR. ZELDIN:

I just want to folIow up on a couple of items you

just discussed with Mn. Caston.
When

visit,

you stated that you knew that Uknaine wanted a White House

how

did you know that?

I would have to think about all the diffenent ways
that I heand that. I know I heand it fnom Ambassadons Chaly, thein
Ambassador here. I know I heand it fnom othen pensonnel in the
MS. CoOPER:

Ukrainian minlstny of defense, but not necessanily the minister

it quite negulanly in oun
noutine meetings. So those ane a few of the places whene I know that

himself, and centainly oun embassy neponted

this was a desine.
MR.

it

ZELDIN: The hold on aid you said you knew that Ukraine

from infonmation neceived fnom Ambassador Volken and

Taylor. Is

that night?
MS. COOPER:

I

know

that they
UNCLASS

knew about

] FIED

it

knew

based on what

 UNCLASS

Ambassador Volken and Ambassadon Taylon
wene

7t

] FIED

told

me, not

that those

two

the sounces.
MR. ZELDIN: Connect.
MS. COOPER:
MR.

you

that

ZELDIN:

so

Do

you necall the

Uknaine knew thene was

MS. COOPER:

that I

I don't know what that sounce of infonmation

met

with

finst

was

--

time that eithen of them told

a hold on aid?

I don't necall specifically when. f

Ambassadon Volken on August

--

mean

I

know

on on about August 2?th,

that's a specific -- I didn't talk to him, you know, noutinely about

this

thnoughout the

summen.

MR. ZELDIN: Then you stated

something about

a statement.

that

Ambassadon VoIken mentioned

Connect?

MS. COOPER: Yes.
MR. ZELDIN: But

knowing

did he say anything at that time about

Uknaine

that thene was a hold on aid?

MS. COOPER:

I don't reca1l if

he

specifically said that, but the

lift the
hold on aid and the fact that if this hold did not get lifted, it would

entine conversation stanted with a discussion on the need to

be veny damaging

to the nelationship.

MR. ZELDIN:

I

undenstand

that and in youn convensations with

Kyiv as well that they ane communicating that they wanted the hold to
be

neleased. I'm tnying to

knew

undenstand how you concluded

that

Uknaine

that thene was a hold on aid.
MS. COOPER: The context

Ambassador Volken nelated

fon the discussion that

specifically to the path that
UNCLASS

] FIED

I

had with

he was punsuing

 72

UNCLASS I

to lift the hold would

be

FlED

to get them to

make

this statement, but the

only neason they would do that is because thene was, you know, something

I don't know if he specifically said who -MR. ZELDIN: We11, it's significant because you'ne -- it's one
thing if you believe that they knew and it's another thing if you

va1uab1e. But no,

actually were told that Uknainians knew.
you

think

it

So again,

nelated

impontance
Uknaine

that

Uknaine would have known based on what you heand on did they

actually te11 you Uknaine

A

Ane you ane guessing

knew?

the convensation with

Ambassadon Volken because

to the secunity assistance needing to be lifted and the
of that, and he was relating conversations he had had with

officials. It

could have been

my

inference, yes,

a veny stnong

infenence that thene was some knowledge on the pant of the Uknainians.

Later,

when you

get into eanly septemben, at that point

thene

-- I'm confident that thene wene staff level questions coming in
fnom lowen level officials in the Ukrainian ministny of defense to oun
team in Kyiv and to my team. But that was night befone the hold was
lifted so no, I cannot pinpolnt a specific time in August.

were

MR. ZELDIN: And ane you awane Ambassador Taylor was hene

testify

yestenday, connect?

MS. COOPER: Yes,

it

was

in the media.

MR. ZELDIN: His opening statement was
awane

to

in the media.

Are you

of that?
MS. COOPER: Yes,

testimony,

to

but

I

have not been focused on othen people's

be honest.
UNCLASS

IE]ED

 73

UNCLASSIFIED

MR. ZELDIN:

That's

fine. I just want to confinm, you haven't

nead Ambassadon Taylon's opening statement?
MS. COOPER:

I

saw some media neponting about

it.

MR. ZELDIN: Did you nead anything Ambassadon Taylon

said with

to Uknaine, not knowing of aid as of August 27th?
MS. COOPER: I did not nead that, no.
MR. ZELDIN: Now any othen holds on -- to any othen countnies on
othen accounts that you'ne awane of anywhene in the wonld oven the
counse of the last sevenal months or is Uknaine the only hold on any
payments through the Secnetany of Defense?
negands

MS. COOPER: Since

othen negions.
MR.

only handle

I just don't

my

region,

I can't speak to the

know.

-- to othen countnies

and

of accounts that -- in othen pants of the wonld that

you

ZELDIN: So thene might be holds in

othen types
ane

I

just not awane of?
MS. COOPER:

I

simply don't

MS. STEFANIK. Ms. Coopen,

know.

in

youn answen

to

Mn. Caston's

questions you neferenced convensations with congnessional

the July 31st PCC.

When appnoximately wene

staff aften

those convensations?

to go back. I might have misspoke, but
I did not have any convensations with congressional staff.
MS. STEFANIK. Congnessional staff neached out to you, you said.
MS. C00PER: Yes. So this was via legislative affalns so thene
wene questions that wene sent in by vanious congnessional staff, and
then I saw what the questions wene and I had my staff pnepare a response,
MS. COOPER:

I'd

have

UNCLASSIFIED

 74

UNCLASSIFIED

and then coordinate

it intennally,

which

is a noutine

pnoceSs, and then

I sent that up saying, you know - MS. STEFANIK. And which committees wene those

staff

membens

fnom, which committees?
MS. COOPER:
rememben

see

I'm pnetty sune it

the specifics.

all the incoming, I
MS. STEFANIK.

there

let

side, but I don't

that I didn't -- I didn't

wene mone

saw what we prepaned

Okay.

MR. MEADOWS: So

funds.

And

was Senate

to

go out.

Thank You.

me come back

to the obligated, unobligated

it is nefneshing to have
on thein topic, and so I want to just say thank

One, thank you fon youn

people who ane expents

senvice.

And

you fon that.

staff, they didn't -- they didn't know that unobligated
funds well typically that happens, end of fiscal yean thene's always
unobligated funds and thene was -- they were not aware of not only what
happened in this case, but it had happened pneviously. Is that
So youn

conrect

?

MS. COOPER: No,

sin.

My

staff

and

I

am aware

that thene

ane

fnequently unobligated funds at the very end of the yean. What we wene
wonnied about
on a

in this

significant

we do understand

case was

that,

you know, the bulk

amount

of funding would be unobligated.

that,

you know, sometimes you

evenything. And I believe last yean

of the funds
So

absolutely

can't actually obligate

USAI

did not have 100 pencent

that

was a yean

obligation.
MR. MEAD0WS:

Right. 0f

counse

UNCLASS

IFIED

--

so you

came

 75

UNCLASS I

in in

F]ED

2016.
MS. C00PER: Correct.
MR. MEADOWS: So pnion

about the 90 pencent

to

you getting thene,

I

mean

there

was

of the appnopniated funds wene obligated, but the

nest wene not, but eveny yean thene have been unobligated

funds.

Would

you agnee with that?

I mean you may not have knowledge, but would it
eveny yean

sunpnise you that

there are unobligated funds based on what is appnopniated

vensus what

is

obligated.

MS. COOPER:

Sir, that would not sunprise

MR. MEADOWS: And

me.

so how often would you dinectly

talk to

like the defense ministen, et cetena, because
I was tnying -- you acted like you had a pnetty negulan dialogue with

Uknainian counterpants

your countenpants, Uknainian countenpants.
And

I

am

not talking just on

this issue, just in

UNCLASS I EIED

genenal.

 UNCLASS I

76

F]ED

p.m. ]

[4:58

MS. COOPER: My

--

MR. MEADOWS: And

I'm not talking just on this issue, just in

genenal.

In genenal, so I talk to Uknainians nelatively

MS. COOPER:

fnequently. But my actual ministen of defense, deputy ministen of
defense countenpants,
And

that would be mone, you know,

it's not always the ministen, it

eveny few months.

might be the deputy,

if that makes

sense.
MR. MEADOWS: So when you say you

talk to Uknainians,

talking to Uknainians in Uknaine, not Uknainians
MS. COOPER: We11,

you'ne

hene?

also Ukrainians visiting here. So when

thene's

I

MR. MEADOWS:

cLearen

guess, I'm tnying

so let me be a

looking fon contacts with Uknainians that

then. I'm

contacts with Ukrainian Govennment.
you

to --

How

often does that

little
have

happen fon

?

I

MS. C00PER:

mean,

it centainly vanies depending on the time

of yean, not a lot in August, but every few weeks at least.
MR. MEADOWS:

what you'ne saying

Okay.

So

is in your

in those convensations every few weeks,

convensations,

this issue of the defense

appnopniations being held up was not something that was naised directly

with you. Is that conrect?
MS. C00PER: Connect.
MR. MEADOWS:

Okay. I'11 yield
UNCLASS

T

back.

FIED

 UNCLASS

77

I EIED

is thene time?
MR. CASTOR: Thene's time. We have about 4 minutes.
MR. PERRY: A11 night. Ma'am, thanks for your testimony.
MR. PERRY: Steve,

Right

hene. I'm cunious about the 31 July PCC meeting as fol}ow-up.
wene

talking about a meeting pnior

when you wene

You

looking into the

Iega1 -- the legality of the hold, and unden what pnovisions that could

happen. You, at the time,

wene aware

of nescission

and repnognamming.

Is that conrect or not connect?
MS. COOPER: So my pensonal knowledge on nescission and
nepnogramming was

context of

not existent pnion to doing

this discussion, if that's

MR. PERRY:

Okay.

That ' s fine

.

some neseanch

in

what you're getting at.
And based on youn undenstanding

initiate eithen one, nescission on neprognamming,
what would youn pant in eithen one of those be?
now, who would

MS. COOPER: So,

again, I'm not the budget expent, so I might

an inaccunate undenstanding, but my undenstanding

piece

is that it

nepnognamming

it's

my sense

would have

to

the

and

have

of the rescission

be the Pnesident; and

that the

piece, that's the Department of Defense, so, you know,

that the comptnollen executes that. I find

it,

you know,

unlikely that they would execute without the penmission of the senion
Ieadenship

of the Depantment. But fon my office,

coondinating on that. So if

it's

we would be

f would see it,
some othen pnognam, I would have no awareness of it.
Uknaine,

MR. PERRY: And do you know when you would

action, nescission, on nepnogramming?

When

UNCLASS]E]ED

but

if it's

get notice of said

would you get notice

if

 78

UNCLASS

I EIED

those, in fact, were occunning, going to occun, so ondered, et cetena?
MS. COOPER:

I don't know, because I also don't know that that's

a noutine thing for this account, So, yeah.
MR. PERRY:

Okay. A11 right.

MR. JORDAN: Secnetany,
wene

Thank

you. I yield.

in youn -- I think you eanlien said

getting the infonmation fnom both Tim and A1ex. Is that

Mr. Monnison and Mr.

Vindman?

MS. COOPER: Yes,
MR. I0RDAN:

that' s

Okay.

And

connect

I think

.

you indicated

that they

said that they wene wonking hard on setting up a phone

the

you

phone

call

call.

had both
Was

that

between President Tnump and President Zelensky?

Yes. lust to be clean, the only person who I necall
specificalty mentioning to me wonking on the phone call was Tim
MS. COOPER:

Mornison. I do not necall AIex
MR. IORDAN:

Okay.

Then

in

Vindman even

telling

youn August 5, August

youn convensation with Mn. Duffy,

me

that.

6,

when you had

I think you said you spoke to

to that?
MS. COOPER: Yes. It was Tim Monrison

Mn. Monnison pnior

who

actually put

me

in

touch with Mike Duffy.
MR. IORDAN: So Tim

called you and said that you should call

and

talk with Mr. Duffy?
MS. COOPER: He emailed me and

said -- he said that

he was

trying

to explain to Mike Duffy some of the points that I had made in the
meeting, and that I refenenced this kind of deadline, and that he didn't
know what that was nefenning to, so he asked me to talk to him. So
UNCLASSIE]ED

 79

UNCLASSIFIED

that's

why

the contact took

p1ace.

MR. IORDAN: Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN:

Okay.

The

time of the minonity has already

expined. Let's take a t@- on 15-minute

bneak and then we'11 nesume.

MS. COOPER: Okay.
IRecess. ]
THE CHAIRMAN:

Okay. Let's go back on the necond.

I just have a couple of questions befone I hand it back to
Mn. Mitchell. In the first meeting whene you descnibed -- a question
was naised about what ane

the }egally available

mechanisms

to actually

this ald, on hold this aid, did someone naise that issue in
a diffenent -- using different tenminology as in, is this lawful? Can
this be done lawfully? Is this a violation of law?
MS. C00PER: So that was in the deputies ' meeting that that finst
convensation that I necall anose, and I don't nememben that exact
suspend

phnaseology being

used. But, I

mean, thene were many affinmative

statements that the Congress has appnopniated

this,

we need

to obligate

it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Unden
MS. C00PER:

Again,

the law?

I don't nememben that exact phnase, but yes.

I think you said that as a nesult of the delay
in the pnognam execution that you got to a point of no netunn with at
least pant of the funding, whene it would not be obligated in time
pursuant to what Congness had appnopniated. Is that night?
THE

CHAIRMAN: Now,

MS. COOPER: So based on

the infonmation that f

UNCLAS

S

] EIED

was

neceiving fnom

 80

UNCLASS

the people implementing the

I FIED

pnognam, by

late August, we felt -- they

felt that they would not be able to obligate all of the funding.
this understanding was actually neflected in a change in the

And

appontionment footnotes.
So

it

in the original appontionment footnotes,

would not impact timely execution

OMB

neflected that

of the funding, but - -

and

I

wish

I could necall fon you the exact date, but mid- to late August, they
changed the footnote. It actually pnobably would have been night about
August 20. They changed the phnasing, and they didn't include that
that said that it would not impact the timely execution.
THE CHAIRMAN: And I think you said that at that point, or maybe
soon theneaften, it became clean that fully a fifth of the funding would

sentence

not be available to be obligated because of the de1ay. Is that night?

I received diffenent estimates at diffenent
points in time of what would be possible. And at one point, in August,
MS. COOPER: So

DSCA

actually thought it would be, you know, well oven $100 million

that would not be -- that thene would not be time to obligate.

They

their eanlien wannings, but
we were quite concenned about the ability to execute.
THE CHAIRMAN: So at one point, then, the delay that had been
ended up being able

to do a lot

mone

than

occasioned by the Pnesident's onden could have cost Uknaine
$100

was

million that would not be obligated in that yean?
MS. COOPER: So just to be clean, sin, the estimate at the time

that it would cost at least that

estimate.

And

amount

of

money, but

that

was an

then, you know, the pnofessionals of the Depantment of
UNCLASS I EIED

 81

UNCLASS

I FIED

to essentially make up fon lost time, is my
penspective, and wene able to do a lot mone.
THE CHAIRMAN: But it's fain to say, at that point, it put
$100 million of aid at risk?
MS. COOPER: That was my view at the time.

Defense wene able

THE CHAIRMAN:

officials

wene

Ultimately,

because

able to do wonkanound,

it

the Defense Depantment
neduced

the impact

down

to

I think you said?
MS. COOPER: It was Less than that. I think we wene able to
obligate, I want to say, 88 pencent by the end of the yean.
THE CHAIRMAN: So that stiIl meant that tens of millions of
about 20 pencent,

dollans you wene not going to be able to obligate. Is that night?
yes, and the neason that we can obligate

MS. COOPER: We1I,

at this point is

it

of congnessional action, because
THE CHAIRMAN: Right. But befone the Congness took action, as
a nesult of the deIay, it was going to cost Uknaine tens of millions
of dollans in militany assistance. Is that nighti
because

MS. COOPER:

to,

RoughIy. That

you know, obligate the

full

assumes

that

we would have been able

amount, which sometimes there ane

challenges with that.
THE CHAIRMAN: And

but fon the effont of Congness to step in

pass a new Iaw, Uknaine would have

at least in that fiscal

yean?

MS. COOPER: Yes, that
THE CHAIRMAN: Mn.

lost out on that militany

'

s connect.

Mitchell.
UNCLASS

I EIED

and

suppont

 82

UNCLASSIFIED

BY MR. MITCHELL:

a Sticking with the same theme, Mn. Meadows was asking you a
senies of questions about whether it was unusual fon thene to be
unobligated funds at the end of a fisca.l year that couldn't be spent,
and

I think

Is that

youn answen WaS, no,

that happens. That's not infrequent.

conrect?

A That's connect. I think it's just

a matten of the onden of

magnitude.

to undenstand a little bit mone the onder
of magnitude. So in youn expenience in the ondinany counse, ane we
talking 1, 2, 3 pencent of funds that are unobligated at the end of
a fiscal yean?
A I can't answen that, because I just -- I do policy ovensight,
but I'm not looking that closely at pnogram execution, and I just don't

A okay. So I

have

the nange of

want

expenience.

a Okay. Ane you awane that that pencentage, whateven that
pencentage is, is typically unobligated because of unpnedictable
events?

Fon example,

salaries

neceive those salanies don't

come

those funds ane not obligated

A

So, yes.

my convensations

histonically

change on the number

to fnuition;

in

and as a

DSCA, some

been unable

who

result of that,

time?

I think that in my limited

with

of individuals

of the

expenience, and fnom

neasons

that

we have

to obligate the entinety of the funding would

be thnough such unpnedictable factons,

to include, you know, pnice

changes and equipment.
UNCLASS I

FIED

 UNCLASS

a Okay.

83

IF]ED

But hene, those unpnedictable factons wene not the

of USAI funding fnom being obligated
at the end of the fiscal yean. Is that connect?

ones

that

pnevented 12 pencent

A

To my undenstanding,

I don't know any of those factons came

into play.

a

Youn undenstanding

is that thene was a hold that was put in

p1ace, cornect?

A Yes, that's connect.
a That delayed the obligation of funds -A Yes.
a -- fon some centain tlme peniod, connect?
A Yes, connect.
a A11 the way thnough September 11?
A Exactly. Septemben L2 is when we began obligating again.
a And as a nesult of that, the window fon obligating the
nemaining funds was dnamatically shontened. Is that connect?
A That's cornect.
a And it was because of that shontened window that L2 percent
of those funds could not be obligated by the
and

that

Congness, as a

nesult, had to

1-yean funding mechanism

end

change

of the fiscal

yean,

the law to extend the

that is USAI. Is that night?

A That is my undenstanding.
a I want to undenstand a little bit mone this August 6 date
that you wene testifying to eanlien that I think you
mentioned cornect me if I'm wrong -- but that you mentioned the
UNCLASS

IF]ED

 84

UNCLASSI FIED

July 31

PCC

A
a

meeting. Is that night?

Yes.

also had a subsequent convensation with

And then you

Mn. Duffey about

this

date?

A That's connect.
a Can you explain the nelevance of August 6?
A So thene were a few factons that came into Play, but the main
issue was that the oniginal appontionment guidance fnom OMB had that

expiration date on
subsequently

it.

And what

to Mike Duffey,

to hold obligation eithen,

was

I

explained

that

we would

until

PCC, and

not be able to continue

you know, past the point whene the

appontionment footnote ended, because
was

at the

that was -- the

OMB

dinection

a centain date, but also, that we would not be able

to

hold

past the point whene continuing to hold would not allow us to obligate
the funds by the end of the fiscal yean, again, unless thene was specific

direction to
the

nepnognam

on, you know,

some

othen specific action with

Congness.

a
A

And was

So

be were an

that

based on communications

the communications with

DSCA

that you had with DSCA?

about what the date would

active, ongoing set of convensations throughout the month

of August. At the point that
ofAugust, at that point,
wenen't sune.

We

felt

we

you wene nefenning

didn't fuI1y

to, at the beginning

knowwhat

that date was.

a sense of uncentainty about

to obligate.
But in that finst week of August, this

how much

time

We

we

would need

UNCLASS I

FIED

infonmation was

stiIl

veny

 UNCLASS

85

] FIED

fresh that thene was a hold, and DSCA hadn't neaIIy done all the
calculations to figune out, you know, kind of what's the last possible
date.

I

telling

was simply

Mike Duffey

that, you know, we have this

August 6 date, and beyond that date we don't have any guidance.

The

is this piece of guidance that says, you know,

hold

until the 6th, and we would need to look at what the last possible

date

only thing

we have

would be.

a Okay. And, again, the genesis fon the August 6
date penhaps I missed it -- was what?
A So -- and this is my secondhand undenstanding. 5o my
secondhand undenstanding on

this

was

that OMB wanted to

communicate

the Pnesident's direction to hold the assistance, and in consultation

with the
be

comptnollen they realized that the way

DOD

to

do

this

would

via an appontionment, this, you know, piece of guidance about the

flow of funds that would te]] us to

ho1d.

I think the August 6 date was fainly anbitnary, to
be honest. I think it was tnying to put something down on papen that
wouLd reflect thene will be some kind of a policy process, thene wiLl
At the time,

be some kind

a date

of

a discussion with the

Pnesident.

You know, we'11 give

that aIlows fon a pnocess to play out. But, you know, we won't

go much beyond

that

because DOD's

we'ne concenned about
secondhand

a

that I

DOD

this.

signaling night

But all of

was discussing

was concenned about

this is

away was, you know,

from me.

It

was

this.

all this because the concenn was that

UNCLASSIT]ED

 UNCLASS

I FIE

85
D

not all the funds would be able to be obligated past August
connect

6. Is that

?

A Yes. And it was -- I mean, so DOD was concenned about the
obligation of funds. Policy, my team, we wene also concenned about
any signal that we would send to Uknaine about a wavening in oun
commitment. And that's anothen neason why, I mean, we did not want
for this to be a big public discussion, you know, if we wene about to
get it tunned back on again because we didn't want to signal any lack

of

suppont.

a l,llhy would that be a pnoblem fon Uknaine?
A So, I mean, the finst and easiest way to answen that is by
looking at the peace pnocess. They ane tnying to negotiate a peace
with Russia, and if they ane seen as weak, and if they are seen to lack
the backing of the United States fon thein Anmed Fonces, it makes it
much mone

good

that

difficult fon them to negotiate a peace on tenms that

fon

Uknaine.

a

Okay.

So

it

ane

that being Uknaine. Is

would weaken an a1Iy,

connect?

A It

would weaken stnategic partnen.

a And it would potentially stnengthen or embolden Russia?
A That is conrect.
a I'm going to hand you thnee exhibits, exhibits 3,4, and 5.
[Majority Exhibits Nos. 3, 4, and 5
wene manked
THE CHAIRMAN:

I just

want

fon identification.l

to

UNCLASS I

mention
FIED

to the witness,

we don't

 UNCLASS I

mean

to

be Rude. We have

the deposition

will

MS. COOPER:

votes.

So membens are going

continue thnough the

Okay.

Thank

87

FIED

staff.

to vote, but

Thank you.

you, sin.

BY MR. MITCHELL:

a

A11

right.

So, ma'am, do you have those documents in fnont

of you?

A I do have the documents in fnont of me.
a And do these look like the thnee appontionments, the finst
one, exhibit No. 3 is undated, and it's just the footnotes. Do you
have that one in front of you, ma'am?
A I do.
a Okay. Put that one to the side fon just a second.
The next one,

exhibit

No

. 4, you'LL see a signature page on the

finst page. Do you see that?
A Uh-huh.
a What was the date of the signatune?
A So the date appeans to be July 25.
a Okay. And who's it signed by?
A Mank Sandy.
a Do you know who Mark Sandy is, othen than the fact that it
says deputy associate dinecton fon national secunity prognams?

A Yes. I don't know Mark Sandy.
a Okay. Is it youn undenstanding that Mank Sandy is a penson
at

OMB?

A I actually don't know Mank Sandy, so I actually don't even
UNCLASS I

FIED

 88

UNCLASSI FIED

know what

his title is.

night. If

of exhibit No. 4, and I'11
tunn youn attention to footnote 44. Do you see that? I'11 just nead
it. It says: "Amounts appontioned but not yet obligated as to the

a

A11

you look

at

page 2

this neappontionment fon the Uknaine secunity assistance
initiative are not available fon obligation until August 5' 2@79' to
alIow fon an intenagency pnocess to determine the best use of such

date of

funds.

"

And then

on

it continues:

July 25,2Tlg,

pause

OMB

"Based on OMB's communication

undenstands fnom the Depantment

in obligations will not pneclude

final policy

DOD's

with

DOD

that this bnief

timely execution of the

detenmination."

last sentence, "DOD may continue its planning and
casework fon the initiative duning this peniod. "
Was this the footnote that you were nefenring to eanlien?
A So I want to clanify that I neven saw the actual full
And then

that. But the language
in here is the language that I saw. So it was -- the language was

document, so

this is the first time I

am

seeing

to me but not the formal document.
a Okay. This is the language that you wene testifying

pnovided

earlien

about

?

A Yes, this is exactly what I was discussing eanlien.
a Okay. And this panticular one says, August 5, 201-9. We've
been

talking about August 6 to date, but do you see those two things

as

UNCLASS

I FIED

 UNCLASS

A I think it's the same thing.
talking about the date whene we would
in this convensation,

12. It

Septemben

89

I FIED

So sometimes we would

nesume

obligation. lust eanlien

someone mentioned Septemben

depends on what you'ne

you can nesume obligation on the date

be

11, and I said, oh,

neferring to, the date that

that the footnote expined, so

I think it's the same thing.
A And the second half of that same sentence says, "to allow
fon an intenagency pnocess to detenmine the best use of such funds.
Now,

this panticulan document was signed

on July 25, which

"

was

to the deputies' meeting, as well as pnion to the PCC meeting
on the 31st. Is that connect?
pnion

A That's connect.
a

So

there was an intenagency pnocess occurning duning this

time peniod?

A
a

That is connect.
The next sentence

also says, "based on OMB's communication

with DOD on Ju1y 25, 2019."

What communication

is this footnote

neferning to?

A

So

I can't say for

occunning thnoughout

sune, but the communication that

this period

tended

to

was

be between OMB and the

DOD

comptnollen. And then DOD comptnollen would nelay pentinent pieces

of

to me on obtain, you know, policy input fnom me.
a Okay. Let's go to exhibit 5. This panticulan
appontionment, who is it signed -- weII, what's the date of it?
A The date is August 6.
information

UNCLASS I

FIED

 UNCLASS

I FIE

90
D

a And who's it signed by?
A Mike Duffey. Michael DuffeY.
a And, again, who is Michael DuffeY?
A So Michael Duffey, I do know, works at OMB. It says hene
his title is associate dinecton for national security pnograms. I did
not know that pnion to neading it, but Mike Duffey was the individual
fnom oMB who was in the deputies' meeting that I nefenenced eanlien.
a

And

also the individual that you spoke to aften that

deputies' meeting?

A Exactly, that's connect.
a And I think you testified that you spoke with him on August 6.
Is that night?

A If I
night

anound

said that,

the

same

I

am

not centain of the exact

time peniod, but

it

was pnion

date. It

was

to the expination

of the footnote. So it pnobably actually was August 5, on even the
4th, but, yeah. So he would have appnoved this after he had spoken
with

me.

a Okay. And the footnote on page 2 of exhibit No. 5, you'}l
see is very similan to the last one we just nead except fon the date
to August L2, 2Ot9.
A Yes. Yes.

changes

Do you see that?

a Do you know how they came up with August 12, 2Ot9?
A I do not. They did ask fon input about, you know, how much
time it would take, how quickly DSCA would be able to obligate the funds.
To my knowledge,

DSCA

and

policy did not pnovide a definitive
UNCLASS

I FIED

answen

 UNCLASS

to give a definitive

91

IFIED

date.

a Okay. And sometime aften this appontionment,
that this footnote

A Yes.

you indicated

changed?

in late August, I think on on about August 20, I
think that was the next footnote actua11y, that is when it changed,
and

it

So,

took out that pant about timely execution.

I don't necall if

I don't necall either way.
a Okay. And why did that -- why was it changed?
A My undenstanding is it changed because at that point, OMB
necognized that thene was a nisk in not being able to obligate the
it

took out a pant about a policy pnocess.

funding.

Pnion

to that point,

OMB

never fonmally acknowledged that

they thought thene was a nisk.

a Okay.

Do you know why

appontionments changed fnom

A I don't know.
a Was thene a policy
being conducted

A

the

penson who was signing these

July 25 to August

6?

on intenagency neview pnocess that

was

in August?

Thene was no

policy neview pnocess that I panticipated in

on knew of.

a The last meeting that you wene aware of was July 31?
A Yes, that's conrect.
a Ane you awane of whethen DOD conducted any sont of
neview -- other than the intenagency pnocess that you descnibed,
sont

of

neview

of

USAI

any

funding duning the JuIy, August, or beginning

of Septemben time peniod?
UNCLASSIFIED

 92

UNCLASS

A I

know

of

no such neview. The only thnee types of

assessments, on neviews,
on

that

that we -- that

I

pensonally panticipated in

I know the DOD participated in, wene, one, to look at the degnee

to which Uknaine

had made sufficient pnogress

and anticonnuption goals
neview and pnovided the

a
A
to

I EIED

in meeting defense nefonm

consistent with the NDAA.

centification letten that

we

We

completed

that

discussed eanlien.

-- just to be clean, that was prion to May?
That was May, yes. I'm just trying to be veny cIean. Pnion
So

that

was

May, we completed

that neview.

Thene was

the second queny that I

neceived regarding USAI that occunred aften the pness release

in

June,

but the only thing that we did thene was summanize neadily available
infonmation reganding finms and intennational contributions. But I

just want to

be cIean, we did pnovide information on that.

And then

the thind ane these meetings that occunned in the

intenagency. But I would not use the term "neview" to descnibe

of

them because they were

all just

noutine business.

a Okay. You indicated that at the JuLy 26 deputies'
Mike Duffey said that thene was a hold both on

it

FMF

meeting,

and USAI and that

nelates to the Pnesident's concenns about connuption.

night

any

Is that

?

A Connect.
a Okay. But DOD did not conduct

any sont

of

neview

following

this statement about whethen Uknaine was making any sont of pnogness
with negand to its anticonnuption effonts in July on August on beginning
of September. Is that night?
UNCLASS

I FIED

 UNCLASS

93

I EIED

A That is connect.
a Okay. And that's because,

of process and Iaw,
all of those events took place precertification, pne-May?
A That is cornect. And in the interagency discussions, DOD
panticipants affinmed that we believed sufficient pnogress has been
as a matter

made.

a Okay. And it

wasn't just

DOD

panticipants

who believed

that

these funds should flow to Uknaine duning these intenagency meetings,
connect

?

A

That's connect.

It

was unanimous

with the exception of the

statements by OMB nepnesentatives, and those statements wene nelaying

highen ]evel guidance.

a And that's the case fon all foun intenagency meetings?
A That's connect.
a Did you ever Leann what Mike Duffey meant by "connuption"
when he made this statement at the July 26 deputies' meeting?
A No.
a Have you seen the JuIy 25 call tnanscripts involving
Pnesident Trump and Pnesident Zelensky?

A I saw them when they wene publicly neleased.
a Okay. Do you now have any undenstanding of what the
Pnesident's concenns wene with negand
day aften

his call with Pnesident

to connuption

on July 26, the

Zelensky?

A I think I have the same intenpnetation of anyone neading it
fon the finst time. I don't have any dinect knowledge beyond what's
UNCLASS] FIED

 94

UNCLASS

T

FIED

actually in that tnanscnipt and what he states himself.

a You testified eanlien that -- I believe, connect me if I'm
wnong -- that you did not pensonally have any convensations with
Uknainian officials about the hold duning this JuIy, August time
period

?

A
a

No,

I

had no conversations

Ane you awane

with the Uknainians.

of anyone within the Depantment of

Defense

having convensations with Uknainians about the hold duning the Ju1y,

August, beginning

of Septemben time period?

A I'm not awane of specific instances, but I would just necalI
that

we have a team

Ambassadon

in

Embassy Kyiv

Bill Taylon.

that

So, you know,

ane DOD nepnesentatives unden

it

would be veny hand fon

me

to discenn convensations that the embassy side might have had vensus
the defense attache side.

a Okay. And I

believe you testified eanlien that you wene in

constant communication, on negular communication --

A Right.
a -- with the defense attache in Kyiv. Is that right?
A Yes. To be -a 0n youn staff.
completely accurate, my staff, but - A
a And was secunity assistance a topic that they would have
discussed

?

A Absolutely.
in

Throughout

this entine peniod of time,

oun team

Kyiv was acutely awane of the hold and was expnessing senious
UNCLASS

I FIED

 UNCLAS

concenns

to

a
on

some

those concenns conveyed to you?

other fonm of
So

95

] EIED

us.

How wene

A

S

to me, it

thene wene emails

to

Wene

they by email

communication?
was kind

my

of in-penson.

staff. I

So

I don't know whethen

would imagine thene pnobably wene,

and

I

DOD

components, because everyone focused on implementing the secunity

would imagine thene wene probably emails, you know, within vanious

assistance.
You know, they wene engaged

of

how

But

long can we hold

that is not to

say

off,

in, as I

said befone, this discussion

and so there wene multiple

DOD

offices.

that any of these would have necessanily been

talking to the Uknainians. I have no evidence of that.

testified earlier that you wene involved in the sale
of javelins back in 2@L7, 20L8. Is that connect?

a

So you

A That's connect.
a Just generally, without going into too much detail,

what was

in that pnognam back then?
A So I've been in my cunnent office since kind of the end of

your involvement

the

Obama

administnation, and obviously tnansitioned into the

administnation.

And thene was

a policy hold in the

Tnump

Obama

administnatlon on pnoviding defensive Iethal assistance to Uknaine,
widespnead, you know,

bipartisan suppont fon

this, but within

the

administnation thene had been a nestriction.
So

with the advent of the

new

administnation,

I

panticipated in

a senies of policy discussions with the intent of making the case that
UNCLASSI FIED

 we should provide defensive

javelin

a

system
And

96

I FIED

UNCLASS

lethal assistance beginning with the

but not necessanily exclusive to that

that decision actually

thene was a decision made by

came

system.

to fnuition; in othen wonds,

this administnation, the Tnump

administration to pnovide that lethal assistance to Ukraine, connect?

A That's cornect.
a And on
A And so -a Go ahead.
A And so at this point, we have both pnovided assistance via
security assistance, via FMF, as I said eanlien, the javelin system,
but now, the Govennment of Uknaine is seeking to punchase a1so. I
that they have that allows them to
do govennment-to-government procunement, and they ane seeking to use
neferned eanlier

that

mechanism

to that

to

new law

procure javelin.

a Okay. So on December 22, 2Ot7, the State Depantment
announced that it approved a license for the expont of these javelins
to Uknaine.

A
a

Ane you genenally aware

of that?

Yes.

And

did you discuss

--

presumably you had discussions with

officials about this fact?
A Yes. I mean, that -- I've

Uknaine

had discussions

with them about

this going back many, many months, oven a yean.

a Okay.

Do you know what

the anticipated timeline

finalizing the tnansfen of those javelins to
UNCLASS

I FIED

was fon

Uknaine aften that

 UNCLASS I

97

FIED

in Decemben of 2@L7?
A I don't necall. At one point I

announcement

knew, but

I just -- I

don't

neca11.

a
FMF

The DSCA

didn't publicly

announce

State's appnoval of these

until March L of 2@L8. Ane you awane of that?
A I don't nemember the timeline at all.
a So you're not awane of whethen thene was a delay in the

sales to Uknaine

release of these funds fon the punchase of the javelins?

A No, I'm not awane.
a Okay. You don't necall any discussions
A I don't necall.
a You don't necall any discussions about that at the time?
A I don't necall.
a Ane you awane that in, appnoximately the same time peniod,
Manch on

Apnil of

2OL8,

the Uknainian authonities abnuptly stopped foun

investigations nelated to PauI Manafont?

A I'm not awane.
MR. MITCHELL:

Al1

night.

We'ne going

to

go ahead and

yield

oun

time to the minonity.
BY MR. CASTOR:

a I'Ll

confess, nonmally the Paul Manafont question

this side of the noom.
I would also like to note the defensive
was authonized and implemented

suppont, something

1ethal assistance that

in the new administration

that possibly

Democnats

UNCLASS I EIED

comes fnom

had

bipantisan

liked about the Tnump

 UNCLASS

administnation

A

?

We1l,

I

to

have

Hill to talk

to the

98

IFIED

say

that nonmally, I neal1y enjoy

about Uknaine, because there

and, you know, the javelin decision

is bipantisan

is something that I

am

coming up
suppont,

pensonally

proud of.

a Okay. The unobligated funds that ultimately -- thene wene
provisions in the
right

NDAA

that allowed the money to

be subsequently spent,

?

A
a
Like,

Yes.

And do you know when those funds wene

how

long did

it

ultimately

expended?

take to wonk its way through?

A I'm not tracking the specific details of the implementation
timeline, but my understanding is we'ne stitl in the pnocess of doing
this.

a Okay. It ' s still - A It's ongoing.
a Okay. And that's not unusual
via the

when something

gets extended

NDAA?

A I

have neven heard

of

in this mannen. When it first

something being extended
came up as

via the

NDAA

a possibility that we would

not be able to expend the funds beyond the end of Septemben, we were
asking amongst ounselves, you know, what would be the possibility hene.
And

it didn't seem like

we wene

gnateful

a gkay.

when
Was

anyone knewthat

this

was a

typical thing.

So

the Congress acted.

thene any discussion about recentifying the funds
UNCLASS

IF]ED

 UNCLASS

aften the

new govennment

99

I EIED

established

itself in Uknaine?

A I can't necall any such discussion, in pant because the new
govennment was,

pnetty eanly on,

embnaced

in

tenms

of its

anticonnuption and nefonm agenda. You know, we had nealIy

been

stnuggling at times to bning the previous govennment along, so the fact

that the new govennment was, you know, pnoceeding in such a positive
fashion, albeit in eanly days, I just don't necall

anyone

raisingthat

to evaluate the connuption

envinonment

as an issue.

a

What

exactly

was done

in Uknaine as pant of this pnocess?
A So, the specifics that we used to evaluate the NDAA cniteria,
if that's what you'ne talking about, nelated specifically to
significant progress in defense nefonm. In the centification letten,
we

outline the specific areas, including things like sufficient

pnogness on command-and-contnol nefonm, a whole host

nelate

to

improving Uknaine's

NATO

of

refonms that

intenopenability, and, a1so,

tackling connuption in, say, Uknaine defense industny. But at the end

of the letten, it states that significant challenges remain,

and

this

of some of the connuption
allegations involving the oliganchs in the Uknaine?
A WeI1, certainly, I hean about some of these. Thene's

open

will

be a multiyean effont.

a

Do you have any knowledge

sounce and othen neporting on these issues.

a
A

Ane you
So

I

familian with the

want

to

be c1ean,

I

company, Bunisma?

was not

UNCLASS

I EIED

familian with this

company

 100

UNCLASS I

FIED

it is not something that I have
encountened in my nole as a defense official. It's something that I've
seen in media.
a The oliganch that has control of Bunisma, Mykola Zlochevsky,
is that a name you'ne familiar with?
A It is not.
a And I apologize if my pnonunciation is not perfect. He was
until the spate of neponting.

So

of the open-sounce
stonies about him on some of the investigations that Bunisma was

a fonmen ecology ministen.

Have you nead any

involved with?

A I have not read much detail at all.
a Okay. But you're generally familian there wene some
investigations into Bunisma for vanious things? I mean, I can
to you,

repnesent

money laundening, and

tax evasion, things of that

sont.

A I have no level of pensonal knowledge on detail on these.
a Okay. Did you have any knowledge about any other companies
in the Ukraine that
oliganchs

wene

subject to connuption allegations, on any othen

?

A No. So my focus has been on the defense industny. So I
familiar with

a number

of allegations in the defense industry,

and

am

that

of defense industry nefonm. And as
pant of the certification pnocess last year, we wene just stanting oun

is

why we have a

specific

pnognam

pnognam unden fonmen Secnetany

senion advisen on

this.

of the Navy, Don Winten, will

So we had them
UNCLASSIE]ED

be oun

sign up to, you know,

we'ne

 101

UNCLASS I

committed

to this.

And since

and stant

FIED

then, we've been able to have Secnetany Winten go out

to develop a prognam. But we'ne at the eanly

stages of

dealing with defense industny reform, and we have kind of a step-wise

appnoach.

It

stants with the legislation that

I talked

about eanlier,

it will be a multiyean effont.
a Okay. But the allegation that Uknaine is beset with
connuption is not something that is contnovensial, night?
A We absolutely undenstand that thene is a significant amount
and

of conruption in Uknaine, and that's
counten

why we have pnognams designed

to

that conrUption.

a In December 2@L5, the Vice Pnesident,
had some subsequently

a pnosecuton genenal

Shokin.

weII-publicized

in the

Uknaine

Vice Pnesident Biden,

nemanks about

his effonts to get

fined by the -- Pnosecutor Genenal

Do you have any awaneness

of that

stony?

A No. That was pnion to my time on the account.
a Okay. But since you've been on the account, have you
followed the news neponting about Vice Pnesident Biden's effonts to

get Shokin

A I

nemoved?

have seen media neponting on

this, but I

have no dinect

knowledge.

a

He was captured on

video at a WalI Stneet Jounnal

Wall Stneet lournal pushed out

that he made in the
Have you even seen

Uknaine

that

some

in

-- or The

video of him necounting the

December

video?
UNCLASS I

FIED

of

2@15

demand

nelating to Shokin.

 UNCLASS

A

to2

I FIED

No.

a Have you seen neponting about the comments he made?
A I've seen neponting on this genenal topic, but I don't necall
seeing the specifics that you're talking about.
a You know, essentially, he indicated that thene was
approximately $1 billion in loan guanantees at issue, and that if, you
know, Shokin wasn't nemoved, the loan moneys would be

withheld.

And

to come to fnuition,
if those Loan moneys were to be withheld, would that go thnough the

the question I have is whethen -- if that

wene

same intenagency pnocess?

A It's veny hand to nespond to a hypothetical like that
because, I mean, I don't know enough about the details to neally even
be able to make a judgment.
Okay.

a

hJheelbanger

You mentioned Acting

this monning.

in subsequent days.
events

Assistant Secnetany Katie

We'ne scheduled

What can you

tell

to speak with hen, I think,

us about hen involvement

in these

?

A
she's in

So she

is

my

immediate supenvison

in the absence of -- I

mean,

it's, you know, one penson filling
two roIes. But I have to note, hen portfolio is vast. It's the whole
an acting

capacity.

So

wonld except fon Asia.
So she

--

We've had Inan

on

oven

the

summen,

if

you

think about the past

summen,

issues, she's the lead on that; we've had a 1ot going

in Synia, you know, not just the necent developments, but eanlien;

Venezuela

is in her pontfolio as well.
UNCLASS I

FIED

 103

UNCLASS ] E]ED

is the penson who, you know, I route all of my papens
thnough, but if she's on tnavel, she doesn't see the piece of papen.
Somebody else pushes it on up the chain in hen absence. So it's
So she

actually veny

hand

for

to necall

me

what specific meetings on events

she would know about, and which ones she

any

of those intenagency

a Okay.
she would add

A It's

meetings

So you'ne

to this

we wene discussing eanlien.

not awane, as we sit here today, what value

discussion?

veny hand fon

me

to

value. You know, she's a tennific
bnoad

that

wouldn't, and she was not in

even say

that my boss would not

add

leaden and has, you know, a ton of

knowledge. But on the specifics -- the specific questions that

you have asked me, I

a Okay.

just

I don't know that she would --

She's not going to have finsthand factual infonmation

about these

-- I mean, none of the specific things that I talked
to you about, it just -- I mean, bnoadly, she has been following Uknaine
like she follows evenything else in hen pontfolio. But, again, because
she wasn't in the specific meetings, I think it's less firsthand

A

Not any

infonmation.

a

You've neven had any communications with the Pnesident about

this issue?
A I've

neven had any communications

with the Pnesident,

peniod.

a Acting Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney?
A No, sin.
UNCLASS I

FIED

 LO4

UNCLASSIFIED

a

And youn

only intenactions with the National Secunity

Council have been the ones you've discussed with --

LEVIN: Relating to this toPic.

MR.

BY MR. CASTOR:

this topic, sir.
Relating specifically to this topic, to

a
A

Relating to

a
A
a
A
a

So Tim Monnison, Alexanden Vindman?

my

recollection,

yes.

Yes.

Befone

that,

Fiona Hill?

Yes, absolutely.

tel1 us about any communications you had
with Fiona Hill nelating to this topic, although she -- hen last day
was

And what can you

July

19?

A

So

I

haven't talked to hen about the topic of the suspension

of the assistance,

a
diplomacy

A
was

because

it all

played out

after

she had

left.

Did you even have any communications with her about this

that

was ongoing

We1I,

I

with Rudy Giuliani?

heand hen nemanks on

multiple occasions that

a sepanate tnack handling foneign policy. I don't necall

thene
hen

specifying Giuliani by name; but she did multiple times expness concern

that thene was kind of a panallel

pnocess

to the one that she was

handling

a And what did she tell you? Like, how did she chanactenize
it? I think you said she had concenns?
UNCLASS

IFIED

 105

UNCLASS

A
it

was

She had concenns. And,

the challenge of

I FIED

I

mean,

the way she chanactenized

managing and, you know, coondinating an

intenagency pnocess when thene ane those who wonk outside
pnocess and have engagements

of that

with foreign officials that, you

know,

people inside the pnocess ane unawane of.

a Did you even have any communications with State Depantment
officials about this non-traditional diplomacy that was occunning?
A So I heand sevenal concenns nelated to what was descnibed
as pnessune that was bnought to bean on Ambassadon Yovanovitch.

I

And

never heand anything specific about, you know, any actions that she

was, you know, asked to take on had

taken. But sevenal,

you know, other

State Department staff would -- you know, pointed to the Giuliani

visit

in open sounce as being a source of
fniction and a sounce of tension. But it neven got -- I neven got any

to

Uknaine, which was neponted

more

details than that.

a
spend -A

at the State Depantment related to
do you communicate with most of the time?
And who

So

it's

eithen

now-Ambassadon Taylon

Uknaine do you

in the field,

on Geonge

Kent, on Phil Reeken, typically.

a

And do you

necalI any specific convensations with

Geonge Kent

to the holdup in the aid?
A 0h, I can't think of any specifics, but we definitely
discussed concenns that we needed to figune out how to get the aid
neleased, and that we didn't, you know -- we thought it was veny
impontant to nestone the assistance.
on Phil Reeken relating

UNCLASS

I EIED

 106

UNCLASS I

FIED

a Did Kent ever mention to you this Rudy Giuliani channel that
was in existence?
A I can't necall any specifics. He did lament the tneatment
of

Ambassadon Yovanovitch.

a Okay. How about with Phil Reeken?
A With Phil Reeken, I recall him mentioning how Ambassadon
Sondland was playing a lange nole in a numben of i.ssues, not just
Uknaine, but he didn't express it as necessanily entirely negative.
a Okay.

During

this time period,

you estimate you had with

Phil

how many

convensations would

Reeken?

A That is very hand.
a About this topic.
A 0h, about this topic?
a Yes.
A 0h, about this topic, I don't know, I
about a handful, probably.

UNCLASSIE]ED

would have

to

guess,

 L07

UNCLASS

] FIED

[6:15 p.m.]
BY MR. CASTOR:

{

a

And do you rememben anything remankable about any

of these

convensations? Did you think that he was somebody that was tnying to

solve the pnoblem, on was
have an

A

just

mone

shaning infonmation? Did

he

active nole in this?
So,

I

mean, my impnession

he has a very bnoad
So

it

pontfolio,

and

of Ambassador Reeken's nole is that

is,

you know, on tnavel a good deal.

I think he has tnied to be, you know, as helpful

know, neleasing the Uknaine secunity assistance

I don't -- I

to,
and FMF funds.
as he can

you

But

haven't noticed a specific nole that he has played in the

pnocess.

a

How about Ambassadon

conversations with

Sondland? Have you even

had

him?

A No, I've neven had convensations with him on met him.
a Okay. You only heand of him?
A I've heand of him.
a
A

US, too.
And

if I

could make one connection thene

in the

sense that

I attended the EUCOM, Eunopean Command Chief of Mission Conference last
spning. It's possible that he was thene, but I don't -- I didn't meet
him in a sense that I don't -- he could have been at that confenence.

a

The whistleblower complaint was made

26th, which was a day aften the call tnanscript

25th.

Was

public on

was made

Septemben

public on the

that the finst time you had seen on heand about the
UNCLASS

I FIED

 108

UNCLASS

I FIED

whistleblowen tnanscript on, I'm sonny, the whistleblowen complaint?

A Yes. It

was

the first time I had seen the whistleblowen

complaint, although, obviously,
know,

track with

a

some

Fnom any

of

what

I

many

of the points thenein ane --

have shaned

with

you

you.

of youn discussions with U.S. Government officials,

did you have any awaneness that a whistleblower complaint of this sort
was

in the offing?
A No.
a

Okay. Are you aware of

?

A

I
a

0kay.

Have you even had any communications

?

a
A

About the issues, though,
Not these issues

that we'ne discussing

specifically,

hene today?

no.

I.
a Youn appeanance hene today, the Depantment instnucted you
initially not to panticipate in a voluntany setting. Is that connect?
A They instructed me yestenday not to panticipate. I'm not
sure if it said a voluntary setting, that pant of the phrase.
a What was youn understanding of the dinection the Department
pnovided to you?
UNCLASSIFIED

 109

UNCLASS

MR.

I FIED

LEVIN: WeII, to the extent

I'd instnuct

hen not

it

involves discussions with

me,

to answen. You got the letten.

MR. CASTOR: We do?
MR. LEVIN: The committee has

the letten.

If you could speak into the mic.
MR. LEVIN: I would instruct hen not to answer to -MR. CASTOR: I got that pant. Yeah. I'm not trying to ask you
MR.

BITAR:

about attonney-client
MR.

have

a

LEVIN:

I think the letter has been sent out, so you should

copy.

MR. CASTOR:
make

This was yestenday,

I

guess,

this letten.

We can

it exhibit numben 6.
IMinonity Exhibit No.
was manked fon

6

identification.l

BY MR. CASTOR:

a
fnom

So

exhibit 6 is a letten dated Octoben 22nd to

-- who signed it?

Do we know who signed

Dan Levin

it? I apologize. I was

in anothen event of this sont.
A The lettenhead is the Deputy Secnetany of Defense

occupied yestenday

lettenhead.

a Okay. Okay. So what was youn undenstanding of the
dinection that the Depantment gave you about panticipating?

it's based on discussions with
ffi€r I'd instnuct hen not to answen. I mean, the letten speaks fon
itself.
MR.

LEVIN: Again, to the extent

UNCLASS I

F]ED

 110

UNCLASS I

MR. CASTOR:

FIED

Okay. Is this the sum total of the

communications

you had fnom the Depantment about appearing today?
MR. LEVIN: Yes,

it is.

MR. CASTOR: So you

of

didn't

have any discussions

with the Office

officials on anybody like that?
MR. LEVIN: I mean, discussions I'm sorry.

Genenal Counsel

BY MR. CASTOR:

a

But just about youn appeanance hene. Just tnying to

undenstand

A

did they try to block youn testimony

Again,

action has

on

I think the letten neflects what the Depantment's

been.

a Okay.
A I think it kind of summanizes it.
a In any event, you'ne appeaning today unden subpoena?
A That is connect.
a Okay. And ane you concenned that there will be
at the Depantment fon youn testimony hene today?
A I would hope that I shouldn't be concenned about such

nepencussions

mattens.

a Okay. And so you're not?
A I don't think that's an accunate statement eithen.
a Okay. You ane concenned?
A This is a challenging envinonment. And fon a civil senvant
who is just tnying to fuIfil1 my obligations, this is -- this is
challenging

in both nespects. Getting a letten like that, getting
UNCLASS

I FIED

a

 UNCLASS I

L1.L

F]ED

subpoena. But, you know, I'm confident that I'11 be able to continue

to senve, and I'Ll be veny happy to get back to the wonk that we do
in my office.
a Who finst notified you that they wene -- that the committee
was

inviting

you

to

appean

today? Did the letten

come

to

you

directly,

it come thnough Leg Affairs on the Office of Genenal Counsel?
A The oniginal letten came thnough Leg Affains.
a And what type of guidance did they give you?
A None initially.
a They just
A It came in on a Fniday night, though.
a Okay.
A And I was supposed to appean the following week, and it was
Columbus Day on Monday. So thene wasn't a lot of time for them to -a OkaY.
A -- you know, engage that much.
MR. CASTOR: Okay. I yield back.
on did

MR. MITCHELL: We ane

not going to stant anothen 45-minute nound,

but we might have a couple minutes of questions. So I think what we'11
do, with youn agneement,

is if

we go 2

minutes, you guys can go 2 minutes

as well.
MR. CASTOR:

I don't anticipate

mean, thene might be

follow-up, but I

of the minutes on seconds. I
MR. LEVIN:

any additional questions.

hope we'ne not going

to -We'11 keep tnack of that.
want

UNCLASS

I FIED

to

I

keep tnack

 1.L2

UNCLASS I EIED

MR. MITCHELL: llrJith

that

undenstanding.

BY MR. MITCHELL:

a

You

on July 31st that you made the

testified eanlien

I tnied to wnite down what you said.
I think you said that it was your undenstanding that fon USAI funds
thene wene two 1egaI1y available mechanisms, the finst being -- we1l,
statement at the

PCC

meeting

--

and

what wene they?

A So the two mechanisms, as I undenstand them, and as I nelated,
ane finst to have a nescission. And this was a Pnesidential-Ievel
action. And the second is fon the Department of Defense to do a
nepnognamming

a

And

action.

I

And both nequine

believe Mn.

notification to

Meadows asked

Congness.

you some questions about

this, and you indicated that there was no congnessional notification
as to eithen. Is that conrect?
A Not to my knowledge.

a
with

Pnior to the July 31st

PCC

meeting, were you in communication

anyone fnom DOD legal?

A
a

Yes.

A
a

That

testified eanlien that you wenen't an expent in
nescission on DOD pnogramming, just genenally. Is that night?
And you

is

connect.

But the statement

based on youn

limited

that

knowledge

you made on

LEVIN:

Can we

leave

it

this luly 31st PCC wasn't

of these two prognams, it

on a convensation that you had with
MR.

the

as

it

DOD

was based

legal?

followed a conversation she

UNCLASSIFIED

had

 113

UNCLASSIFIED

legal? I'm just tnying not to get her in trouble
Depantment, in tenms of --

with

back

at the

I don't think

we'ne

DOD

MR. GOLDMAN:

I think it's

undenstood, but

asking hen to shane the contents of the convensation that she had, but
we ane asking whethen on

Iegal, which
MR.

we

not hen statement nelied on advice fnom DOD

don't think would faII under the pnivilege.

LEVIN: I think it's a yes on

MS. COOPER: What was

no.

the question? The question was, did it

nely on advice, is that the question?
BY MR. GOLDMAN:

a

Did youn undenstanding of the appnopniate

-- the two pnoper

legaI mechanisms to divent funding nely on a convensation that you had

with

DOD

legaI?

A

Yes.

a

I'11 just follow

up

with one question. Sonny. And, to

knowledge, the Depantment

of

Defense

youn

did not endeavon to do any wonk

on a potential Pnesidential nescission?

A

To my knowledger ro.

a

Would you know

if that wene to

happen, on would you know

if

that were happening?

A In nonmal cincumstances, if it nelates to the countny that
I'm handling, on the pnognams that I ovensee, y€S, in nonmal
cincumstances.

a And what about DOD nepnognamming?
A Again, in nonmal cincumstances, that type of an action would
UNCLASS

I FI

ED

 7L4

UNCLASSIFIED

have

to

be coondinated with the regional

policy office,

and

that

would

be my office.

a
wene

Wene

you awane

of whether any nepnognamming effonts by DOD

eithen being undentaken on directed to be undertaken?

A I
a

was

So,

to

not

awane

of

any such efforts.

youn knowledge, the only lega1 ways to adjust funding

in nelation to USAI?
A I just want to caveat that, that those legally available
means nelate to the question of whether on not all the funds can be
obligated by the end of the fiscal year. So as long as the funds can
pnovided by Congress wene not being punsued

be obligated, you do not have

to avail younself of these mechanisms.

in spending. It's once you get to the point
whene it's clean that you cannot obligate all the funds by the end of
the fiscal yean that those two mechanisms, one of the two would have
You can have a hold

to

be used.

a

Because othenwise, You'd be

in violation of the Impoundment

Control Act. Is that night?

A That is

my undenstanding, Yes.

MR. GOLDMAN: We yield.

MR. CASTOR:

Does minonity have any questions?

NO.

right. Mn. Bitan?
MR. BITAR: So just prion to adjounning, I'd like to just
undenscone something. I'd like to undenscone something that the
chainman would have said at the opening, but due to the disnuption,
MR. GOLDMAN: A11

he was not able to.
UNCLASS I

FIED

 UNCLASS I

115

FIED

finst, I'd like to apologize on behalf of the committees for
the disnuption that occunred. But finally, with pnion witnesses he
So,

in light of what
you -- the questions you answened at the end, which is to undenscore
that Congress will not tolenate any nepnisal, thneat of nepnisal, or
has said the

following,

and

I think this is

veny apt

to netaliate against any U.S. Government official fon
testifying befone Congness, including you on any of youn colleagues.
attempt

It is distunbing that the Defense Depantment, in coondination
with the White House, sought to pnohibit Department employees,
including you, fnom coopenating with the inquiny and with
have

Congness and

tnied to limit what they can say. This is unacceptable.

Thankfu}ly,

consummate

nemankable counage
t^Jith

that,

in

w€'ne

public senvants like you have demonstnated

coming fonward
ad

jounned.

to testify

and te11 the tnuth.

Thank you.

MS. COOPER: Thank you.
[Wheneupon,

at 6:29 p.n., the deposition

UNCLASS

I FI

ED

was concluded.]