A shocking new report further corroborates Ambassador William Taylor’s testimony that Ukrainian President Zelensky knew of President Trump’s withholding of military aid, conditioned on a personal political favor. The Associated Press claims that in between Zelensky’s election and inauguration, he met with advisers in Kyiv to plan how to avoid becoming entangled in American elections. Based on conversations with three sources familiar with the May 7 meeting, the AP reports:
Seeing as how the AP gives no further detail, the report itself makes it impossible to say whether Zelensky’s fear, however well-founded in hindsight, was based on any actions or communications with the Trump administration at the time. But there was one person in the room for that conversation whom Congress has the authority to subpoena: Amos Hochstein, an American supervisory board member of Ukrainian natural gas company Naftogaz and a former Obama administration energy diplomat with ties to the Bidens.
If Hochstein’s name sounds familiar, it’s because you may recognize it from the lengthy New Yorker expose on Hunter Biden. Back in July, Adam Entous at the magazine wrote of Hochstein:
…
There is no credible evidence that Biden sought Shokin’s removal in order to protect Hunter. According to Amos Hochstein, the Obama Administration’s special envoy for energy policy, Shokin was removed because of concerns by the International Monetary Fund, the European Union, and the U.S. government that he wasn’t pursuing corruption investigations. Contrary to the assertions that Shokin was fired because he was investigating Burisma and Zlochevsky, Hochstein said, “many of us in the U.S. government believed that Shokin was the one protecting Zlochevsky.”
Hochstein also advised Biden directly on Ukraine matters during his tenure as Special Envoy and Coordinator of International Energy Affairs during the Obama administration.
As an American citizen, Hochstein is the only person from the meeting in the AP piece whom Congress has the undisputed authority to subpoena. Not only could he testify to the question of impropriety with regards to the Bidens and Burisma, but he could also provide key details about the Zelensky meeting. Even more importantly, he could explain the events that precipitated it and instigated Zelensky’s fears.
Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney and the leader of the secondary back channel that operated outside of the purview of Trump’s formal diplomats, tweeted about a “DNC conspiracy” with Ukraine on April 23, exactly two weeks before the Kyiv meeting with Hochstein.
Hillary is correct the report is the end of the beginning for the second time…NO COLLUSION. Now Ukraine is investigating Hillary campaign and DNC conspiracy with foreign operatives including Ukrainian and others to affect 2016 election. And there’s no Comey to fix the result.
— Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) April 23, 2019
The New York Times reported on May 9, two days after the meeting, that Giuliani was “plan[nning]” a trip to Ukraine. In that light, it’s possible that Zelensky was simply scared by Giuliani’s tweet and Trump’s interview with Sean Hannity in which he suggested that Attorney General Bill Barr ought to look into Ukraine. But was it something else? Was there any direct line of communication between Trump’s camp and the Ukrainians that gave Zelensky enough pause that he was planning how to circumvent Trump’s eventual quid pro quo before he was even sworn into office?
Hochstein is the only American who knows for certain, and he can provide goods for both Republican and Democratic interests. Maybe the Biden connection to Burisma was deeply corrupt, and maybe Trump’s threats went back further than the summer. But it’s hard for us to determine without Hochstein’s testimony. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and both parties ought to bring in Hochstein to elucidate the truth.
