ORGANIZATION IN THE WORLD. >>> TODAY FOR THE FIRST TIME

>>> TODAY FOR THE FIRST TIME OUSTED U.S. AMBASSADOR MARIE

OUSTED U.S. AMBASSADOR MARIE YOVANOVITCH TOLD HER SIDE OF THE

YOVANOVITCH TOLD HER SIDE OF THE STORY PUBLICLY.

STORY PUBLICLY. LAWMAKERS AND LEGAL COUNSEL BOTH

LAWMAKERS AND LEGAL COUNSEL BOTH SIDES ATTEMPTED TO PAINT A

SIDES ATTEMPTED TO PAINT A PICTURE.

PICTURE. >> GETTING RID OF AMBASSADOR

>> GETTING RID OF AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH HELPED SET THE STAGE

YOVANOVITCH HELPED SET THE STAGE FOR AN IRREGULAR CHANNEL THAT

FOR AN IRREGULAR CHANNEL THAT COULD SET THE PRECEDENT FOR TWO

COULD SET THE PRECEDENT FOR TWO PRESIDENTS.

PRESIDENTS. THE 2016 CONSPIRACY THEORY AND,

THE 2016 CONSPIRACY THEORY AND, MOST IMPORTANT, AN INVESTIGATION

MOST IMPORTANT, AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE 2020 POLITICAL OPPONENT

INTO THE 2020 POLITICAL OPPONENT HE APPARENTLY FEARED MOST, JOE

HE APPARENTLY FEARED MOST, JOE BIDEN.

BIDEN. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE EXPECT THEIR

THE AMERICAN PEOPLE EXPECT THEIR PRESIDENT TO USE THE AUTHORITY

PRESIDENT TO USE THE AUTHORITY THEY GRANT HIM IN THE SERVICE OF

THEY GRANT HIM IN THE SERVICE OF THE NATION, NOT TO DESTROY

THE NATION, NOT TO DESTROY OTHERS BUT TO ADVANCE HIS

OTHERS BUT TO ADVANCE HIS PERSONAL OR POLITICAL INTERESTS.

PERSONAL OR POLITICAL INTERESTS. IN FACT, DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN

IN FACT, DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN VOWING TO OUST PRESIDENT TRUMP

VOWING TO OUST PRESIDENT TRUMP SINCE THE DAY HE WAS ELECTED.

SINCE THE DAY HE WAS ELECTED. SO AMERICANS CAN RIGHTLY SUSPECT

SO AMERICANS CAN RIGHTLY SUSPECT THAT HIS PHONE CALL WITH

THAT HIS PHONE CALL WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKY WAS USED AS

PRESIDENT ZELENSKY WAS USED AS AN EXCUSE FOR THE DEMOCRATS TO

AN EXCUSE FOR THE DEMOCRATS TO FULFILL THEIR WATERGATE

FULFILL THEIR WATERGATE FANTASIES.

FANTASIES. >> LIKE MY COLLEAGUES, I ENTERED

>> LIKE MY COLLEAGUES, I ENTERED THE FOREIGN SERVICE

THE FOREIGN SERVICE UNDERSTANDING THAT MY JOB WAS TO

UNDERSTANDING THAT MY JOB WAS TO IMPLEMENT THE FOREIGN POLICY

IMPLEMENT THE FOREIGN POLICY INTERESTS OF THIS NATION AS

INTERESTS OF THIS NATION AS DEFINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND

DEFINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS AND TO DO SO REGARDLESS

CONGRESS AND TO DO SO REGARDLESS OF WHICH PERSON OR PARTY WAS IN

OF WHICH PERSON OR PARTY WAS IN POWER.

POWER. I HAVE NO AGENDA OTHER THAN TO

I HAVE NO AGENDA OTHER THAN TO PURSUE OUR STATE THE FOREIGN

PURSUE OUR STATE THE FOREIGN POLICY GOALS.

POLICY GOALS. THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DID NOT

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DID NOT ASK ME TO HELP THE CLINTON

ASK ME TO HELP THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN OR HARM THE TRUMP

CAMPAIGN OR HARM THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, NOR WOULD I HAVE TAKEN

CAMPAIGN, NOR WOULD I HAVE TAKEN ANY SUCH STEPS IF THEY HAD.

ANY SUCH STEPS IF THEY HAD. PARTNER

PARTNER PARTISANSHIP OF THIS TYPE IS NOT

PARTISANSHIP OF THIS TYPE IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH A CAREER FOREIGN

COMPATIBLE WITH A CAREER FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICER.

SERVICE OFFICER. WITH RESPECT TO MAYOR GIULIANI,

WITH RESPECT TO MAYOR GIULIANI, I HAVE ONLY HAD MINIMUM CONTACT

I HAVE ONLY HAD MINIMUM CONTACT WITH HIM, A TOTAL OF THREE.

WITH HIM, A TOTAL OF THREE. NONE RELATED TO THE EVENTS AT

NONE RELATED TO THE EVENTS AT ISSUE.

ISSUE. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND MR. GIULIANI'S MOTIVES FOR

MR. GIULIANI'S MOTIVES FOR ATTACKING ME NOR I CAN OFFER AN

ATTACKING ME NOR I CAN OFFER AN OPINION ON WHETHER HE BELIEVES

OPINION ON WHETHER HE BELIEVES THE ALLEGATIONS HE SPREAD ABOUT

THE ALLEGATIONS HE SPREAD ABOUT ME.

ME. CLEARLY NO ONE AT THE STATE

CLEARLY NO ONE AT THE STATE DEPARTMENT DID.

DEPARTMENT DID. WHAT I CAN SAY IS MR. GIULIANI

WHAT I CAN SAY IS MR. GIULIANI SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THOSE CLAIMS

SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THOSE CLAIMS WERE SUSPECT COMING AS THEY

WERE SUSPECT COMING AS THEY REPORTEDLY DID COMING FROM

REPORTEDLY DID COMING FROM QUESTIONS WITH QUESTIONABLE

QUESTIONS WITH QUESTIONABLE MOTIVES AND REASONS TO BELIEVE

MOTIVES AND REASONS TO BELIEVE THEIR POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL

THEIR POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL AMBITIONS WOULD BE STYMIED BY

AMBITIONS WOULD BE STYMIED BY OUR ANTI-CORRUPTION POLICY IN

OUR ANTI-CORRUPTION POLICY IN UKRAINE.

UKRAINE. OUR UKRAINE POLICY HAS BEEN

OUR UKRAINE POLICY HAS BEEN THROWN INTO DISARRAY AND SHADY

THROWN INTO DISARRAY AND SHADY INTERESTS THE WORLD OVER HAVE

INTERESTS THE WORLD OVER HAVE LEARNED HOW LITTLE IT TAKES TO

LEARNED HOW LITTLE IT TAKES TO REMOVE AN AMERICAN AMBASSADOR

REMOVE AN AMERICAN AMBASSADOR WHO DOES NOT GIVE THEM WHAT THEY

WHO DOES NOT GIVE THEM WHAT THEY WANT.

WANT. >> DID ANYONE AT THE STATE

>> DID ANYONE AT THE STATE DEPARTMENT EVER EXPRESS CONCERNS

DEPARTMENT EVER EXPRESS CONCERNS ABOUT YOUR JOB PERFORMANCE?

ABOUT YOUR JOB PERFORMANCE? >> NO.

>> NO. >> NOW, DURING THIS CONVERSATION

>> NOW, DURING THIS CONVERSATION DID THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TELL

DID THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TELL YOU ABOUT YOUR FUTURE AS THE

YOU ABOUT YOUR FUTURE AS THE AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE?

AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE? >> WELL, HE TOLD ME I NEEDED TO

>> WELL, HE TOLD ME I NEEDED TO LEAVE.

LEAVE. >> WHAT DID HE SAY?

>> WHAT DID HE SAY? >> THERE WAS A LOT OF BACK AND

>> THERE WAS A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH, BUT ULTIMATELY HE SAID

FORTH, BUT ULTIMATELY HE SAID THE WORDS THAT, YOU KNOW, EVERY

THE WORDS THAT, YOU KNOW, EVERY FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICER

FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICER UNDERSTANDS, THE PRESIDENT HAS

UNDERSTANDS, THE PRESIDENT HAS LOST CONFIDENCE IN YOU.

LOST CONFIDENCE IN YOU. THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, A TERRIBLE

THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, A TERRIBLE THING TO HEAR.

THING TO HEAR. AND I SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, I

AND I SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, I GUESS I HAVE TO GO THEN.

GUESS I HAVE TO GO THEN. BUT NO -- NO REAL REASON WAS

BUT NO -- NO REAL REASON WAS OFFERED AS TO WHY I HAD TO LEAVE

OFFERED AS TO WHY I HAD TO LEAVE AND WHY IT WAS BEING DONE IN

AND WHY IT WAS BEING DONE IN SUCH A MANNER.

SUCH A MANNER. >> DID YOU HAVE ANY INDICATION

>> DID YOU HAVE ANY INDICATION THAT THE STATE DEPARTMENT HAD

THAT THE STATE DEPARTMENT HAD LOST CONFIDENCE IN YOU?

LOST CONFIDENCE IN YOU? >> NO.

>> NO. >> AND WERE YOU PROVIDED ANY

>> AND WERE YOU PROVIDED ANY REASON WHY THE PRESIDENT LOST

REASON WHY THE PRESIDENT LOST CONFIDENCE IN YOU?

CONFIDENCE IN YOU? >> NO.

>> NO. >> IN YOUR OPENING STATEMENT

>> IN YOUR OPENING STATEMENT THAT YOU HAD LEFT UKRAINE BY THE

THAT YOU HAD LEFT UKRAINE BY THE TIME OF THE JULY 25th CALL

TIME OF THE JULY 25th CALL BETWEEN PRESIDENT TRUMP AND

BETWEEN PRESIDENT TRUMP AND PRESIDENT ZELENSKY, WHEN WAS THE

PRESIDENT ZELENSKY, WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT YOU SAW THE CALL

FIRST TIME THAT YOU SAW THE CALL RECORD FOR THIS PHONE CALL?

RECORD FOR THIS PHONE CALL? >> WHEN IT WAS RELEASED PUBLICLY

>> WHEN IT WAS RELEASED PUBLICLY AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER, I

AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER, I BELIEVE.

BELIEVE. >> AND PRIOR TO READING THAT

>> AND PRIOR TO READING THAT CALL RECORD, WERE YOU AWARE THAT

CALL RECORD, WERE YOU AWARE THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD SPECIFICALLY

PRESIDENT TRUMP HAD SPECIFICALLY MADE REFERENCE TO YOU IN THAT

MADE REFERENCE TO YOU IN THAT CALL?

CALL? >> NO.

>> NO. >> WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION TO

>> WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION TO LEARNING THAT?

LEARNING THAT? >> I WAS SHOCKED.

>> I WAS SHOCKED. ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED.

ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED. AND DEVASTATED, FRANKLY.

AND DEVASTATED, FRANKLY. >> WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY

>> WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY DEVASTATED?

DEVASTATED? >> I WAS SHOCKED AND DEVASTATED

>> I WAS SHOCKED AND DEVASTATED THAT I WOULD FEATURE IN A PHONE

THAT I WOULD FEATURE IN A PHONE CALL BETWEEN TWO HEADS OF STATE

CALL BETWEEN TWO HEADS OF STATE IN SUCH A MANNER, WHERE

IN SUCH A MANNER, WHERE PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID I WAS BAD

PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID I WAS BAD NEWS TO ANOTHER WORLD LEADER AND

NEWS TO ANOTHER WORLD LEADER AND THAT I WOULD BE GOING THROUGH

THAT I WOULD BE GOING THROUGH THINGS.

THINGS. SO, I WAS -- IT WAS A TERRIBLE

SO, I WAS -- IT WAS A TERRIBLE MOMENT.

MOMENT. A PERSON WHO SAW ME ACTUALLY

A PERSON WHO SAW ME ACTUALLY READING THE TRANSCRIPT SAID THAT

READING THE TRANSCRIPT SAID THAT THE COLOR DRAINED MY FACE.

THE COLOR DRAINED MY FACE. I THINK I EVEN HAD A PHYSICAL

I THINK I EVEN HAD A PHYSICAL REACTION.

REACTION. >> THE NEXT EXCERPT WHEN THE

>> THE NEXT EXCERPT WHEN THE PRESIDENT REFERENCES YOU WAS A

PRESIDENT REFERENCES YOU WAS A SHOT ONE, BUT HE SAID, WELL,

SHOT ONE, BUT HE SAID, WELL, SHE'S GOING TO GO THROUGH SOME

SHE'S GOING TO GO THROUGH SOME THINGS.

THINGS. WHAT DID YOU THINK WHEN

WHAT DID YOU THINK WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMP TOLD PRESIDENT

PRESIDENT TRUMP TOLD PRESIDENT ZELENSKY AND YOU READ THAT YOU

ZELENSKY AND YOU READ THAT YOU WERE GOING TO GO THROUGH SOME

WERE GOING TO GO THROUGH SOME THINGS?

THINGS? >> I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK,

>> I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK, BUT I WAS VERY CONCERNED.

BUT I WAS VERY CONCERNED. >> WHAT WERE YOU CONCERNED

>> WHAT WERE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT?

ABOUT? >> SHE'S GOING TO GO THROUGH

>> SHE'S GOING TO GO THROUGH SOME THINGS.

SOME THINGS. IT DIDN'T SOUND GOOD.

IT DIDN'T SOUND GOOD. IT SOUNDED LIKE A THREAT.

IT SOUNDED LIKE A THREAT. >> AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH, AS WE

>> AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH, AS WE SIT HERE TESTIFYING, THE

SIT HERE TESTIFYING, THE PRESIDENT IS ATTACKING YOU ON

PRESIDENT IS ATTACKING YOU ON TWITTER.

TWITTER. AND I'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU A

AND I'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO RESPOND.

CHANCE TO RESPOND. I'LL READ PART OF HIS TWEETS.

I'LL READ PART OF HIS TWEETS. EVERYWHERE MARIE YOVANOVITCH

EVERYWHERE MARIE YOVANOVITCH WENT TURNED BAD.

WENT TURNED BAD. SHE STARTED OUT IN SOMALIA.

SHE STARTED OUT IN SOMALIA. HOW DID THAT GO?

HOW DID THAT GO? HE GOES ON TO SAY, LATER IN THE

HE GOES ON TO SAY, LATER IN THE TWEET IS THE U.S. PRESIDENT HAS

TWEET IS THE U.S. PRESIDENT HAS THE ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO APPOINT

THE ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO APPOINT AMBASSADORS.

AMBASSADORS. FIRST OF ALL, AMBASSADOR

FIRST OF ALL, AMBASSADOR YOVANOVITCH, THE SENATE HAS A

YOVANOVITCH, THE SENATE HAS A CHANCE TO CONFIRM OR DENY AN

CHANCE TO CONFIRM OR DENY AN AMBASSADOR, DO TLE NOT?

AMBASSADOR, DO TLE NOT? >> YES, ADVISE AND CONSENT.

>> YES, ADVISE AND CONSENT. >> WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO

>> WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND TO THE PRESIDENT'S

RESPOND TO THE PRESIDENT'S ATTACK THAT EVERYWHERE YOU WENT

ATTACK THAT EVERYWHERE YOU WENT TURNED BAD?

TURNED BAD? >> WELL, I -- I MEAN, I -- I

>> WELL, I -- I MEAN, I -- I DON'T THINK I HAVE SUCH POWERS,

DON'T THINK I HAVE SUCH POWERS, NOT IN MOGADISHU, SOMALIA AND IN

NOT IN MOGADISHU, SOMALIA AND IN OTHER PLACES.

OTHER PLACES. I ACTUALLY THINK WHERE I'VE

I ACTUALLY THINK WHERE I'VE SERVED OVER THE YEARS, I AND

SERVED OVER THE YEARS, I AND OTHERS HAVE DEMONSTRABLY MADE

OTHERS HAVE DEMONSTRABLY MADE THINGS BETTER, YOU KNOW, FOR THE

THINGS BETTER, YOU KNOW, FOR THE U.S. AS WELL AS FOR THE

U.S. AS WELL AS FOR THE COUNTRIES THAT I'VE SERVED IN.

COUNTRIES THAT I'VE SERVED IN. UKRAINE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHERE

UKRAINE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHERE THERE ARE HUGE CHALLENGES,

THERE ARE HUGE CHALLENGES, INCLUDING ON THE ISSUE WE'RE

INCLUDING ON THE ISSUE WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY OF CORRUPTION.

DISCUSSING TODAY OF CORRUPTION. HUGE CHALLENGES.

HUGE CHALLENGES. BUT THEY'VE MADE A LOT OF

BUT THEY'VE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS SINCE 2014, INCLUDING

PROGRESS SINCE 2014, INCLUDING IN THE YEARS THAT I WAS THERE.

IN THE YEARS THAT I WAS THERE. AND I THINK, IN PART, I MEAN,

AND I THINK, IN PART, I MEAN, UKRAINIAN PEOPLE GET THE MOST --

UKRAINIAN PEOPLE GET THE MOST -- THE MOST CREDIT FOR THAT.

THE MOST CREDIT FOR THAT. BUT A PART OF THAT CREDIT GOES

BUT A PART OF THAT CREDIT GOES TO THE WORK OF THE UNITED STATES

>> I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW,

>> I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW, AMBASSADOR, THAT SOME OF US HERE

AMBASSADOR, THAT SOME OF US HERE TAKE WITNESS INTIMIDATION VERY,

TAKE WITNESS INTIMIDATION VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY.

VERY SERIOUSLY. >> DO YOU THINK PART OF MAKING

>> DO YOU THINK PART OF MAKING THE UKRAINIAN INTELLIGENCE TO DO

THE UKRAINIAN INTELLIGENCE TO DO THINGS COUNTER TO U.S.

THINGS COUNTER TO U.S. INTERESTS?

INTERESTS? I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY WHAT

I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY WHAT THE UKRAINIAN ESTABLISHMENT