Page:20191203 - full report hpsci impeachment inquiry - 20191203.pdf/112

 recalled “at least referring to an investigation that Rudy Giuliani was pushing,” Ambassador Sondland replied, “I would have, yes.”711

After the lunch, Mr. Holmes dropped off Ambassador Sondland at his hotel, the Hyatt Regency Kyiv. Mr. Holmes then returned to the U.S. Embassy.712 Ambassador Taylor, the acting Ambassador in Kyiv, was still visiting the front line. So when he arrived at the Embassy, Mr. Holmes briefed his immediate supervisor, Kristina Kvien, Deputy Chief of Mission at U.S. Embassy Kyiv, about the President’s call with Ambassador Sondland and Ambassador Sondland’s subsequent description of President Trump’s priorities for Ukraine.713

After taking a long-planned vacation from July 27 to August 5, Mr. Holmes told Ambassador Taylor about his lunch with Ambassador Sondland on the first day he returned to work, August 6.714 Mr. Holmes told the Committee that he did not brief the call in detail to Ambassador Taylor because “it was obvious what the President was pressing for”:


 * Of course that’s what’s going on. Of course the President is pressing for a Biden investigation before he’ll do these things the Ukrainians want. There was nodding agreement. So did I go through every single word in the call? No, because everyone by that point agreed, it was obvious what the President was pressing for.715

In October 2019, following the public release of testimony by several witnesses pursuant to the Committee’s impeachment inquiry, Mr. Holmes reminded Ambassador Taylor about Ambassador Sondland’s July 26 conversation with President Trump. Ambassador Taylor was preparing to return to Washington and testify publicly before the Committee. Mr. Holmes had been following news coverage of the inquiry and realized he had unique, firsthand evidence that “potentially bore on the question of whether the President did, in fact, have knowledge” of efforts to press the Ukrainian President to publicly announce investigations:


 * I came to realize that I had firsthand knowledge regarding certain events on July 26 that had not otherwise been reported and that those events potentially bore on the question of whether the President did, in fact, have knowledge that those senior officials were using the levers of diplomatic power to influence the new Ukrainian President to announce the opening of a criminal investigation against President Trump’s political opponent. It is at that point that I made the observation to Ambassador Taylor that the incident I had witnessed on July 26th had acquired greater significance, which is what he reported in his testimony last week and is what led to the subpoena for me to appear here today.716

Mr. Holmes testified that the July 26 call became “sort of a touchstone piece of information” for diplomats at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv who “were trying to understand why we weren’t able to get the meeting” between President Trump and President Zelensky and “what was going on with the security hold.”717 He elaborated: