yuriy lutsenko, he's the prosecutor. he's no longer the prosecutor. just unpack who he is and why he might've wanted rudy giuliani's help. >> so yuriy lutsenko is the former top prosecutor in ukraine and people have probably heard his name because ambassador yovanovitch testified at some length about him. she believed and americans believed that he was kind of a corrupt guy. and he wanted her, that's ambassador yovanovitch, out of her job because she was sniffing around his corruption. so he's interested in u.s. politics because he wants to maintain his job. he wants influence over here, like any foreign government want influence over here. and then rudy is interested in him because he believes the ukrainian prosecutor can investigate the bidens. the biden family. this prosecutor had been involved in an investigation, which at this time was dormant, into a company that employed joe biden's son. so that's why rudy is interested in him. and then he, of course, has his own reasons to be interested in the u.s. >> just quickly, if this deal had gone throug

yuriy lutsenko. with ambassador volker an eye. ambassador taylor wrote to us as follows.re and the referring to ukraine foreign minister vadym prystaiko. very concerned about what lutsenko told them. according to our g rudy giuliani there's a lenski potus meeting will not happen. volker responded. tell the dean to let the official us government representatives speak for the u s lutsenko has his own self interest here. that he had communicated that message to the ukrainians and he added. i briefed all rick this afternoon on. referring to state department counselor. rick brechbuhl. 3 things are critical about this what's appexchange. first while the ukrainians were in washington at the white house. mister giuliani was communicating with ukrainians without our knowledge. mister giuliani was communicating with the reportedly corrupt ukrainian prosecutor lutsenko and discussing whether is a lenski trump meeting was going to happen. their brief all rick brechbuhl who is the counselor to secretary of state pompeo. and even as late as september 24th of this year. secretary pompeo

yovanovitch did not just his soft corrupt ukrainians like the corrupt former prosecutor general yuriy lutsenko. certain americans like rudy giuliani donald trump's personal tourney and 2 individuals now indicted who worked with him igor fruman and let parness. fruman parness and others who would come to include the president's own son don junior, promoted to smear campaign against her based on false allegations. at the state department there was an effort to push back. to obtain a statement of support from secretary pompeo. but those efforts failed when it became clear the president trump want to her. some of argued that a president has the ability to nominate or remove any investor he wants that they serve at the pleasure of the president. and that is true. the question before us is not whether donald trump could recall an american ambassador with a stellar reputation for fighting corruption in ukraine. but why would he want to. why did rudy giuliani want her gone. and why did donald trump. and why would dobut for that someone blew the whistle. ambassador yovanovitch was serving our nation's

yuriy lutsenko. i >> remember the possibility of prosecution. >> they raised it and you talked about it. >> excuse me congressman i'm sorry. to be clear, there was a lot of talk in kiev at that time about whether the new team would be prosecuting the former president. i had met with the president before any opposition as well. i wanted to call mr. earmarks attention to the problems and i'm very familiar with other examples that have gone for prosecutions of the former government. these have created deep divisions in the society. so i cited president zelensky's inauguration speech -- i'm sorry, his national speech from august 24th and it was all about unifying the country. i cautioned mr. yermak saying that pursuing prosecution of president pushing go risks deepening the opposite of president zelensky as he wants to do. it's >> fair to describe that you discouraged him from such action? >> i discouraged him on the potential impact and what was mr. yermak's response. >> i am professionals in saying tha

this effort where some of those se corrupt former prosecutors i had encountered particularly yuriy lutsenkofalse information in order to extrt revenge against those who expose their miscouct, including us diplats, ukrainian anti-corruption officials and reform minded civil society grps in ukraine. during the te spring and summer of 2019 i became alarmed as those efforts bore fruit. they led to the ouster of investor yovanovitch and hampered us efforts to establi rapport with the news. let's get ministrations in ukraine. in mid august, it became clear to me that giuliani's efforts to jenna politically motivated investigations. we're now infecting us engagement th ukraine leveraging president's lewinsky's desire for a white house meetg. and alwa have been conditionality placed on our sovereign loan guarantees for ukraine conditns include anti-corruption ror as stability goals and social safety nets. the international monetary fund does the same thing. congress and the executive branch work together tout conditionality on some security assistance in the ukraine security assistance initiative.

one of the main proponents to get yovanovitch out of office was no other than yuri yuriy lutsenko. e same lutsenko who was in negotiations to pay giuliani hundreds of thousands of dollars. now the other major reason why we are paying attention to this story and watching it very closely is about president trump. we know the president is already distancing himself from his personal attorney. we heard him in that o'reilly interview essentially saying i never directed him to do anything. this gives the president and the white house an out. they can paint giuliani as a rogue actor here and say that he was just doing his own business while he was there. so these are two lines to watch very closely as the story develops. >> kristen holmes, there's always a new nugget every single day in this investigation. thank you. joining us to discuss is cnn political analyst karen demurgen for "the washington post" and cnn legal analyst shan wu, defense attorney and former federal prosecutor. shan, if giuliani was trying to make these business deals. we're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars, wit

remember, she was pushed aside because giuliani and his two sidekicks were t working with yuriy lutsenko to try to open an investigation on hunter biden. and it wasn't working by the way. they tried to get her out of the way, and then they go to plan b. that's when ambassador sondland comes in. that's when the three amigos come in, and this phone call that maybe we'll talk about in a minute --al that's when they're trying to work to get the same thing done. but i think it's really important for everybody to understand that this was something the president was seeking to achieve months before this july m 25th phone call, an not once in seven hours of testimony did any republican challenge those basic facts. >> melanie zanona, when applause breaks out in a hearing room on capitol hill, you know if you're the republicans, you may have a problem. and we note following the president's attack, republican questioners started lining up to say at the start of their questioning, we thank you for your service. this is getting tougher for them. what have you gleaned from them in your reporting this

giuliani was still talking with ukrainian prosecutor yuriy lutsenko. in whatsapp messages with ambassador volker and i, ambassador taylor wrote to us as follows. just had a meeting with andriy and vadym, referring to ukraine forei 's foreign minister. very concerned about what he told him. meaning according to rg, this zelensky/potus will not happen. volker responded, good grief. please deal vadym to let u.s. government representatives speak for the u.s. lutsenko has his own self-interest here. taylor confirmed that he had communicated that message to the ukrainians, and he added, i briefed ulrich this afternoon on this. referring to state department counselor ulrich brechbuhl. again, everyone's in the loop. three things are critical about this whatsapp exchange. first, while the ukrainians were in washington at the white house, mr. giuliani was communicating with the ukrainians without our knowledge. ambassador taylor, ambassador volker and i were all surprised by this. second, mr. giuliani was communicating with the reportedly corrupt ukrainian prose

. >> was one of those corrupt people prosecutor general yuriy lutsenko? >> yes, i believe so. >> was another of those, a man named victor shokin? >> apparently so although i have never met him. >> at some point, did you come to learn that both lutsenko and shokin wither in touch with rudy giuliani, president trump's representative? >> yes. >>, in fact, did giuliani try to overturn a decision that you participated in to deny shokin a visa? >> yes, that is what i was told. >> and that denial was based on mr. shokin's corruption? >> yes, that's true. >> and was it mr. lutsenko among others who coordinated with mr. giuliani to peddle false accusations against you as well as the bidens? >> yes, that is my understanding. >> and were these smears also amplified by the president's son, donald trump jr. as well as certain hosts on fox? >> yes. yes, that is the case. >> in the face of this smear campaign, did colleagues at the state department try to get a statement of support for you from secretary pompeo? >> yes. >> were they successful? >> no. >> did you come to

quote, giuliani began negotiations with yuriy lutsenko about a possible agreement in february. in the agreement, giuliani's company would receive payment to represent lutsenko as the ukrainian sought to recover assets he believed had been stolen from the government in kiev. the "post" also reports agreements were never executed and there is no indication giuliani was paid. giuliani for his part told the "wall street journal" today he was in talks with ukraine but it was for even more money than that. giuliani said lutsenko asked him to represent both the ukrainian ministry of justice and lutsenko personally on two matters. the journal goes on to report "giuliani said he subsequently drew up two retainer agreements for a total of about 500 large and gave them to lutsenko. the next day giuliani decided he couldn't represent lutsenko personally because he believed doing so would pose a conflict with his representation of the president." giuliani said he declined the ministry of justice contract and was never paid a penny for that. on sunday giuliani denied any financial interests

in ukraine we now know he was trying to work out a deal with the former chief prosecutor, yuriy lutsenko, the guy who worked with giuliani and his indicted associates to oust former u.s. ambassador of ukraine marie yovanovich. >> was it mr. lutsenko among others who coordinated with mr. giuliani to peddle false accusations against you as well as the bidens? >> yes, that is my understanding. >> the post and other outlets revealed today that around the same time that giuliani and lutsenko were smearing yovanovich in order to clear the way in part at least for trump's extortion scheme, legal agreements are drafted under which giuliani's company would have received more than $200,000 to represent lutsenko. in addition, another retainer agreement called for giuliani partners to receive another $300,000 in the ukrainian ministry of justice. those deals reportedly did not go through though federal prosecutors are reportedly now scrutinizing giuliani's ukrainian business dealings and finances as part of their broader probe into giuliani's alleged corruption. today giuliani claimed that he did no

giuliani's relationships with some of the key figures in ukraine including former prosecutor yuriy lutsenko and what the documents show. there are a few newspapers that have reviewed documents, contracts from giuliani partners, his security firm that were beginning the process of a business engagement which would represent in one instance, it was $200,000. in another it was $300,000 in retainer fees with this ukrainian official and separately with the ministry of justice. so a government entity in ukraine. what is important to point out is these were contracts that were not finalized and not pursued and, therefore, no business went forward. but it raises the question about at the time this was happening, which was earlier this year, the beginning of 2019, was giuliani pursuing interest for his own personal self gain at the same time he was dealing with officials trying to gather information that might be useful to the president, whether it was with respect to the 2016 election or the bidens and their activities in ukraine. giuliani said he didn't think it was appropriate to go forward with

giuliani and parnas and another of his associates, igor fruman spoke with shokin again, and with yuriy lutsenkoagainst biden. shokin criticized an ambassador to ukraine, in addition here, marie yovanovitch. "the washington post" reports that during those conversations, lutsenko asked giuliani to represent him. lutsenko wanted to recover assets that he claimed had been stolen from ukraine. the pair discussed agreements and reportedly this involved hundreds of thousands of dollars in retainers for giuliani. giuliani eventually decided not to take that job. then we take you to late april in the calendar. yovanovitch was removed from her position. she was targeted by giuliani and others in trump's circle on the way up to this release and this firing. fruman and parnas at the same time were meeting with ukrainian officials. now, parnas told the new yorker they were working to help dig up dirt on behalf of the president and garner new business for themselves along the way. then in way. in may volodymyr zelenskiy takes office as the ukrainian president. this is when the president said to work with giu

and that -- with yuriy lutsenko. both made accusations against biden.ador to ukraine. in addition here, marie yovanovitch. now the washington. >> reporter: lutsenko asked -- he claimed had been stolen from ukraine. the pair discussed agreements and reportedly this involved hundreds of thousands of dollars in retainers for giuliani. giuliani eventually decided not to take that job. then we take you to late april in the calendar. yovanovitch was removed from her position. she was targeted by giuliani and others in trump's circle on the way up to this release. this firing. fruman and parnas at the same time were meeting with ukrainian officials. now, parnas told the new yorker that they were both working to both help dig up dirt on behalf of the president and garner new business for themselves along the way. then in may, vladimir zelensky takes office as the new ukrainian president. this is when the president told his team this is when the president told his team to works with giuliani on ukraine. this continued to aid in the pressure campaign to get ukrai

another draft agreement called for ukraine's former top prosecutor yuriy lutsenko to pay the company $200,000 to help. both the times and the post report the agreements were never finalized but giuliani has repeatedly made this claim about his work in ukraine. >> i have no financial interest in the ukraine. i'm not gonna financially profit from anything that i know of in the ukraine. i have no business interest in ukraine. it is untrue. it is false. >> "the new york times" talked with giuliani about the draft agreements. according to the times, quote, he said that a ukrainian official approached him this year seeking to hire him personally. giuliani said he dismissed the suggestion but spent about a month considering a separate deal with the ukrainian government. he then rejected that idea. joining us now to dig into this and other impeachment related headlines, natasha, national security correspondent at politico and msnbc contributor. jennifer reuben, washington post opinion writer. and also an msnbc contributor. and with us is msnbc legal analyst danny a hacevallos. one is the rep

yuriy lutsenko. i >> remember the possibility of prosecution. >> they raised it and you talked about it. >> excuse me congressman i'm sorry. to be clear, there was a lot of talk in kiev at that time about whether the new team would be prosecuting the former president. i had met with the president before any opposition as well. i wanted to call mr. earmarks attention to the problems and i'm very familiar with other examples that have gone for prosecutions of the former government. these have created deep divisions in the society. so i cited president zelensky's inauguration speech -- i'm sorry, his national speech from august 24th and it was all about unifying the country. i cautioned mr. yermak saying that pursuing prosecution of president pushing go risks deepening the opposite of president zelensky as he wants to do. it's >> fair to describe that you discouraged him from such action? >> i discouraged him on the potential impact and what was mr. yermak's response. >> i am professionals in saying tha

yuriy lutsenko. i >> remember the possibility of prosecution. >> they raised it and you talked about it. >> excuse me congressman i'm sorry. to be clear, there was a lot of talk in kiev at that time about whether the new team would be prosecuting the former president. i had met with the president before any opposition as well. i wanted to call mr. earmarks attention to the problems and i'm very familiar with other examples that have gone for prosecutions of the former government. these have created deep divisions in the society. so i cited president zelensky's inauguration speech -- i'm sorry, his national speech from august 24th and it was all about unifying the country. i cautioned mr. yermak saying that pursuing prosecution of president pushing go risks deepening the opposite of president zelensky as he wants to do. it's >> fair to describe that you discouraged him from such action? >> i discouraged him on the potential impact and what was mr. yermak's response. >> i am professionals in saying tha

lutsenko. >> we reviewed drafts and in fact retainer agreements that mr. giuliani signed with various ukrainian officials, one a draft agreement unsigned with yuriy lutsen lutsenko, top prosecutors in ukraine at the time and helping with the dirt-digging campaign with joe biden and giuliani proposed in this draft agreement a $200,000 contract to do asset recovery for the government of ukraine to try to get money allegedly stolen and had gone overseas. we also reviewed another contract that he did sign for $300,000 with the ukrainian ministry of justice. none executed, but were various incarnations of these contracts that giuliani was trying to do business with various ukrainian officials while also serving as the president's personal attorney and doing this dirt-digging of the campaign. >> biden jumped in the race officially in april. according to you and your reporting, did these talks -- when did it originate? way back, wintertime? >> the first agreement that we saw proposed was in february of this year, and he had met with -- biden was known to be a leading candidate for the democratic presidential nomination and this discussion about alleged corruption invol

some of those same corrupt former prosecutors i had encountered, particularly victor shokin and yuriy lutsenko. they were now peddling false information in order to extract revenge against those who had exposed their misconduct, including u.s. diplomats, ukrainian anti-corruption officials and reform-minded civil society groups in ukraine. during the late spring and summer of 2019, i became alarmed as those efforts bore fruit. they led to the ouster of ambassador yovanovitch and hampered u.s. efforts to establish rapport with the new zelensky administration in ukraine. in mid-august it became clear to me that giuliani's efforts to gin up politically motivated investigations were now infecting u.s. engagement with ukraine, leveraging president zelensky's desire for a white house meeting. there are and always have been conditionality placed on our sovereign loan guarantees for ukraine. conditions include anti-corruption reforms, as well as meeting larger stability goals and social safety nets. the international monetary fund does the same thing. congress and the executive branch work together to

yovanovitch did not just piss off corrupt ukrainians, like the corrupt former prosecutor general yuriy lutsenkosonal attorney, and two individuals now indictd who worked with him, igor fruman and lev parnas. lutsenko, giuliani, fruman, parnas and others who would come to include the president's own own don junior promoted a smear campaign against her based on false allegations. at the state department there was an effort to push back to obtain a statement of support from secretary pompeo. but those efforts failed when it became clear that president trump wanted her gone. some have argued that a president has the ability to nominate or remove any ambassador he wants. that they serve at the pleasure of the president. and that is true. the question before us is not whether donald trump could recall an american ambassador with a stellar reputation for fighting corruption in ukraine, but why would he want to? why did rudy giuliani want her gone? and why did trump? and why would donald trump instruct the new team he put in place, the three amigos, gordon sondland, rick perry and kurt volker to work w

relationship with former president poroshenko and some of his allies, including prosecutor general yuriy lutsenkoruly independent eents-corruption institutions that would help ensure no ukrainians, however powerful, were above the law. despite this resistance, the ambassador in the embassy kept pushing anti-corruption and other priorities of our policy towards ukraine. beginning in march 2019, the situation at the embassy and in ukraine changed dramatically. specifically, the three priorities of security, economy and justice and our support for ukrainian democratic resistance to russian aggression became overshadowed by a political agenda promoted by former new york city mayor rudy giuliani and a cadre of officials operate with a drcirect channel to the white house. that change began with the emorni emergence of press reports critical of yovanovitch and lutsenko and others to discredit her. in mid-march 2019, an embassy colleague learned that mr. lutsenko had complained that ambassador yovanovitch had, quote, destroyed him with her refusal to support him until he followed through with his reform