Q. (Steve Castor, Republican Staffer, House Oversight & Government Reform Committee). Before the removal of Lutsenko's predecessor, Shokin, there was effort on behalf of the U.S. Government, including Vice President Biden, to have Shokin removed, correct?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: Well, one thing, just to remind, as I said in my opening statement, which you now have, I was not present at that time, but I can tell you what I understand to be the case.
Q. Yes. Please do.
Ambassador Yovanovitch: So Vice President Biden, the IMF, pretty much every - every country that is present in Ukraine all felt that Mr. Shokin as prosecutor general was not doing his job.
Q. Which led to calls to oust him?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: Yes.
Q. And the legislature has to remove him. Is that correct?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: Yes, that's correct.
Q. And then that occurred.
Ambassador Yovanovitch: Yes.
Q. And then Lutsenko comes on board.
Ambassador Yovanovitch: Yes.
Q. And was he, in your experience - because you're very knowledgeable about the region, so when I ask you in your opinion, you have a very informed opinion - was Lutsenko better or worse than Shokin?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: l mean, honestly, I don't know. I mean, I think they're cut from the same cloth.
Q. Equally bad?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: I'm not sure that these comparisons are helpful.
Q. Okay. And there was also an issue with the special prosecutor, Kholodnitsky?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: Uh-huh.
Q. Were there any - any other beacons of hope in the prosecutorial world of Ukraine?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: Well, it was kind of an unreformed office, shall we say. So I think - I think some of the people, who I didn't actually personally know, but some of the people who came in in the early days after the Revolution of Dignity, were considered to be quite good. And I think some of them have been brought back again under -- under this new President, Zelensky. So, you know, I'm always hopeful about the possibility for change.
Q. There was never as much of a clamor to remove Lutsenko as there was Shokin. Is that fair to say?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: Yeah, I think that's fair.
Q. And what do you account for that?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: I would say that there was, I think, still a hope that one could work with Mr. Lutsenko. There was also the prospect of Presidential elections coming up, and as seemed likely by, you know, December, January, February, whatever the time was, that there would be a change of government. And I think we certainly hoped that Mr. Lutsenko would be replaced in the natural order of things, which is, in fact, what happened.
We also had more leverage before. I mean, this was not easy. President Poroshenko and Mr. Shokin go way back. In fact, I think they are godfathers to each other's children. So this was, you know, this was a big deal. But we had assistance, as did the IMF, that we could condition.
Q. (Daniel Goldman, Democratic Staffer, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence). Could I just make one point of clarification? You said President Poroshenko and Mr. Shokin go way back?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: Yes.
Q. Do you mean Shokin or Lutsenko?
Ambassador Yovanovitch: Well, I think they probably all go way back. It’s a small elite. But President Poroshenko and Shokin go way back, because my understanding is that they are each other’s – godparents for each other’s children.
