Giuliani Ally Who Pushed Debunked Theory Of Ukraine Election Meddling Says He'll Testify
BLITZER: We're following multiple breaking stories this hour. Tonight, CNN has learned that an ally of Rudy Giuliani already has been contacted by Senate staff and has agreed to testify about a debunked conspiracy theory he helped promote that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. CNN's Rene Marsh is her to break it all down for us. Rene, will this Ukrainian help Giuliani continue to push this bogus conspiracy theory?</s>RENE MARSH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, in a word, yes. And we're talking about a former Ukrainian diplomat, Andriy Telizhenko. He used to be based in the Ukrainian embassy here in Washington, D.C. But now, he is no longer based here in Washington, D.C. However, he is known to push the conspiracy theory that it was Ukraine and not Russia that meddled in the U.S. election. That's often in line with what Mr. Giuliani would like Americans to believe. So, yes, this is someone who would certainly repeat and parrot a lot of the conspiracy theories that you have heard the president's personal attorney pushing, Wolf.</s>BLITZER: Rene, where is Rudy Giuliani now, as far as we know, and what is he up to?</s>MARSH: Well, Rudy Giuliani telling CNN's Dana Bash today that he wrapped up that trip in Ukraine. He's been in Europe this week. It's been a part of this bid to keep digging into dirt on the President Trump's political rivals. As Democrats essentially continue to move towards these articles of impeachment, it is unclear where Giuliani is, as we speak. But last night into this morning, he has been tweeting. And his tweets, Wolf, can only be characterized in one way, false. On Thursday, he tweeted this, and we have the Thursday tweet. He says that the accounts chamber in Ukraine found an alleged misuse of $5.3 billion in U.S. funds during the Obama administration while Biden was the point man. Well, here are the facts. Multiple countries provided that $5.3 billion, not solely the U.S. And CNN spoke with a financial expert in Kiev who found that the U.S. provided only $1.4 billion. That's based on a 2017 report by Ukraine's account chamber. The chamber also reported improper accounting but they didn't say there was any misuse of the $5.3 billion. Let's go back to the tweet from Thursday night. He also says that the Obama embassy urged Ukraine police not to investigate all of this. Well, we can tell you there is no evidence to support that accusation that the U.S. embassy urged the Ukrainian police not to investigate. We should also point out once again there would be no reason to investigate because no one said there was any misuse of this money in Ukraine. Let's fast forward to Friday morning. That is when Giuliani tweeted this. Much of the $5.3 billion in U.S. aid that Ukraine reported as misused was given to the embassy's favored NGOs, that's non- governmental organizations. Well, we spoke with that same financial expert who points out that, actually, only 6 percent of the total funding, so just a very small slice went to non-governmental organizations, whereas the majority of this money, 70 percent of it went towards nuclear power station security and military support. So all in all, when you look at Giuliani's tweets from last night and to this morning, tweets like this, coupled with the trip to Europe that he took this week, they are all part of what critics are calling this disinformation campaign, Wolf, where they're essentially trying to create this counter argument to defend the president.</s>BLITZER: Excellent reporting as usual, Rene. Thank you very much. Let's talk a little bit more about all of this with the former top lawyer over at the FBI, CNN Legal Analyst, Jim Baker. So, Jim, this Ukrainian associate of Rudy Giuliani has agreed apparently to testify on Ukraine 2016 election and the DNC. What does this reveal about Giuliani's motives for his trip to Ukraine?</s>JIM BAKER, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I think it reveals that -- what's going to happen, I think, is that the House is going to indict the president but the Senate is going to try President Obama and Vice President Biden. In other words, they're going to try to hit the focus away from the president's conduct to the conduct that happened in 2016, what was going on, all these other allegations that we've heard about Vice President Biden. I think that's what they're going to try to do. That's -- there are going to be witnesses, it appears, who come in and talk about these various conspiracy theories. They're going to try to introduce evidence in a form of testimony and perhaps other documents and other reported facts or evidence, material that purports to be evidence. So I think that's what they're going to try to do, Wolf.</s>BLITZER: But do sitting U.S. senators -- do they continue to legitimize these conspiracy theories which have been promoted, as you know, by the Russian intelligence services by conducting this investigation?</s>BAKER: Well, the question here is, I think, who is going to be in charge of the trial. And what I've been thinking today is that probably one of the least happy people in America right now is Mitch McConnell, because he is going to have to try to preside over this whole thing. And I think the president and his immediate advisers are going to try to micromanage what happens in the Senate. So I'm not sure that the senators are actually -- I mean, they'll be voting, and they'll vote on what evidence comes in, they'll vote on the rules. They'll ultimately decide whether the president should be removed or not. But I don't think that they're actually going to be in control. I would speculate that the president is going to be calling the shots and perhaps live tweeting during the proceedings if he's not happy with how things are going.</s>BLITZER: But as you know, some Republican senators have already expressed deep concern, this whole thing, if there's a trial in the Senate, it looks almost certainly like there will be a trial in the Senate, this could turn out to be a circus and they don't want that. The Republicans, remember, they have 53 senators, 47 Democrats. You need a simple majority to move, to get witnesses to appear, things along that line. It's, by no means, a done deal.</s>BAKER: No, that's absolutely true. But they're under tremendous pressure from the president and he's going to be calling them out if they don't vote -- I would expect that he would call them out if they don't vote the way that he wants with respect to questions of evidence. Because, remember, the Senate decides both the evidentiary questions, what the rules are for the proceeding and so on, and then they ultimately are the jurors in the sense that they decide whether to impeach or not. But I don't think they're really going to be in control in the way they think. And they haven't been able to resist pressure from the White House so far and I just don't know how they're going to do it.</s>BLITZER: Rudy Giuliani, as you know, is already under federal investigation for his work in Ukraine. Are his current efforts -- do you believe, Jim, are they putting him at further legal risk?</s>BAKER: Yes. This is one I've struggled to try to understand. Yes, I do think they are putting him at further legal risk. And so I'm asking myself why in the world is he doing this. Isn't somebody telling him not to do this, this is a bad idea? And to be honest, I have no evidence of this, but I'm starting to wonder whether he has an understanding with the president, that no matter what he does, the president will pardon him before he leaves office, whether that's in 2020 or sometime thereafter. Otherwise, this doesn't make any sense to me. I don't why he would be doing this. Giuliani is a smart person. He should know that he's exposing himself legally here and yet he's proceeding forward. And I just don't get it other than this pardon theory. And I admit that it's fully -- I fully meant it's a theory.</s>BLITZER: Yes. All right, Jim Baker, as usual, thanks so much for joining us. There's another major story that's breaking right now, a deadly shooting attack at a U.S. Navy Base, the naval base in Florida. The gunman was a member of the Saudi military. Is there a terror connection? We're getting new information.