Democrats Say Trump’s Ukraine Conspiracy Theories Parallel Putin’s

“I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine.”

President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin meet in Osaka, Japan on June,28,2019.Mikhail Svetlov/Getty Images

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

During Friday’s testimony by Marie Yovanovitch, the former US ambassador to Ukraine, Democrats argued that Trump’s views on that country run parallel to talking points pushed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

While questioning Yovanovitch, Daniel Goldman, a top Democratic aide on the House Intelligence Committee, cited a February 2, 2017, joint press conference held by Putin and the far-right leader of Hungary, Viktor Orban. In it, Putin pushed the view that it was Ukraine, not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 US election.

“We all know, during the presidential campaign in the United States, the Ukrainian government adopted a unilateral position in favor of one candidate,” Putin said. “More than that, certain oligarchs, certainly with the approval of the political leadership, funded this candidate, or female candidate, to be more precise.” 

The US intelligence community has concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 election, stealing and disseminating thousands of Democratic emails and spreading fake news damaging to Hillary Clinton. There is no evidence that Ukraine did anything similar.

Asked about Putin’s statement, Yovanovitch said that amid intense concern in the United States about Russian meddling, it was “classic” for Putin, a former KGB officer, “to try to throw off the scent and create an alternative narrative that maybe might get picked up and get some credence.”

Conspiracy theories about Ukraine interfering in the 2016 election have been seized upon by Trump defenders and by Trump himself. Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal attorney, worked to find Ukrainians who would help advance the claim. Numerous US officials have said that Trump held up both US military aid and a bilateral meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as part of a pressure campaign to extract from Zelensky a public pledge to launch politically motivated investigations—including into claims that Ukrainians had worked to assist Clinton in 2016.

In his July 25 call with Zelensky, Trump specifically referenced the debunked theory that the Democratic National Committee’s server, which US intelligence agencies have said was hacked by Russia, is secretly in Ukraine. Trump mentioned Crowdstrike, a private company that helped the DNC investigate the matter, and which features prominently in right-wing efforts to blame the hack on someone other than Russia. “I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine,” Trump told Zelensky. “They say Crowdstrike…I guess you have one of your wealthy people…The server, they say Ukraine has it.”

There’s no evidence that Trump learned of these conspiracy theories by listening to Putin, but the convergence of the two leaders’ views on Ukraine is nonetheless notable. 

“Is it your understanding that what Vladimir Putin is saying here in this press statement in February 2017 is similar to what President Trump says on the July 25 call related to the 2016 election?” Goldman asked on Friday.

“Maybe,” Yovanovitch responded.

Minutes before the start of Friday’s hearing, the White House released a rough transcript of an earlier call, from April 21 of this year, between Trump and Zelensky. During the April call—unlike in July—Trump didn’t demand any investigations, and the White House seemed to hope Friday that the positive tenor of the conversation would blunt the impact of Yovanovitch’s testimony. But the release raised questions about what changed after April. 

In a closed-door deposition in October, George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of State, offered a perspective. Summarizing briefings he had received, Kent testified that Putin and Orban, in phone conversations with Trump, had helped sour the US president on Ukraine after the April call. Both men had clear motives to do so. Russia seized Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and continues to back fighters in Ukraine’s Donbass region. Orban is in a spat with Ukraine over his effort to allow ethic Hungarians in Ukraine there to vote in Hungarian elections. 

“Both leaders, both Putin and Orban, extensively talked Ukraine down, said it was corrupt, said Zelensky was in the thrall of oligarchs…negatively shaping a picture of Ukraine and even President Zelensky personally, ” Kent told lawmakers.

Communications with Putin and Orban, and with Giuliani, “shaped the president’s view of Ukraine and Zelensky and would account for the change from a very positive first call on April 21 to his negative assessment of Ukraine” later, Kent said.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate