All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 29, 2020 - Rudy Giuliani
49:06
$5.3 Billion in Ukrainian Foreign Aid Missing | Rudy Giuliani’s Common Sense Ep. 11
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
It's our purpose to bring to bear the principle of common sense and rational discussion to the issues of our day.
America was created at a time of great turmoil, tremendous disagreements, anger, hatred.
There was a book written in 1776 that guided much of the discipline of thinking and brought to us the discovery of our freedoms.
Of our God-given freedoms.
It was Thomas Paine's Common Sense, written in 1776, one of the first American bestsellers, in which Thomas Paine explained by rational principles the reason why these small colonies felt the necessity to separate from the gigantic Kingdom of England and the King of England.
He explained their inherent desire for liberty, freedom, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and he explained it in ways that were understandable to the people, to all the people, not just to the educated upper class.
Because the desire for freedom is classical.
The desire for freedom adheres in the human mind and in the human soul.
Today we face another time of turmoil, of anger, and very, very serious partisan division.
This is exactly the time we should consult our history, look at what we've done best in the past, and see if we can't use some of that to help us now.
We understand that they created the greatest country in the history of the world, the greatest democracy, a country that has taken more people out of poverty than any other country on earth.
They weren't perfect men and women, and neither were we.
But a great deal of the reason for America's constant ability to self-improve is because we're able to reason.
We're able to talk.
We're able to analyze.
We are able to apply God-given common sense.
So let's do it.
Hello.
I'm back with Rudy Giuliani, Common Sense, and today we have the honor of having with us a member of the Rada, the Parliament of Ukraine, Mr. Andrei Derkash.
You saw Mr. Derkash interviewed in the last two episodes.
Those were interviews done in Kiev, but he's now in New York, and there are some new developments that we'd like him to discuss with us that are very, very recent and will have a great impact on what's going on.
So I want to thank Mr. Derkash for coming, and I want to thank him particularly for his interest in what turns out to be the expenditure of a good deal of American money.
This is something that's in the interest of both the people of the United States and the people of Ukraine.
So, Mr. Derkash, you're also involved with a radio and television station, correct?
Previous.
Previous, not now?
Not now.
Okay, and how long were you in that business?
About 15 years.
My family, my family involved in this business.
My family, my family involved in this business.
And for the last 20 years you've been a member of?
Parliament, 20 years.
20 years. And tell us what you focus on, what your specialty is, what you're chairman of.
The majority of time I used to work in the Budget Committee of Ukraine.
It's questions involved with budgeting loans, debts and the transition of money within the budget of Ukraine.
And also last time I told you that we were involved in the involvement of the foreign assistance aid to Ukraine.
And you were amazed at how much money is being spent and it's not being accounted for.
We continued our investigation and today I pass to you the other part of the documents.
On one of those documents a criminal case is opened already today.
The other documents we have to work with together with both sides.
Part of your concern, I'm sure, and this is a document you gave to me back in three or four months ago when we were in Kiev.
There was an accounting chamber decision on 19 December 2017 that was quite dramatic.
It found about $5.3 billion.
$3 million out of that amount is the money of the U.S.
foreign aid that wasn't accounted for.
So is that something that you're looking at now?
In general, the foreign aid?
Was it spent? Was it spent accountably?
Was it spent corruptly?
$3 billion out of that amount is the money of the US taxpayers.
So of the $5.3 billion that's in question, $3 billion is American.
And what I try to explain and to show that in the last 15 years there's a huge corruption scheme done to diversify the technical assistance to Ukraine.
A system is made in such a way that close relatives and people close to the USAID and to the U.S.
government receive the funds.
Previous officials or acting officials?
So, that report of the $5.3 billion that was, let's say in general, not accounted for properly, That was never really investigated fully.
When we discussed it, you told me that there was a lot of interference by the American embassy in doing that investigation.
Is that investigation being done now?
Right now we started investigations in some of the cases that I gave to you and transferred to you.
The majority of those investigations are done by journalists.
And right now one of the investigations is done by the National Police of Ukraine of the ineffective and insufficient of the transferring of funds to people who are sick with AIDS.
Okay, so there are many cases to be investigated.
I passed you a chart with 20 cases that you have right now, which are needed to be investigated.
Right.
So you were showing me a chart.
This chart you showed me yesterday and we went over it.
These are 20... 20 cases.
Twenty cases.
How many?
Twenty?
Twenty cases which are needed to be investigated because of some of the illegal activities in them.
And in some of the cases there's no reports on the cases.
So these are cases that are going to be investigated or they are being investigated?
Those are the cases that we are trying to get investigated right now.
Now there's one particular case where you filed A complaint with regard to that case.
It's a case about the supplying of people who are affected with AIDS, which is a $133 million case.
There were also a sign of effective companies, small companies, which were in this case.
The documents on how it was ineffectively investigated and how it was spent, we gave to the National Police of Ukraine, and today they opened a criminal case.
So let's get the right title for this investigation.
This is the investigation that involves the National Center for HIV-AIDS.
Is that...?
Right.
And is this the formal document that initiated the investigation this year?
No.
And that's one that you filed?
That's the document that you filed?
Yes, these are documents, they are in open source.
They're open?
They are on my Facebook page.
So they're laid out on your Facebook page.
And this involves two individuals who ran this center.
Can you tell us their names?
The journalist investigators sought out a scheme that was built by Sharon Bay and Shabunin.
There was a system built that there was supposed to be some sort of anti-corruption system, which is allegedly controlling the distribution of funds to the other organization.
And in the result, through the organization of people who are affected with AIDS, a lot of money was laundered.
And the name of the organization was the All-Ukrainian Network of People Living with HIV-AIDS.
And the head of this organization was Sharon Bay, who was four times convicted prior.
And what was the connection of Mr. Shabunin to that?
Both Sherembei and Shabunin were the head of the anti-corruption organization.
And you can find in open sources, in Wikipedia, of their both cooperating on anti-corruption initiatives.
So the National Center, let's call it the National Center for AIDS, so we shorten it a bit.
The National Center for AIDS was run by Mr. Sherembe.
And the Anti-Corruption Center was run by Shabunin.
And the Anti-Corruption Center, one of its responsibilities was to keep watch over this money.
And also to that, Sharon Bay is the board member of the Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, NABU, where Sitnik is the head.
I see.
So, he has a great deal of influence over the investigators who are specially designated to investigate corruption.
They don't even keep secret their ties with the U.S.
Embassy in Kiev.
And what is Mr. Shabunin's relationship, again, to it?
Mr. Sherenbey runs the center, and what does Mr. Shabunin do?
Together, they funded this anti-corruption center, and for the view of the investigative journalists, they controlled the funds of that center together.
And what was Shabunin's connection to the National Center for Aid, the old Ukrainian network?
And there's no straight connection.
The main idea was that the anti-corruption center had to control the money and the funds from international donors and from outside to this HIV center.
And was that ever, is that the subject of legislation?
Is there a law or regulation that says that ANTAC should review it?
No, it's a recommendation when they give foreign technical assistance to an organization.
I see.
And Sharon Bay is also part of ANTAC, is that correct?
He was the funder of that anti-corruption center.
So, altogether, in this document, the allegation is that there's $133 million, almost $134 million, that was transferred to various vendors and contractors and many, many, many, many.
And that there is not proper documentation for it.
It was for purposes that were not intended and in some cases was laundered.
The whole host of reasons why it was improperly dealt with.
Is that what is outlined here with these charts?
Money that was inappropriately distributed to these vendors?
Part of the funds were spent appropriately and the other part of funds was spent on effective companies and laundered.
And also to companies which had cases open against them for stealing and theft.
Now, this document that I'm holding here is a certificate, and it lists, again, $134 million that's questionable, not accounted for properly, raises suspicions about money laundering or raises suspicions about overpricing.
Who prepared this document, this certificate, that goes into detail on the inappropriate spending?
The problem of technical assistance and assistance to the medical sphere was numerous times investigated prior already.
There were different criminal cases opened.
The majority of those cases were closed from the orders of the top.
But the materials of those cases were still there.
Voice of God?
It was the voice of God?
Fortunately, not from God, but from there.
We don't want to take the name of God in vain.
So, they were fixed.
The cases were fixed, is what you're telling me.
Part of those cases were closed, but documents were still there.
I see.
And the journalists received those documents from the investigators who were investigating those cases.
And were they... Who were the prosecutors assigned to?
NABU or... NABU?
Those documents were from the prosecutor's office.
The prosecutors gave those documents to the journalists.
And this compilation here, who did this?
Who prepared this compilation of questionable, improper... This chart was in the case.
It's probably from the case.
And who entered this certificate?
Who wrote this certificate?
Who wrote this?
There was somebody who was working on that case.
I see.
So this comes from the file of the prosecutor?
From the prosecutor give to the journalist, journalist give us.
I see.
I see.
And tell us about the background of Mr. Sherem Bey.
What kind of, what does he do?
What does he do for a living?
What kind of past does he have?
The information on him is in open sources.
He already four times was in prison.
He was four times convicted.
He had a really difficult life.
And then he started to fight corruption.
At the beginning he started to fight corruption together with Shebudin.
And then he started to redistribute the foreign technical assistance.
And so back in, I believe it was in the 1990s, in the early 2000s, he was actually convicted of grand larceny, theft, and at least four separate convictions.
And he was in jail, correct?
And then when he came out of jail, that's when he set up both the all-Ukrainian network, Yes, partially that money was given from Soros organizations for anti-corruption.
That original ANTAC was funded in part by George Soros?
Yes, a portion of that money was given from Soros organizations for anti-corruption.
And part of it came from, do you know where else?
From the U.S. government.
The government of the U.S.
And do Do you know which of the two organizations started first?
The All-Ukrainian Network for HIV-AIDS or ANTAC, the Anti-Corruption Network?
At first the AIDS organization was funded and then in 2012 the ANTAC, Center for Anti-Corruption.
And part of the reason for setting up ANTAC was to have a, theoretically, to have a check on
expenditures like, in particular, the all-Ukrainian network.
Yes, it's more convenient that way.
So they set up ANTAC in order to basically audit and determine that
expenditures of this foreign aid was proper.
And have they ever done that?
Have they ever submitted a report or an analysis?
Unfortunately, on the majority of those programs, the 20 cases that I gave to you, there is no right accountability or audits done.
And this is a problem.
So if I understand it correctly, Mr. Sherembei is what we would call the common denominator.
He runs the all-Ukrainian network that handles No.
hundreds of millions of dollars.
I mean, hundreds of millions of dollars.
Is that right?
He runs that, but he also was the founder of the corruption organization
that was gonna oversee his spending.
And that didn't occur to anyone that it's a conflict of interest?
He, a year, a year and a half ago, left this anti-corruption organization.
But all during the time that this money was being spent, because this goes back to what, 2000,
and tell me what years these go back to.
What period of time are we talking about here?
It's a period of time, I'll have to be more concrete, it's a period of time from 2013, 2017.
Here, here.
So he was, at that time, part of the organization.
In 2015, as I remember, he was still the founder.
But he was part of all anti-corruption programs.
More than that, he was a board member who oversaw NABU.
The head member of the board of NABU, so-called.
Supervisor NABU.
So for an ex-convict, he played a lot of roles.
So he ran the all-Ukrainian network that distributed hundreds of millions of dollars.
Correct?
Yes.
He was a founder of the organization that in part was founded in order to determine whether expenditures like that were accountable.
ANTAC.
And then he was also involved with the special prosecutor's investigators, the investigators that did corruption investigations, NABU, is that correct?
Not exactly.
In NABU we had an overseeing board.
And he was a member of that board which oversees the actions of NABU.
And he was also a member of the supervisory board of the investigators.
Yes, yes.
Four times convicted.
So he was part... Yes, but that's the point I'm making.
He was four times in prison for theft.
He starts an AIDS organization.
There are questions about expenditures.
So this ANTAC is set up, and he's part of the outside agency that's supposed to oversee him.
And then he's also on the board of the governmental investigators.
So he basically controlled... He had his finger everywhere.
The problem is that also the Ukrainians and the US taxpayers are being lied to.
My job as a member of parliament is to stop this process.
So that there will be clarity in the distribution of funds.
And the most important part is that it has to be effective.
That's why we brought to you those 20 cases.
Because on our own we won't be able to investigate them.
Part of those companies are American.
So something like, not just this, but all of the different examples you gave us, they're going to have to be investigated from the point of view of Ukraine and also the United States.
Yes, we need a joint international investigation.
And so, I know this is the conclusion, but we might as well raise it now.
And your recommendation, if I remember correctly, is that a task force should be established so that both the U.S.
and the Ukrainian investigators can investigate cases like this together.
Yes, so we would bring order and the technical foreign assistance.
Because we really need that.
And we are grateful to the United States for that help.
It doesn't have to be spent on parties, on champagne, on Xerxes and copying machines.
And it has to be spent on real issues.
For those of you who know me, in addition to law and politics, I'm passionate about the Yankees, baseball, football, all sports to watch, golf to play, history to read, opera, classical music to listen to and watch, and cigars to relax, and socialize.
And I have definite opinions on the best cigars for the right time and the right place.
And you'll hear about that, too.
But the revolution in cigars took place in the 1990s.
Most cigars then were machine-made with foreign ingredients.
Now it's just the opposite.
Most are heteroamino man-made.
All organic, natural, The Revolution was led by one man and one man alone, Marvin Shankin and Cigar Aficionado magazine.
Marvin had been rating wines quite successfully for Wine Spectator magazine and he brought the rating system to cigars.
The first cigars rated in the 90s were gone in a flash.
Even now the first thing I do when I get my magazine is I go right to the ratings page.
There it is.
Hmm, 93.
91.
Oh yeah, I'll go for that one.
Then there'll be 94.
92.
Problem is, you gotta get there fast, because they go fast.
This revolutionized the cigar industry, and quality rose to the top.
Then there's the Cigar of the Year.
Try to get them as fast as possible, because they've gone pretty quick.
This magazine revolutionized the industry.
And I'll tell you why.
This month is Cigar of the Year.
Cigar of the Year.
One of these four is Cigar of the Year.
You better get this magazine quick, because these cigars are going to be gone very, very quickly.
Go to the link on our website and order it.
And you'll be able to get down to your cigar store and get to smoke a few of these and you'll let me know which ones you like better.
Because we can have a really good conversation about it.
Sometimes I do agree with Marvin.
And when I don't, I let my opinion be known.
And Marvin usually says, stick to the law.
Also, along with rated cigars, there are articles on politics, sports, interesting profiles.
And Marvin also has Wine Spectator, Spirit Advocate.
If you like wine, if you like scotch, if you like bourbon, if you like rye, if you like vodka, if you like gin, they're the magazines for you.
And you know what?
Subscribe to Cigar Aficionado right now through the link on our website.
Subscribe to Cigar Aficionado right now through the link on our website.
It was only a part of their budget.
So they had additional amounts of money in addition to this that could or could not have been spent correctly.
Nobody's looking at that right now.
Yes, and I gave you the investigation of one of the journalists on this topic.
And there is no evidence that you can see that ANTAC conducted an investigation of them at any time?
It was registered and then it was closed.
But I'm asking about ANTAC now, not the government.
ANTAC is supposed to oversee them.
Is there any evidence of reports, investigations done by ANTAC?
No, there's only a statement.
And as soon as somebody's trying to investigate them, then these two people, Chernobyl and Chebunin, are starting to announce that it's pressuring on democracy.
And before, the U.S.
Embassy in Kiev would interact right away.
And today, thank God, it's quiet and nobody's interfering.
So the answer to the question is that ANTAC never conducted, there's no evidence that ANTAC ever conducted an investigation.
They reacted to investigations being conducted by others.
Is that correct?
Yes, yes.
Now, there are a couple of particular cases you were making reference to, just so people can understand, you know, some examples.
There's a company called Farmasco, which received 2.7 million, I think it's 2.7 million dollars, and Farmasco is a defendant in criminal proceedings for overstating the cause of acquiring goods and medicine and for failing to register the financial and economic transactions with enterprises and also for doing business with fictitious enterprises.
That's a lot of charges.
And they gave that company $2.7 million.
The allegation is that that was substantially overcharged.
Yes, this is what I talked about, that most of the companies that the money was given to were already under investigation.
separately, both for its dealings with the all Ukrainian network and for other violations.
Yes, this is what I talked about, that most of the companies that the money was given to were already under
investigation.
The next example is Optima Farm.
Optima Farm Limited says here, repeatedly involved in criminal proceedings,
creating a shadow and corrupt scheme to conceal the real value of medicines,
with the aim of seizing budget funds and the significantly higher prices,
would then be corruptly diverted.
Bye.
Is that right?
That's all that you could find open sources.
You filed a document in which you laid out those examples and then a number of others.
This is the document that you, Mr. Dirkhoff, filed requesting an investigation.
Yes, that's why we said that this has to be investigated.
And as soon as this investigation started, there was a lot of pressure from Shabunin and Sharembe for this investigation.
And this investigation specifically involves, as the focus of the investigation, both Sharembe and Shabunin, and it alleges that they organized a scheme for embezzlement of international technical funds.
Because it's what our journalist investigators think.
And this is the opinion of the prosecutors who gave the documents to our journalist investigators.
And one of the specifications that you have in this that goes beyond the other one is
this one here for 5.3, almost 5.4 million to a company called, and you can probably pronounce
that better than I can, Svitlo Nadi NGO.
Svitlo Nadi.
Yes, it's an NGO.
And in this particular case, they're supposed to care for internally displaced persons.
And according to the complaint here, it was found that any of the internally displaced persons received no real financial assistance.
It's a real scheme of how foreign technical assistance is being laundered from Ukraine today.
And not only in this case, but in the other 20 cases they use almost the same scheme to launder the money.
It's because you pay less taxes there.
This document here, which goes through some of the same things,
this is a document that was prepared by Yevgeny Filandash.
He's a political expert.
Former Ukrainian parliament and now political expert.
So this is based on his investigation.
And here he points out that the $5.3 billion that was put in question by the audit in 2017,
that that is roughly one-eighth of the state budget.
Here he says that part of funds which was given, they're also partially funds from the
state budget.
This allegation from him involves very, very similar, very similar allegations against the old Ukrainian network and also the Alliance for Public Health.
In his investigation, he gives an example on how the funds are being distributed and spent.
In his investigation, he gives examples on how the money is being misused.
And what Mr. Feldash is saying is that most of those funds were spent through the companies which are affiliated with the United States.
And in the second part, for example, where they have an issue about Deloitte, Yes.
Before we get to that, there's a chart that involves the all-Ukrainian network, and the allegations are that these expenditures, for example, for airline tickets, computer equipment, translation, consultation, methodological work, translations, program assistance, audits, catering, hotels, office supplies, Anastasia Dieva.
Millions of dollars was spent on that.
Yes.
And now it says here at the end that the green light for travel, flights, hotels was paid
in currency and it was given by the executive director of the All-Ukrainian Network of People
Living with HIV AIDS, Anastasia D'Eva.
Anastasia D'Eva, yes.
And she's married to Georgi Dev.
Is that his name?
That's just the last name of her husband.
Is there any significance to that?
Is he a political figure?
She worked as a deputy minister for a short period of time.
And she had a troubled situation there when she was the deputy minister of the interior?
Yes, but I wouldn't want to interfere.
That was some inappropriate situation.
It's not a story you want to tell about her?
It's her private own story.
Problematic in that it's not true or problematic in that it's embarrassing?
It's an embarrassing story.
Because her photos went online.
Her personal private photos went online.
More than one?
More than one or just one?
A lot of them.
A lot of pictures?
Where she appears to be a drug addict.
I cannot say that.
Now, Mr. Sherembe, Mr. Sherembe has already been involved with the law many, many times back in the early 2000s.
At least four convictions for theft in large amounts.
But in 2017, he was alleged to have purchased medicines at inflated prices for money kickbacks from the Global Fund.
And then that case was closed.
Was there ever a proper investigation of that?
I think during the period of time when the Poroshenko government was in place, it was impossible to investigate such sort of cases.
It was not possible?
It was not investigated, in other words?
Because those issues are connected with four technical assistants and they were coordinated by somebody within the U.S.
Embassy.
And they would stop some of these investigations?
Yes, they would just close the cases.
I think so.
I mean, we know about the situation where Antonovitch told Lutsenko that he had to drop
the case on ANTAC, which is the organization that is supposed to oversee these funds.
But are there other situations where cases were dropped?
Yes, I've heard about this.
I cannot confirm the whole truth of that story, but the prosecutors and the police officers who investigated these cases of technical foreign assistance, they told too many journalists that they were blocked from investigating such cases.
Now, the funds for the National Center in part come from USAID and also the Renaissance Foundation.
Who runs the Renaissance Foundation?
The Renaissance Foundation is the Soros Fund.
Most of the programs which are financed by the USAID are also financed by Soros.
When I came to work as a Member of Parliament the last time, On my table I was given a big booklet and from one side was said USAID, from the other side it was said the Soros Fund, Renaissance and recommendations for the Member of Parliament.
And it was really pricey paper.
It was made all on very expensive paper.
Very expensive, quality paper, quality expensive print.
And all members of parliament received such book and all were laughing in the parliament.
So they co-invested, the U.S.
government, USAID and Soros co-invested in these projects, is that right?
In many other projects.
Not just ANTAC?
Not just ANTAC.
Not only in that.
With the programs of Internews is the same case.
Partly such programs are financed by USAID, partially by Soros Foundation, partially by the European Initiative for Foreign Corruption.
Journalists also investigated this activity and also the European Anti-Corruption Initiative where the money are being distributed improperly.
Now, according to this document, Mr. Philandash's document, the misappropriated funds are approximately $143 million.
That's about $10 million more than is alleged in the documents.
I think he's using the data which was added on after 2017.
And also he has another scheme which is being used by Deloitte and Detouche, which we can see here in the papers.
This is a separate case?
Yes, for the 23 million.
This is a case of 23 million, and according to the allegation, part of the money was lauded simply through private entrepreneurs,
without any intended use and with no reporting. Would this be another situation
that Antac was supposed to oversee? Everybody has
to pay attention to this.
$200,000 was spent for laptops and cell phones.
$3.5 million for publications and postal services.
And this organization, what was its function?
What was it supposed to do?
This is a program about nothing.
There's a lot of these programs.
about nothing. So they, so 22 million dollars was spent on a program. I'm sorry, 23 million.
There's a lot of these programs. If you open up and see the cases, there's a lot of these programs
for 60, for 70 million dollars. If you open up and look at the cases, you can see by
the name that the program was about nothing.
It's an example of the influence of wind on the democracy in Ukraine.
70 million dollars for that.
Pardon me?
You have to say that again.
You can see it by the names of those programs.
They are about nothing.
The program is about adding up confidence in yourself.
It's a program to help people to be more self-confident.
And how much money, roughly, was spent on making people self-confident?
I gave you that document.
How much it was worth.
Does it work?
How much it was worth.
How much it was worth.
We're gonna see right now.
For example, democratic arrangement and development in Ukraine.
Democratic regulation in Ukraine.
57 million dollars.
So, $57 million was spent on helping people to be more self-confident, on an organization that theoretically is supposed to help people be more self-confident.
In this case, on teaching how the local governments work.
Or the competitive economics of Ukraine, $41 million.
And the self-confidence program, $36 million.
$36 million.
$76 million was...
$36 million.
$36 million.
Let's make sure we get this correct now.
The program you're describing to us is a program to build confidence among citizens and give them a transformation process in a constructive way.
$36 million spent.
This program is already finished.
That was $36,510,000 done by the Tramonics company.
is already finished.
How can you count all that?
What kind of result do you have to receive out of this 36 million dollars?
Just spend money and that's it.
Well, I mean, as long as we're talking about Shamanics, it's also alleged that in 2015, USAID allocated Shamanics $9.5 billion for a program to prevent and treat HIV, AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis, and it was reported in 2017 that only 7% of the supplies of medical products were delivered under this program and arrived on time and in full.
Is this the same company, Shamanics?
This company is working in different other countries, but we are interested mainly in Ukraine.
And once again, in our country, this company is doing programs, for example, $41 million, second program, $57 million, and the completed program, $36 million, and the shamanic company, additional $20 million, and one more other program, $21 million.
The completed program, $36 million.
And the shamanics company?
Additional $20 million.
And one more other program, $21 million.
And this company is a American company or a Ukrainian company?
It's an American company.
And it's run by someone named Thurston Teal.
This is what we can find in open sources.
David Snellbecker is the CEO.
David Sandberg.
And it was founded by Thurston Teal.
And David Snellbecker, the CEO of Shamanics, is close to Senator Biden.
Then-Senator Biden?
Joe Biden?
This is from open sources.
This is what the journalists are providing to us.
So we discussed today the All-Ukrainian Network for HIV-AIDS.
Mr. Sherembe and Mr. Sabunin and their involvement in diverting and improperly handling about $133 million.
That case is actively under investigation now.
Yes, the police is investigating that case.
The other cases that we talked about, like shamanics and the 20 that are in the chart, those are cases that are going to have to be investigated.
They're not being investigated right now, but they're on a list to be investigated.
So that's going to be quite a long job.
And I'd like to ask you, as we conclude, what your recommendation is for the best way to get these cases investigated, particularly since they involve, in many cases, large amounts of American money.
From our side, we will, as members of parliaments, we will send requests and official letters to get official information into our hands.
I'd also ask you, since you're here, when President Trump raised this question about American aid and the use of American aid with President Zelensky, how was that reported in Ukraine and what was the reaction to that?
We have a new government in Ukraine.
They have been in power for less than a year.
They're trying to understand what's going on in the situation.
Because the system for stealing international technical assistance was their place for many, many years.
And when President Trump said we want to investigate, find out what's going on, he was correct and right.
Why do U.S.
taxpayers have to pay money for nothing?
And why do the Ukrainian citizens don't receive real help, but only some fiction?
There has to be very strict control and audit, and there has to be a report on the effectiveness
of such help, because we can make up different programs, as I said as a joke, the influence
of wind on the democracy of Ukraine, and we can spend 70 millions on such program.
Well, Mr. Derkash, you�ve raised some very, very important issues.
And I really am very encouraged by the fact that these investigations are being taken
so seriously, and a lot of that has to do with you.
So, for the American people, I thank you for being conscious of the expenditures of our taxpayers' dollars, and also for your own people, because they're not getting, by any means, the full benefit of the money that we're giving them.
So, thank you very much.
Thank you for sitting, and for a good job for the people of Ukraine.
This was, of course, an interview with Andrei Derkosch, who's a member of RADA, and as you can see throughout the interview, a person very, very concerned with the expenditure of funds, particularly our American funds, and whether they're used properly, and very concerned about the fact that they're used properly because they're supposed to be helping people, and in fact, large amounts In this case, $133 million or $142 million, whichever figure you use, was not properly accounted for, diverted, wandered, or flew off into the wind.
But it didn't get to people and it didn't get to help people.
That's an extraordinary amount of money.
The two people involved are Mr. Sherembe and Mr. Sabunin, and we'll see what happens with the investigation.
But this is a very, very significant development and a very good sign
▲
Export Selection