Brian Fitzpatrick, the only former FBI agent in Congress, was in Kiev in 2015 as part of an anti-corruption push. His time there has new relevance as President Trump faces an impeachment inquiry into his dealings with Ukraine.

As a national controversy erupts over President Donald Trump, former Vice President Joe Biden, and allegations of corruption in dealings with Ukraine, there may be no lawmaker with more background perspective than Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick.

Fitzpatrick, R-1, of Middletown, was serving in the FBI in 2014 when revolution took hold in Ukraine and the country’s president fled to Russia. By 2015, the FBI had sent Fitzpatrick, who specialized in anti-corruption, to Kiev as part of the United States’ efforts to establish good governance in the country.

“The Congressman was assigned to Ukraine on detail with the FBI’s International Corruption Unit for several months in 2015. His main responsibilities were to help establish Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU)," Fitzpatrick’s office confirmed in an email, adding he trained Ukrainian investigators and prosecutors in best practices.

Just a short time later, in January 2016, Fitzpatrick left the FBI and launched his campaign for Congress, eventually winning his first term. Fitzpatrick now serves as co-chair of the Ukraine and Ukrainian American Caucus in the U.S. House, and has received several awards and speaking invitations from Ukrainian groups.

Fitzpatrick’s time in Kiev is now of renewed interest, as it coincides with efforts to oust a Ukrainian official at the heart of the freshly launched impeachment inquiry of Trump.

The official in question is former Ukrainian prosecutor-general Viktor Shokin. The equivalent of the United States’ attorney general, Shokin served in the role from February 2015 until being ousted in March 2016.

Upon entering office, Shokin ostensibly assumed control of an investigation into a man named Mykola Zlochevsky, who owns an energy company called Burisma Holdings. In 2014, Hunter Biden, son of the then-vice president, had joined the board of directors of Burisma.

Shortly into Shokin’s tenure, Joe Biden, officials from other western governments, and civil society groups within Ukraine began criticizing the prosecutor general for not acting quickly enough to tackle corruption. Donald Bowser, an international anti-corruption expert who worked with Fitzpatrick in Kiev as a Canadian government employee, said it was not a controversial position.

“There was a general consensus that Shokin wasn’t moving on the cases that existed,” Bowser said Wednesday night. “He wasn’t pushing for reforms.”

Bowser’s recollection of Fitzpatrick’s role in Kiev matched the description provided by the congressman’s office. Bowser said he had been working with NABU when he learned of Fitzpatrick’s assignment, which lasted approximately four months in late 2015.

“I knew that he was in town and I talked to him and asked him if he would be willing to help us,” Bowser said of Fitzpatrick, adding that he then helped out with several training sessions.

Bowser said the FBI doesn’t typically take political positions, but that the entire U.S. apparatus, including officials from the state department, were pushing for Shokin to go.

“This was supported by the law enforcement agencies,” Bowser said.

By March 2016, Ukraine’s parliament had voted Shokin out of his position. Trump and allies such as Rudy Giuliani have this year begun to question the chain of events, suggesting the elder Biden may have inappropriately used his influence to oust Shokin and stop an investigation into Burisma.

Most significantly, Trump appeared to have raised those concerns in the recently released summary of his telephone call with current Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. The call is a primary focus of a federal whistleblower complaint, which Democrats cited in launching an impeachment inquiry this week.

The call summary appeared to show Trump saying Shokin “was treated very badly and he was a very fair prosecutor.” Trump also appeared to state that Shokin was “very good,” that his efforts had been “shut down,” and that there was “a lot of talk” that Biden had stopped the prosecution of Burisma’s owner.

Supporters of Trump have further pointed to statements Biden made in 2018, when he told a public audience that he had warned Ukrainian officials that they would not receive $1 billion in loan guarantees unless Shokin was removed.

“I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion,’” Biden recalled of a visit to Ukraine. “I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’”

In his call with Zelensky, which took place in July, Trump said that dynamic “sounds horrible” and urged his Ukrainian counterpart to “look into it.”

Biden has denied any wrongdoing, saying that his actions were unrelated to his son's role in Burisma. Ukrainian officials have also denied any impropriety, with another former prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, telling Bloomberg News in May he found no evidence of wrongdoing by the Bidens after taking over for Shokin.

Democrats have said they believe the request to be an improper, and potentially illegal, effort by Trump to dig up dirt on Biden, now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, and thus have Ukraine interfere in the 2020 election. The president and his allies have defended the call, saying it was an innocent and proper request that Ukraine look into potential corruption.

Asked for his opinion, Fitzpatrick’s office provided a statement that Shokin was a “hindrance” to anti-corruption efforts.

“The Congressman’s personal experience regarding former PG Viktor Shokin was that (he) was not cooperative with the FBI’s anti-corruption efforts in Ukraine, and that he posed a hindrance regarding numerous investigative matters,” Fitzpatrick’s office wrote in an email.

Asked whether or not the congressman has any concerns that Biden had improperly influenced Ukrainian investigations into Burisma, Fitzpatrick’s office said former FBI agents are prohibited from disclosing classified or law enforcement information that has not been publicly disclosed or could pertain to ongoing matters.

Fitzpatrick’s office did comment on the Trump-Zelensky call, offering a rebuke while also saying the congressman opposed impeachment efforts.

“The Congressman believes that law enforcement matters must always remain separate and distinct from political matters at all times. Whether or not law enforcement matters and investigations should be initiated or closed are decisions that should be made by law enforcement and law enforcement alone, not by politicians,” Fitzpatrick’s office wrote. “The Congressman believes that Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi’s response, however, to move forward with impeachment proceedings is ill-advised and will only further divide this Congress and our nation, and the Congressman is opposed to her decision.”