mr. morrison? >> not to my knowledge, ma'am. >> ambassador volker? >> not to my knowledge either. >> did either of you ever have any evidence of quid pro? mr. morsen? >> no, ma'am. >> mr. volker? >> i did not. >> any evidence of bribery? >> no, ma'am. >> no, ma'am. >> any evidence of treason? >> no, ma'am. >> no evidence of treason. >> with that i yield back. >> mr. swalwell. >> thank you. mr. morrison, did ambassador bolton want the security aid hold lifted? >> yes, congressman, he did. >> you testified he had a late one-on-one meeting in august, is that right? >> can you point to where i testified to that. >> on page 266 you said a meeting but the president was not ready to approve the release of the assistance. 266 and 268. but i'm asking you did that happen or did it not? >> sir, i want to be clear in characterizing it. okay, yes, sir, i see. >> you testified to that. what was the outcome of that meeting between ambassador bolton and president trump? >> ambassador bolton did not yet believe the president was ready to approve the assistance. >> di

i want to start if i can with you, mr. morrison. in discussing the 7/25 phone call and the concerns that the lieutenant had, and he came to you with edits for the transcript and you stated that you accepted all of his edits, is that correct? >> i -- i would have accepted all of the edits they believed were faithful to what was actually discussed. >> did high e come to you that word "demand" was in there? >> i don't recall that. >> he didn't either. how soon after the phone call did he meet with you on that particular issue? >> we got the draft as was normal, fairly quickly after the call. that same day. >> that same day. so today he said i reported my concerns to mr. eisenberg. it is improper for the president of the united states to demand a foreign government investigate a u.s. citizen and political opponent. he was going to mr. eisenberg with his concerns about the conversation, yet he did not at any point on the edits say that there should be a demand and you know, he didn't do that, but he did say that he didn't come to you wit

so mr. morrison was skipped in the chain of command. so mr. morrison said he was the final clearing authority and saw your edits. do you remember if all of the edits were incorporated and he , said yes. that is on pages 61 and 62. he believes all of your edits were accepted. let me ask you, in your edits did you insist that the words demand be put into the transcription between the conversation of the two presidents? lt. col. vindman: i did not. >> you did say so in the opening statement today. thank you, and i yield back. >> thank you both for your testimony and service. colonel vindman, wasn't it the case that mr. eisenberg the attorney had said to you after the july meeting that you should come to him if you have any other concerns? lt. col. vindman: after the july 10 meeting, yes. >> it is not going outside the chain of command to speak to a lawyer within the institution, right? lt. col. vindman: he is the senior between the two, certainly. >> our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been complaining about what this is only havin

i want to start, if i can, with you mr. morrison. discussing the 7:25 phone call and the concerns that lieutenant colonel vindman had. colonel vindman came with you with edits to the transcript and you stated you accepted all of his edits, is that correct? >> i would have accepted all the edits that i believed were faithful to what was actually discussed. >> did he come to you with an added and said that the word "demand" should be in there? >> i don't recall that specifically. >> he didn't either. how soon after the phone call, did he talk on the particular issue? >> we got the draft, as was normal, fairly quickly after that same day. >> he said i reported my concerns to mr. eisenberg, it is improper for the president of the united states to demand a foreign official to investigate a political opponent. he was going to mr. eisenberg with his concerns about the conversation, yet he did not at any point on the edits say there should be a demand. he didn't do that, but he did say that he didn't come to you with his concerns because you

morrison said in his deposition. page 82 of the transcript from mr. morrison. mr. morrison said this, i had concerns about lieutenant colonel vindman's judgment, among the discussions i had with dr. hill and the transition was our team, its strengths, its weaknesses and fiona and others had raised concerns about alex's judgment when mr. morris was asked by mr. kaster did anyone bring concerns to you that they believe colonel vindman may have leaked something, mr. morrison replied yes. so your boss had concerns about your judgment. your former boss dr. hill had concerns about your judgment. your colleagues had concern about your judgment, and your colleagues felt na there were times when you leaked information. any idea why they have those impressions colonel vindman? >> yes, representative jordan, i guess i'll start by reading drf dr. hill's own words as she attested to in my last evaluation that was dated middle of july right before she left. alex is a top 1% military officer and the best army officer i have worked with many any 15 years of government service. he

mr. morrison? >> not to my knowledge. >> ambassador volker? >> not to my knowledge either. did >> either of you ever have any evidence of quid pro quo? mr. morrison? >> no man. >> ambassador volker? >> no ma'am. >> bribery? >> no ma'am. >> no. >> any evidence of treason? >> no ma'am. >> no evidence of treason. >> with that i yield back. (inaudible) mr. swalwell. >> mr. morrison, did ambassador bolton want the security hole lifted? he >> did. >> new testified that bolton had a one-on-one meeting with president trump in late august related to the ukraine assistance is, that correct? >> can you point to our testify to that. >> page two 66 you said bolton had a one-on-one meeting with president trump in august 2019, but the president was not ready to approve the release of the assistance, to remember that? >> 2:26? >> yes. two 66 and to 68. i'm asking you did that happen or did not? i >> want to be clear characterizing it. yes sir i see. >> you testified to that. what was the outcome of that meeting wi

mr. morrison? >> no man. >> ambassador volker? >> no ma'am. >> bribery? >> no ma'am. >> no. >> any evidence of treason? >> no ma'am. >> no evidence of treason. >> with that i yield back. (inaudible) mr. swalwell. >> mr. morrison, did ambassador bolton want the security hole lifted? he >> did. >> new testified that bolton had a one-on-one meeting with president trump in late august related to the ukraine assistance is, that correct? >> can you point to our testify to that. >> page two 66 you said bolton had a one-on-one meeting with president trump in august 2019, but the president was not ready to approve the release of the assistance, to remember that? >> 2:26? >> yes. two 66 and to 68. i'm asking you did that happen or did not? i >> want to be clear characterizing it. yes sir i see. >> you testified to that. what was the outcome of that meeting with bolton and trump? >> ambassador bolton was ready to approve the assistance. did >> ambassador both inform you for the end gone going ways of his spee

of the transcript from mr. morrison. mr. morrison said this, i had concerns about lieutenant colonel vindman's judgment. among the discussions i had with dr. hill and the transition was our team. its strength, weaknesses and fiona and others raised concerns about alex's judgment and mr. morse was asked by mr. castor, did anyone ever bring concerns that colonel vindman may have leaked something. mr. morrison replied yes. so your boss had concerns about your judgment. dr. hill had concerns about your judgment. your colleagues had concerns about your judgment and your colleagues felt r there were times when you leaked information. any idea why they have those impressions? >> yes, representative jordan, i'll start by reading dr. hill's own words as she, she attested to in my last evaluation that was dated middle of july right before she left. alex is a top 1% military officer and the best i've worked with in my 15 years of government service. he's brilliant. unflappable and exercises excellent judgment. i'm sorry. exemplary duri

mr. morrison? >> no man. >> ambassador volker? >> no ma'am. >> bribery? >> no ma'am. >> no. >> any evidence of treason? >> no ma'am. >> no evidence of treason. >> with that i yield back. (inaudible) mr. swalwell. >> mr. morrison, did ambassador bolton want the security hole lifted? he >> did. >> new testified that bolton had a one-on-one meeting with president trump in late august related to the ukraine assistance is, that correct? >> can you point to our testify to that. >> page two 66 you said bolton had a one-on-one meeting with president trump in august 2019, but the president was not ready to approve the release of the assistance, to remember that? >> 2:26? >> yes. two 66 and to 68. i'm asking you did that happen or did not? i >> want to be clear characterizing it. yes sir i see. >> you testified to that. what was the outcome of that meeting with bolton and trump? >> ambassador bolton was ready to approve the assistance. did >> ambassador both inform you for the end gone going ways of his spee

>> that is correct. >> mr. morrison, mr. rock i think that's inappropriate to ask a foreign head of state to investigate a u.s. person let alone a political rival, but you said you had no concern with, that do you think that's appropriate. >> as a hypothetical matter i do not. >> i'm not talking about a hypothetical matter. read the transcript. in that transcript was the president not wetaskiwin the landscape to look into the bidens. >> mister chairman i can only tell you what i was thinking at the time. that is not what i understood the president to be doing. >> but nonetheless this was the first and only time where you went from listening to a presidential call directly to the national security lawyers. >> that's correct. >> and i think you have said that concern was not that it was unlawful but that it might leak, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> the problem is leaking is that what would be leaking as the president asking a foreign head of state to investigate mr. biden, isn't that the problem? >> i believe i state

i attempted to try to talk to mr. morrison. that didn't happen before i received struninstructions from eisenberg to not talk to anybody else any further. >> so the lawyer -- you not only didn't go to your boss, you went straight to the lawyer and the lawyer told you not to go to your boss? >> no, he didn't tell me until -- what ended up unfolding is i had the conversation with the attorney, i did my coordination -- my core function, which is coordination. i spoke to the appropriate people within the interagency, and then circling back around, mr. eisenberg came back to me and told me not to talk to anybody else. >> i'm going to read from the transcript here. why didn't you go to your direct report, mr. morrison, your response, because mr. eisenberg had told me to take my concerns to him. and then i asked you, did mr. eisenberg tell you not to report, to go around mr. morrison? and you said, actually, he did say that, i shouldn't talk to any other people. is that right? >> yes, but there's a whole -- there's a period of time in

morrison when asked by mr. castor, bring concerns to you that colonel vindman had leaked something, mr. morrison replied yes. your boss had concerns about your judgment. your former boss dr. hill had concerns about your judgment and your colleagues felt that there were times that you leaked information. any idea why they have those impressions? >> yes, representative jordan, i'll start by reading dr. hill's own words. as she attested in my last evaluation that was dated middle of july right before she left. alex is the best army officer have worked with in his 15 years. he's brilliant, unflappable. exercises excellent judgment. i'm sorry, exemplary during numerous visits, you get the idea. mr. morrison, the date of that was -- yeah -- let's see, i'msem sorry. july 13th. so, mr. jordan, i'd say i can't say what why mr. morrison questioned my judgment. he wasn't there very long. we were trying to figure out our relationship. maybe it was different cultures. >> colonel, you never leaked information? >> i never did

mr. morrison, i'll start with you. did anyone ever ask you to bribe or extort anyone at any time during your time in the white house? >> no, sir. >> and you were the top person for crane in the white house, at the nsc level? >> i would argue ambassador bolton would be. >> reporting to ambassador bolton. >> i was the senior official, yes. >> and ambassador volker, you have a storied career and thankful for your service and you were the special envoy to ukraine. >> that is correct. >> did anyone at the white house ever ask you to bribe or extort anything out of anyone at any time? >> no, sir. >> thank you. i want to thank you both for being here and i'll yield to mr. caster. >> thank you, mr. nunes, thank you both for being here today and participating in the lengthy depositions. ambassador volker you were the first one on october 3rd and mr. morrison you were with us on halloween so thank you for your participation. mr. morrison, i also want to thank you. a long time hill staffer. i certainly have appreciation for that.

when mr. morrison was asked by mr. castor, did anyone ever bring concerns to you that they believed colonel vindman may have leaked something, mr. morrison replied yes. so your boss had concerns about your judgment. your former boss, fiona hill, had concerns about your judgment. your colleagues had concerns about your judgment and your colleagues felt there were times you leaked information. any idea why they have those impressions, colonel vindman? >> yes, representative jordan. i guess i'll start by reading dr. hill's own words as she attested to in my last evaluation that was dated middle of july right before she left. alex is a top 1% military officer and the best army officer i ever worked with in my 15 years of government service. he's brilliant, unflappable and exercises excellent judgment. >> so was -- >> exemplary during numerous visits so forth and so on but i think you get the idea. mr. morrison, the date of that was -- let's see, i'm sorry, july 13th. so mr. jordan, i would say i can't say what mr. morrison

uh, mr. morrison, i'll start with you. did anyone any ask you to bribe or extort anyone at any time during your time in the white house? >> no, sir. >> and you were the top person for ukraine in the white house, correct? at the nsc level. >> i would argue ambassador bolton would be. >> reporting to ambassador bolton. >> i was the senior official, yes, sir. >> ambassador volker, you have a storied career, we're very thankful for your service. you were the special envoy to ukraine. >> that is correct. >> did anyone at the white house ever ask you to bribe or extort anything out of anyone at any time? >> no, sir. >> thank you. i want to thank you both for being here and i'll yield to mr. castor. >> thank you, mr. nunes. thank you both for being here today and also for participating in the lengthy depositions. ambassador volker, you were the first one on october 3rd. mr. morrison, you were with us on halloween. so thank you for your participation. mr. morrison, i also want to thank you, you're a long time hill staffer. i certa

as mr. morrison just said, he does speak with president trump. i knew that he had conversations in general. i did not know specifically about one leading up to this. >> on the screen in front of you is another text message from you that same morning. at 8:36 in the morning to yermak. >> because of the time difference, this is actually in the afternoon in ukraine. >> in ukraine, and east coast time. this is less than a half-hour between the call between president trump and president zelensky. >> "after the lunch, good lunch, thanks. heard from the white house, president zelensky will investigate and get to the bottom of what happened in 2016. we will nail down the date for their visit to washington. good luck, see you tomorrow." >> does this accurately relay the message that you received from ambassador sondland? >> yes. >> did the national security council prepared talking points for president trump for this call? >> the staff did commit yes. >> per usual custom, where these talking points based on the official united states policy objectives? >>

the next day, september 2nd, mr. morrison called to inform me that mr. done luke asked him to come to his hotel in warsaw. he expressed president zelensky's concern about the possible loss of u.s. support for ukraine. in particular, mr. morrison related to me that the inability of any u.s. officials to respond to the ukrainians' specific questions about security assistance was troubling them. i was experiencing the same tension in in my dealings with the ukrainians including in a meeting with the defense minister that day. on september 5th, i accompanied senators johnson and murphy during their visit to kiev. when we met with president zelensky his first question to the senators was about the withheld security assistance. my recollection of the meeting is that both senators stressed that bipartisan support for ukraine in washington was ukraine's most important strategic asset and that president zelensky should not jeopardize that bipartisan support by getting drawn into u.s. domestic politics. i had been making and continued to make this point to all of

of the transcript from mr. morrison. mr. morrison said this, i had concerns about lieutenant colonel vindman's judgment. among the discussions i had with dr. hill and the transition was our team. its strength, weaknesses and fiona and others raised concerns about alex's judgment and mr. morse was asked by mr. castor, did anyone ever bring concerns that colonel vindman may have leaked something. mr. morrison replied yes. so your boss had concerns about your judgment. dr. hill had concerns about your judgment. your colleagues had concerns about your judgment and your colleagues felt r there were times when you leaked information. any idea why they have those impressions? >> yes, representative jordan, i'll start by reading dr. hill's own words as she, she attested to in my last evaluation that was dated middle of july right before she left. alex is a top 1% military officer and the best i've worked with in my 15 years of government service. he's brilliant. unflappable and exercises excellent judgment. i'm sorry. exemplary duri

the next day, september 2nd, mr. morrison called to inform me that mr. doneeuck asked him to come to warsaw. he expressed president zelensky's concern about the possible loss of u.s. support for ukraine. in particular, mr. morrison relayed to me that the inability of any u.s. officials to respond to the ukrainian's explicit questions about security assistance was troubling them. i was experiencing the same tension in my dealings with the ukrainians, clawing meeting i had had with the defense minister that day. on september 5th, i accompanied seniors johnson and murphy during their visit to kiev. when we met with president zelensky, his first question to the senators was about the withheld security assistance. my recollection of the meeting is that both senators stressed that bipartisan support for ukraine in washington was ukraine's most important strategic asset and that president zelensky should not jeopardize that bipartisan support by getting drawn into u.s. domestic politicles. i had been making and continue to make this point to all of my official

when mr. morrison was asked by mr. kaster, did anyone bring concerns to you that colonel vindman may have leaked something. mr. morrison replied yes. so your boss had concerns about your judgment. your former boss dr. hill had concerns about your judgment. your colleagues had concerns about your judgment. and your colleagues felt there were times when you leaked information. any idea why they have those impressions, colonel vindman? >> yes, representative jordan, i guess i'll start by reading dr. hill's own words as tested to in my last evaluation dated mid-july before he left. alex is top 1% best army officer i've worked with in 15 years of government service. he's brill antibiotic. and exercises excelle-- he's br. and exercises excellent judgment. i think you get the idea. >> the date of that was? >> yeah, let's see, i'm sorry, july 13th. >> so mr. jordan, i would say i can't say what mr. morrison, why mr. morrison questioned my judgment. we had only recently started working together. he wasn't there very long. and w

mr morrison you said that after you heard the call you went directly to the attorneys in the national security council and recommended that they be limited access and they were subsequently put into a special server the white house has not released any documents whatsoever to this committee so to you mr volcker thank you but for the fact that you as a private citizen with your own personal phone and your text messages with mr giuliani and mr santelli and and mr miacca and whomever else i for those text messages that we've been putting up on the screen all day we would have nothing nothing and this cover up would be complete that's something we should think about now. on july 19th you had breakfast with rudy giuliani at the trump hotel correct and secret in that conversation at one point he brought up mr lute sankoh and you said that whatever mr lute sankoh is saying that's not credible is that correct yes and then he brought up mr biden and i'm going to quote you here i've known him for a long time is a person of integrity giuliani simply not credible to me joe biden would be influenc

mr jordan i would say that i can't say what mr morrison why mr morrison i question my judgment we had only recently started working together his it didn't he wasn't there very long and we were just trying to figure out our relationship maybe it was a different cultures military culture versus and colonel you never leaked information i never did never would that is that is preposterous that i would do that ok colonel it's it's interesting we deposed a lot of people in the bunker in the base of the capitol over the last several weeks but of all those depositions only 3 of the individuals we deposed were actually on the now somewhat famous july 25th phone call between president trump and presidents lewinsky that was you the individual sitting beside you miss williams and then there were of course was your boss mr morrison who i just read from his his deposition when we asked miss williams who she spoke to after the call about the call she was willing to answer our questions and chairmanship allowed her to answer our questions when we asked mr morrison who he spoke to after the call about

mr. morrison, the date of that was july 13, so mr. jordan i would say -- i cannot say what mr. morrison? judgment, we only recently started working together and he was not there very long and we're trying to figure out a relationship and we came from different military cultures -- >> and you never leaked information? >> i never did andcu never woul, that is preposterous that i that.do >> and then you said there was a group of other people you communicate with but you would only give us one individual in that group. and the chairman would only allow you to give us sunny when we asked you who will she communicate with. i want to know first, how many other people are in that group of people that you communicated with also the four individuals i just named. >> on a call readout, after the first call there were probably half a dozen or more people that were read out. those are people with the proper clearance and the need to know. in this case, mr. eisenberg told me not to speak to anybody else and i only right outside the nsc to individuals. >> to individuals? >> mr. chairman -- i

morrison said in his deposition. page 82 of the transcript from mr. morrison. mr. morrison said this. "i had concerns about lieutenant colonel vindman's judgment. among the discussions i had with dr. hill and the transitions was our team, its strengths, its weaknesses and fiona and others had raised concerned about alex's judgment. when mr. morris was asked by mr. castor, did anyone ever bring concerns to you that they believed that colonel vindman may have leaked something, mr. morrison replied, yes." so so your boss had concerns about your judgment. your former boss, dr. hill, had concerns about your judgment. your colleagues had concerns about your judgment and your colleagues felt that there were times when you leaked information. any idea why they have those impressions, colonel vindman? >> yes, representative jordan, i guess i'll start by reading dr. hill's own words, as she attested to in my last evaluation that was dated middle of july, right before she left. >> alex is a top 1% military officer and the best army officer i have worked with in my 15 years of

mr. morrison, do you have any reason to believe mr. sondland is not telling the truth of the content of his conversation with the president of the united states? >> no, congressman. >> do either of you have information or evidence that anyone that testified before the committee in the secret dungeon testimonies that have been released or in open testimonies has perfejured themselves or li to the committee? >> i have no reason to think that. >> mr. morrison? >> no, sir. >> lieutenant colonel vindman reported to you? >> he did, sir. >> you have a legal background. he said he listened the phone call, a phone call you said you saw nothing had occurred illegally, and he said he believed the president of the united states demanded to president zelensky that these investigations move forward. do you believe, because he only was telling us his opinion, do you believe in your opinion that the president of the united states demanded that president zelensky undertake these investigations? >> no, sir. >> to both of you. ukraine is an aspireant to

to pursue the barista investigation i was alarmed by what mr morrison told me about the sun and your ma conversation i understand that mr morrison testified at his desk deposition that investor someone proposed that might be sufficient for the ukrainian prosecutor general to commit to pursue the investigations as opposed to present selenski but this was the 1st time that i had heard that the security assistance not just the white house beating was conditioned on the investigations very concerned on that same day september 1st i sent ambassador simon a text message asking if we are now saying that the security systems as and a white house meeting are conditioned on best occasions best or stalin responded asking me to call him which i did during that phone call investor solomon told me that president trump had told him that he wants president alinsky to state publicly that ukraine will investigate boris ma and alleged ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. besser song also told me that he now recognized that he had made a mistake by earlier telling ukrainian officials that only a

when mr. morrison was asked by mr. castor, did anyone bring concerns to you that they believe colonel vindman leaked something? mr. morrison replied yes. so your boss had concerns about your judgment. your former boss dr. hill had concerns about your judgment. your colleagues had concerns about your judgment and had concerned you leaked information. any reason they have that impression? >> yes. i guess i'll start by reading dr. hill's own words as she attested to in my last evaluation that was dated middle of july right before she left. before she left. alex is a top military 1% officer and best military officer i worked with our 15 years of service. he is unflammable and exercises excellent judgment. exemplary during numerous visits. i think you get the idea. mr. morrison -- yeah, the date of that was -- yeah, let's see, i'm sorry, july 13th. so mr. jordan, i would say that i can't say what mr. morrison -- why mr. morrison questioned my judgment. we had only recently started working together. he wasn't there very long

which conversations with mr. morrison and mr. taylor? >> well, mr. morrison testified that you relayed a conversation you had with the president in which the president told you no quid pro quo, but president zelensky must go to a microphone and announce these investigations, and that he should want to. similarly, you told ambassador taylor that while the president said no quid pro quo, unless zelensky announced these investigations, they would be at a stalemate, presumably a stalemate over the military assistance. do you have any reason to question those conversations that mr. morrison and ambassador taylor took notes about? >> well, i think it's tied to my text, mr. chairman, because in my text i think i said something to the effect that he wants zelensky to do what he ran on, i believe is transparency, et cetera, et cetera, which was my clumsy way of saying he wanted these announcements to be made. >> again, ambassador, i'm not asking about your text message. i'm asking about what you relayed to ambassador taylor and mr. morrison about your convers

page 82 of the transcript from mr. morrison. mr. morrison said this. i had concerns about lieutenant colonel vindman's judgment, among the discussions i had with dr. hill and the transition was our team, strength, weaknesses and fiona and others had raised concerns about alex's judgment when mr. morrison was asked by mr. castor. did anyone ever bring concerns to you they believe colonel vindman may have leaked something and mr. morrison replied yes. so your boss had concerns about your judgment, your former boss had concerns about your judgments and colleagues had concerns about your judgment and colleagues felt there were times when you leaked information. any idea why they have those impressions colonel vindman? >> yes, i guess i'll start by reading dr. hill's own words as she attested to in my last evaluation that was dated middle of july right before she left. alex is a top 1% military officer and the best army officer i ever worked with in my 15 years of government service. he is brill yanlt, unflappable and excellent judgment. >> so -- >> exempla

>> yes, it would. >> mr. morrison? >> i agree with that, but i would add that the hold as i understood applied to ukraine security systems, ua si and aff. it did not apply to ams. and the javelins were provided under fms. >> so the most lethal weapon that president trump provided to the ukrainians that president obama in his public national policy which he said was available to them should the russians have push their javelins? >> yes, sir. >> through that process. even with the pause and all of the stuff going on? >> yes, sir. >> associated press is reporting that an ambassador volker, you said earlier. they took two gunships and a tug and 21 sailors last november. and the russians have now given the 24 sailors back in september and the associated press is reporting today that they have been given the gun votes in the tug back. does that sound like the ukraine is inept at being able to negotiate with the russians because they are wounded by her actions? >> no, i would not say that the ukrainians are inept. >> thank yo

and i attempted to try to talk to mr. morrison. that didn't happen before i received instructions from john eisenberg to not talk to anybody else any further. >> so, the lawyer -- you not only didn't go to your boss, -- what ended up unfolding was, you had conversations with the attorney. i did my core function, which is coordination. i spoke to the appropriate people. and mr. eisenberg told me not to talk to anybody there. >> mr. eisenberg, he told me to take my concerns to him. >> and, there's a period of time in it wasn't that long a period of time, but it was enough time for me to -- >> enough time to talk to someone who you want i will assume it is, right? >> i've been instructed not to, representative jordan. >> he's what i'm getting. he told you not to talk to any of the people and you interpret that as not talking to your boss. but you talked to your brother, you talked to the lawyers, you talked to secretary kent, and the one guy adam schiff will let you tell us who he is. is that right? >> representative jordan, i did my

mr. morrison, do you have any reason to believe that mr. sondland is not telling the truth as to the content of his conversation with the president of the united states? >> no, congressman. >> do either of you have any information or evidence that anyone who has testified before the committee either in the secret dungeon testimonies that have been released or if these open testimonies has perjured themselves or lied to this committee? >> no, sir. >> lieutenant colonel vindman reported to you; is that correct? >> he did, sir. >> now, you have a legal background. he said that he listened to the phone call, a phone call when you said you saw nothing that had occurred illegally, and he said he believed the president of the united states demanded to president zelensky that these investigations move forward. do you believe, because he only was telling us his opinion, do you believe in your opinion that the president of the united states demanded that president zelensky undertake these investigations? >> no, sir. >> to both of you, the ukraine is

ambassador taylor recalls that mr. morrison told that i told mr. morrison that i conveyed in conversation to from yermak september 19th, 2019 in qu x no vice president's visit to warsaw and a meeting with zelensky. this is his clarification. let me read it one more time. ambassador taylor tolls ambassador taylor that i told morrison that i conveyed this message to mr. yermak vice president's visit to warsaw and a meeting with president zelensky. we got six people having four conversations in one sentence and you just told me this is where you got your clear understanding. which, i mean, even though you had three opportunities with president zelensky, for him to tell you, you know what? we are going to do these investigations to you had get the aid. didn't tell you three different times. never makes an announcement. never tweets about it. never does an cnn interview. ambassador, you weren't on the call, were you? you didn't listen in on president trump and president zelensky's call. >> did i not. >> you didn't talk with chief of staff mulvaney. >> t

mr morrison i know that you put that conversation in the server because as you said you feared the political consequences and some other reasons that you gave but you also chose to defy the president's request to not come here as others have like mr maule veiny and mr bolton and you have come here and you've been truthful i appreciate that mr morse and whether you acknowledge it publicly or not i believe that you knew that what the president asked ukrainians to do was wrong and as you just described your duty is to follow the foreign policy priorities the president but to also only follow something that is a lawful order and i don't think you believe that was a lawful order and that's why you did not follow up on those priorities mr volcker we've heard a lot today about this president being such an anti corruption president really cared about fighting corruption is russia corrupt country. there's a we're talk about present no president from president trump is russia corrupt country yes it is and president trump has met a number of times in person with president putin is that right yes a few

thank you, mr. chairman. >> mr. morrison, and to both of you thank you so much for your service. thanks for being here. it's been a long day. mr. morrison, just to follow up with the question from my colleague, you responded earlier to a series of questions about the call and basically saw nothing wrong with it. yet you skipped your chain of command to go to legal counsel i guess to find out what to do because you were concerned about the political fall out, not about anything being inappropriate or wrong with the call, is that correct? >> ma'am, i don't agree with the premise, no. >> could you tell me why you felt the need you saw nothing basically wrong with the call yet you skipped your chain of command to go to counsel because of what? what was the reason for that? >> i don't know that i -- again, i don't agree with the premise, ma'am. i don't think i did skip my chain of command. if i did see something wrong i would have -- >> and who is your direct report? >> the deputy national security advisor. >> and the name of the person? >> dr. charles cupperman. >> did you speak with

morrison was skipped in your chain of command about your other concerns so mr morrison said he was the final clearing the thora to he said he saw your edits do you remember if all of the edits were incorporated and he said yes i accepted all of them at some page 6162 so he believes all your edits were excepted let me ask you were in your edits did you insist that the word demand be put into the transcription between the conversation of the 2 presidents i did not but you did say that in your opening statement today thank you no you'll be. the spear thank you mr chairman and thank you both for your testimony and your service colonel van then wasn't the case that mr eisenberg the attorney had said to you after the july 5th meeting that you should come to him if you have any other concerns after the july 10th meeting just members correct and it is not going outside the chain of command to speak to a lawyer within the institution is that correct no he is the senior between the 2 certainly all right our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been complaining about other witnesses hav

mr. morrison says he told ambassador bolton and the lawyers of this phone call. the following day on september 8, the investor and i spoke on the phone and confirmed he had talked to president trump. but that president trump was adamant that president zelensky himself had to clear things up and do it in public. president trump said it was not a quid quote pro -- quid quo pro. i believe this was the same conversation described to me. ambassador sondland also said he had spoken to ukrainian officials and told them that although this was not a quid quo pro, if president zelensky did not clear things up, we would be at a stalemate. i understood a stalemate to mean that ukraine would not receive military assistance. sondland said this conversation concluded with zelensky agreeing to make a public statement in an interview. shortly after that call, i expressed my strong reservations in a text message, stating that ukrainianse is the give the interview and don't get the security assistance. the russians love it and i quit. i was serious. the next day, i said to the inve

and mr. morrison recounted something similar. you don't have any reason that both of their very similar recollections that they had with you? >> let me break that down. the text i said about the no quid pro quo was my effort to respond to amourespond to ambasr taylor's concerns to go to president trump. apparently ambassador taylor had access to secretary pompeo, not president trump. so i made the phone call. i said what do you want? president trump responded with what i put in the text. and then i strongly encouraged ambassador taylor to take it up with the secretary. and he responded, a agree. when i said that. as far as the other part of your question relating to whether or not the prosecutor could make the statement or zelensky could make the statement, i don't recall who told me whether it was volker, whether it was giuliani, or whether it was president trump, it's got to be zelensky, it can't be the prosecutor. but that's what i relayed. whoever i got that information from, i relayed that to i believe both mr. -- or excuse

based on my call with mr. morrison, i was preparing to do so. just lays later on august 27th, ambassador bolton arrived in kiev and met with zelensky. security was not discussed. as far as i knew the ukrainians were not aware of the hold until august 29th. i was all too aware of and still troulkd by the hold. near the end of bolton's visit i asked to meet with him privatesly during which i discussed my serious concern about withholding military other assistance to ukraine while they were defending against russian aggression. ambassador suggested i send a memo directly relaying my concerns. i wrote and transmitted such a cable describing the folly i saw in withholding military aid to ukraine at a time when hostilities were still active and russia was watching closely to gauge the level of american support for the ukrainian government. the russians, as i said at my deposition, would love to see the humiliation of president zelensky at the hands of the americans. i toll the secretary that i could not and would not defend such a policy. although i r

morrison's that correct mr morrison has left the position some time ago already at least 3 weeks so but you do that you prepare for talking points for your supervisors that. typically i'm frankly that at that level they don't really take talking points specially if they have expertise in talking points or more intended for national security advisor although 'd for bolton did a really really require dip because of his deep expertise it's more the next level up the president a traditionally on this trying to establish i know this position is somebody accurately is talking points for a number of people that is correct do they always use them now or is is president trump known to stick to a script. i don't believe so so is it odd that he didn't use your talking points no it is not in your deposition if your lawyer wants to follow on it's page 3 o 6 when you were asked about events during the temporary hold on u.s. assistance to ukraine this is that 55 day period or so and you testified that the u.s. administration did not receive any new or shine says from ukraine about anticorruption e

chairman which conversations with mr morrison and mr tell mr morris and testified that you related a conversation you had with the president in which the president told you no quid pro quo but presidents alinsky must go to a microphone and announce these investigations and that he should want to similarly you told investor taylor that while the president said no quid pro quo unless the lewinsky announced these investigations they would be at a stalemate presumably a stalemate over the military assistance you have a reason to question those conversations that mr morrison and bester taylor took notes about. well i think it's tied to my text mr chairman because in my text i think i said something to the effect that. he wants selenski to do what he ran on i believe is transparency cetera et cetera which was my clumsy way of saying he wanted he wanted these announcements to be made we're going to ask for not asking about your text message i'm asking about what you relayed to investor taylor and mr morrison about your conversation with the president you know the reason to question their re

in particular, mr. morrison relayed to me that the inability of any u.s. officials to respond to the ukrainian's explicit questions about security assistance was troubling them. i was experiencing the same tension in my dealings with the ukrainians including a meeting i had had with the defense minister that day. on september 5th, i accompanied senators johnson and murphy during their visit to kiev. when we met with president zelensky his first question to the senators was about the withheld security assistance. my recollection of the meeting is that both senators stressed that bipartisan support for ukraine in washington was ukraine's most important strategic asset and that president zelensky should not jeopardize that bipartisan support getting drawn into u.s. domestic politics. i had been making and continued to make this point to all of my official ukrainian contacts but the odd push to make president zelensky publicly commit to investigations of burisma and alleged interference in the 2016 election showed how the official foreign policy of the united

i told mr. morrison that i conveyed this message to mr. yermak in connection with vice president pence's -- ambassador taylor recalls that mr. morrison told ambassador taylor that i conveyed this message to mr. yermak in connection with vice president's meeting in warsaw. we've got six people having four conversations in one sentence and you told me this is where you got your clear understanding. even though you had three opportunities with president zelensky for him to tell you you know what we're going to do these investigations to get the aid. never makes an announcement, mr. does a cnn interview. you weren't on the call, were you? >> i did not. >> you never talked with chief of staff mulvaney. >> i never did. >> you didn't meet the president. >> that is correct. >> two of those they had never heard about as far as i know. there was no reason for it to come up. >> president zelensky never made an announcement. this is what i can't believe. you're their star witness. they're their first witness. >> mr. jordan -- >> based on this i've see

>> did i ever have any conversations with mr. morrison? no. >> did mr. morrison ever expressed concerns that he thought maybe you were not following the chain of command? >> he did not. >> did doctor hill or mr. morrison ever ask you questions whether you are trying to access information outside of your lane? >> they did not. >> another aspect of the ukraine portfolio that you were not a part of or some of the communications mr. morrison was having with the basinger taylor? >> correct. >> did you ever expressed concern he was leaving you off the calls? >> certainly was concerning had just come aboard and he did not have -- he was knocked in all the items we are working on in the policy we developed over the preceding months and i thought i could contribute to the performance of his duty. >> okay, you went to ukraine for the integration customer. >> correct. >> at any point during that trip did they offer you a position of defense minister with ukrainian government. >> heated. >> how many times. >> i believe three times. >> do you have any reason why he a

morrison told investor taylor that i told mr morrison that i conveyed this message to mr yarmuk on september 1st 21000 in connection with vice president his visit to warsaw and a meeting with president selenski we've got 6 people having 4 conversations in one sentence and you just told me this is where you got your clear understanding which i mean even though you had 3 opportunities with presidents alinsky for him to tell you you know what we're going to do these investigations you get the aid didn't tell you 3 different times never makes an announcement never tweets about it never does a see an interview besser you were on the call were you president you did listen in present from presidencies call you never talk with step one of any i never did i'm never met the president through meetings again was alinsky didn't come up and 2 of those that never heard about as far as i know and president of the region for president has never made an announcement this is this is what i can't believe in your their star witness you're their 1st witness this is your high you're the guy based on this based on

>> did i ever have any conversations with mr. morrison about it? no. >> okay. did mr. morrison after express concerns to you that he thought maybe you weren't following the chain of command in all instances? >> he did not. >> did dr. hill or mr. morrison ever ask you questions about whether you were trying to access information outside of your lane? >> they did not. >> and another aspect of the ukraine portfolio that you were not a part of were some of the communications mr. morrison was having with ambassador taylor. >> correct. >> did you ever express concerns that he was leave iing you off those calls? >> well certainly it was concerning. he had just come on board. he didn't have the you know, he wasn't steeped in all the items that we were working on including the policy that we had developed over the proceeding months. and i thought i could contribute to that, to his, to the performance of his duties. >> okay. when you were, you went to ukraine for the inauguration? >> correct. >> at any point during that trip did mr. dannylook offer you a position with the ukrain

i was alarmed by what mr. morrison told me about this conversation. i understand that mr. morrison testified at his deposition that ambassador sondland proposed it might be efficient for the ukraine prosecuting general mig might. first time i heard the security assistance not just the white house meeting was candidate on the investigations. very concerned on that same day, september 1st, i sent ambassador sondland a text message asking if we are now saying that the security assistance and a white house meeting are conditioned on investigations. ambassador sondland responded asking me to call him. which i did. during that phone call, ambassador sondland told me that president trump had told him that he wants president zelensky to state publicly that ukraine will investigate burisma and alleged interference in the 2016 election. ambassador sondland told me that he now recognized that he had made a mistake by earlier telling ukrainian officials only a white house meeting with president zelensky was only conditioned on a meeting in the white house. everything was such announce