state department emails. and many many other state department documents. and i was told i could not work with my the eu staff to pull together. to the state department materials would have been very helpful to me and trying to reconstruct. with whom i spoke unmet and when and what was said. i've had hundreds of meetings and calls with individuals. but i'm not a note taker. that i speak with heads of state. senior government officials members of the cabinet, th president. almost each and every day. talking with foreign leaders might be memorable to some people. but this is my job i do it all the time. my lawyers and i have made multiple requests to the state department and the white house for these materials. yet these materials were not i did to me and they have also refused to share these materials with this committee. these documents are not classified. and in fairness. and in fairness should have been made available. in the absence of these materials, my memory admittedly has not been perfect. process of allowing me to read the state department records

the state department's its. there is great they were worried. she just wanted to give me a heads up about this. you seem to be going on and so she just wanted to give me a heads up. i you know hard to know how to react to something like that i asked her what it was about what did she think it was about she didn't know she said that she was going to try and find out more but she had wanted give me a heads up in fact i think she may even have been instructed to give me a heads up on that. so i asked are going to have what is the next step here. so she said she would try to find out more as you try to call by midnight. around 1 o'clock in the morning. she called me again and she said that. there are concerns up the street and said i needed to get on the call it come home immediately get on the next plane. to the u s. and i asked her why. and she said she wasn't sure but there were concerns about my security astor my physical security because sometimes washington knows more than we do about these things and she said

had you been offered an extension of your post by the state department. yes undersecretary the undersecretary for political affairs had asked whether i would extend for another another year and departing in july of 2021 was that request made in early march so about a month and a half before this call yes did anyone at the state department ever express concerns about your job performance. now after you returned to washington a couple days that after that you met with the deputy secretary of state and that your deposition you said the decorative deputy secretary of state told you that you had done nothing wrong but that there was a concerted campaign against you what did what did he mean by that i'm not exactly sure but i took it to me that the allegations that mayor giuliani and others were putting out there that that's that's what it was and who else was involved in this concerted campaign against you . there were some members of the press and others in mayor giuliani's circle and who are from ukraine. in ukraine i think well mr lutes and the prosecutor g

like every other state department employee retained at all times and continues to retain state department documentary records and email account, which he has always been fully free to access and review at will. that's an accurate statement from the state department, isn't it, ambassador hale? >> i had not seen it until shortly before entering this hearing room, but it sounds accurate, yes. >> appreciate that. >> ambassador, you're aware of no connection between the pause in aid in exchange for any kind of investigation, is that correct? >> i'm sorry, i missed a key word. can you repeat the question? >> you're not aware of any connection between the pause in aid in exchange for some kind of investigation being announced or done by ukraine, is that correct? >> right. >> and you're not aware of secretary pompeo having any knowledge, direct knowledge of connection between investigations and security aid, is that correct? >> i'm not aware of that, and he did not speak to me about that. >> you're not aware of any nefarious motive to withhold aid to ukraine. is that correct? >> correct, sir. >>

she has a relationship with the state department and the deep state. those connections with well known. these people all knew each other. fiona hill said she believes steele's information, he was playing them and probably trying to make a few bucs. i can't emphasize enough the witnesses against donald trump in the impeachment trial are key players in hiding ukrainian efforts to spy on the trump team. the nellie ohr source in ukraine. she swears poroshenko is her source. he appears in the do not prosecute list. why yovanovich? the same players. judge jeanine: everything they accuse the president of, they are guilty of. you point one finger, four point back at you. dan bongino. thanks so much. carter page joins me in a few moments. new details on hunter biden and those pesky connections. fox news contributor john solomon with new information next. [♪] >> i want people to see the document of the money laundered that went to hunter biden which in and of itself is the crime of money laundering. i have got the documents in my file. they say the charges wer

did have all support of the state department, right? >> yes. >> and, in fact, during her 33 year career as a foreign service officer did you ever hear of any serious concerns about your job performance? >> no. >> was the statement of support ultimately issued for you? >> know it was not. >> did you learn why not? >> yes. i was told that the was concerned on the seventh floor that if a statement of support was issued, whether by the state department or by the secretary personally, that it could be undermined. >> how could it be undermined? >> that the president might issue a tweet contradicting that, something to that effect. >> so let me see if i've got this right. you were one of the most senior diplomats in the state department. you have been there for 33 years. you have won numerous awards. you have been appointed as an ambassador three times by both republican and democratic presidents, and the state department would not issue a statement in support of you against false allegations because they've concerned about a tweet from the pr

that's how the state department aid gets freed up. the lawyers conclude it has to go, legally, then john bolton says, yeah, let it go, then he quits his job. now, the rest of the fund, the military funds, laura cooper, the senior defense department official, indicates in her testimony which we just got today that it also appeared to be quite illegal for trump to be withholding that part of the funding, too. she says in that meeting where it finally became crystal clear that the president had ordered the withholding of both the state department money and the military money, she says, quote, in that meeting, deputies immediately began to raise concerns about how this could be done in a legal fashion. quote, the comments in the room at the deputies' level reflected a sense there was not an understanding of how this could legally play out. quote, the question in the room, there was not an available mechanism to simply not spend money that in the case of the state department had already been notified to congress and in the case of the mili

beyond these posts she has held pneumorouse other senior positions at the state state department clurg european and your asian affairs. she taught national security strategy at the defense university. she also previously served as u.s. embassies in kiev, moscow, london, and mogadishu. the ambassador has received multiple-ors from the department for her work including the presidential's distinguished service awards and diplomacy and human rights award. two points before our witness is sworn. all open hearings will be held at the unclassified level. any information that may touch on classified information will be addressed separately. second, congress will not tolerate any reprisal, threat of reprisal or attempt to retaliate against any government official for testifying before congress including you or any of your colleagues if you would please rise and raise your right hand i will begin by swearing you. do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god let the record show that the witness has answer

an article from politico recently stated that, "john sullivan is winning over state department employees. so far, sullivan has shown a fluency with diplomacy." crucial ingredients to leading the mission to russia. in a wall street journal op-ed by ambassador thomas pickering, he said of secretary sullivan, i have come to respect john sullivan's judgment, his balance, his good sense, his open-minded approach to how to deal with foreign relations problems we may have. you may have seen a letter of distinguished national security executives, former diplomats, security officials, secretaries of defense, and other positions were all endorsing secretary sullivan's ambassadorship to russia. as it relates to the new position he has been nominated, he currently leads the only two dialogues on strategic security. he has played a key role relating to the u.s.-russia relation ship over the past two years. at a time when u.s.-russian relations are more complex and strained than ever, it is important to have someone like john as america's top diplomat. i had the honor of introducing another outstandin

as my other state department state department have testified. it should not have been delayed. i expressed this view to many during this period, but my goal at the time was to do what was necessary to get the aid released and to break the logjam. i believe that the public statement we had been discussing for weeks was essential to advancing that goal. you. >> know, i really regret that the, cranians were placed in that predicament, to braekt logjam and to not some problem. y i mentioned at the outset that we would the lead lead are surprised and was aware that a commitment to invest fwagd gagzs were the acting assistant secretary phil reeker sent an e-mail to me, to secretary perry and to others forwarding some positive media coverage of president zelensky's attendance at our event. mr. reeker wrote, and i quote, this headline underscores the importance and timeliness of zelensky's visit to brussels, and the critical, and the critical, perhaps historic role of the dinner and engagement gordon coordinated. thank you for your participation and dedication to this effort. months la

comeback and assist the state department at a very double time for the department. striking about his testimony is the degree to the stateought to get department to issue a statement of support for its own ambassador and how those repeated efforts were rebuffed. you also see in writing his transcript, his growing alarm at the degree to which the apparatus the state department itself was being used to seek political information for a political purpose. by the president of the united states. and others. and you see that these are two of the prince more reasons that caused this career public servant to decide that he must resign his office, as he did. we will be releasing further transcripts tomorrow we are scheduled to release the transcripts of ambassador vocal and ambassador song lend -- sondland. we continue to allow witnesses the opportunity to review their transcripts. we continue to make reactions for private information or personally identifiable information. but we will continue to release the transcripts. and we will soon moving to open hearings as well. thos

within the state department. you can roll your eyes. >> i'm not rolling my eyes. i say -- >> it's legitimate. >> he's concerned about the deep state and yet levin, igor and giuliani and all of these corrupt ukrainian officials who are now in the camp with giuliani and levin igor, those, he has no concerns about their, but yovanovitch is the one who's suspect? >> you could say rudy giuliani is corrupt. i don't think he's corrupt. >> i don't think he's corrupt. he's out there -- >> basically put him in with the den of thieves. >> he's working with them. he's choosing to work with a den of thieves. >> we don't know that. >> we do know that. he's trying to get a visa for them. he's trying to get them in the united states. he's trying to get them on "hannity." you wouldn't associate with these people. >> i'm not the standard. >> i wish you were. >> i appreciate that but i'm not the standard. >> there's another important thing i think sondland said to the president that's very damaging because he's trying to suck up to

s is the official state department. look, we tried our best to fix the problem, while keeping the state department and the nsc closely apprised of the challenges we faced. on july 25, presidents trump and zelensky had their official call. i was not on the call and i don't think i was invited. i first read the transcript on september 25, the day it was publicly released. all i had heard at that time was that the call had gone well. looking back, i find it very odd, very odd, that neither i nor ambassador taylor nor ambassador voelker ever received a detailed readout of that call with the biden references. now there are people who say they had concerns about the call , but no one shared any concerns about the call with me at the time, which frankly would have been very helpful to know. taylor,26, ambassador ambassador voelker and i were in kiev to meet with president zelensky. the timing of that trip immediately after the call was entirely coincidental. had beenmeetings scheduled well before the date the white house final

advisors, the department of defense and in coordination with department of state certified in may of 2019 ukraine had taken substantial actions to make substantial institutional reforms tore decreasing corruption and increasing accountability and sustained combat capability unquote and the entire 250 million in usdi funds. this brings me to the topic of today's proceedings. i would like to recap my recollection of the timeline in which these events played out. i testified about all of this at length in my deposition. in july, i became aware of a hold being placed on obligation of the state department's military financing or fmf and dod's usai fund. in meetings i heard the president directed the office of management and budget to hold the funds because of his concern for corruption in ukraine. let me say at the outset i have never discussed this or any other matter with the president and never heard directly from him about this matter. at a senior level meeting i attended july 26th chaired by national council security leadership as in all other interagency meetings on this topic of wh

collecting it, they were not passing it to you, they were passing it to state department? department of defense? >> this is what they reported to me. i have not seen the documents that have been collected. i only know those documents that i have produced or that my staff at my staff has brought to my attention or that i have received. so no, i do not know what has happened with the documents that have been collected. >> same general question to you, sir. >> i requested it wants given access to documents that had originated or were sent to me for the pertinent matters of this investigation during a finite. back. i don't have information about what is going on in terms of other documents that i did not produce or do not receive. there was a move to gather them, and i understood generally and directly and informally that they had been gathered. that is the extent of my knowledge. it is not my area of responsibility. >> yes, but did they pass them on to you or did they pass them on to the administration somehow? >> the only documents i received, sir, where those in the primari

that's where the leadership of the state department sits. there was great concern. they were worried. she just wanted to give me a heads up about this and things seemed to be going on. so she wanted to give me a heads up. hard to know how to react to something like that, i asked her what was it about, what did she think it was about. she didn't know. she said that she was going to try and find out more, but she wanted to give me a heads up. in fact, i think she may have been instructed to give me a heads up on that. so i asked her kind of what is the next step here, so she said she would try to find out more and she would try to call me by midnight. >> what happened next? >> around 1:00 in the morning she called me again and she said that there were great concerns, there were concerns up the street, and she said i needed to get -- come home immediately, get on the next plane to the u.s. and i asked her why, and she said she wasn't sure, but there were concerns about my security. i asked her my physical security, because sometimes washington knows more than we do abo

the state department said, ambassador sondland, like every state department employee called before congress, continues to retain all access to his state department document terry records and email account, which he is always fully free to access and review at will. that is accurate, isn't it? >> i had not seen it until shortly before entering this hearing room, but it sounds accurate. >> ambassador, you are aware of pausenection between the in aid? >> i missed a keyword. >> you are not aware of any connection between the pause in aid and some kind of investigation being done? >> correct. >> and you are not aware of secretary pompeo having any knowledge, directly, of the connection between investigation and security eight? >> i am not aware of that. he did not speak to me about that. >> not aware of any nefarious motives to withhold aid to ukraine, correct? >> correct, sir. >> you testified that what you knew was that president trump was skeptical of foreign assistance in general, mr. radcliffe highlighted that, and skeptical of the corruption environment in ukraine, is that accurate? >> we

i was at the state department in a secure video conference. i did not recognize the face and i believe the individual representing omb at the time was not normally the person who did. it was the summer vacation cycle and he just stated to the rest of those participants either in person or video screens that the head of the office of management and budget, who was the acting chief of staff mick mulvaney, at the direction of the president had put a hold on all security assistance to the ukraine. this, of course, is central to the whole thing because not only did that happen but when asked, because this was congressionally approved money, congress was not given clarity as to why congressionally-approved money would have been delayed. that's a serious business because when you are representing the country as an employee of the state department, that is not -- you don't really get to meddle in stuff that congress decide. >> well, you can hold up money for good reasons. but there's no good reason to have held up this money to ukraine. i've never in

i have not had access to all of my phone records, state department emails and many, many other state department documents. and i was told i could not work with my eu staff to pull together the relevant files and information. having access to the state department materials would have been very helpful to me in trying to reconstruct with whom i spoke and met and when and what was said. as ambassador, i've had hundreds of meetings and calls with individuals, but i'm not a note taker or a memo writer, never have been. my job requires that i speak with heads of state, senior government officials, members of the cabinet, the president almost each and every day. talking with foreign leaders might be memorable to some people, but this is my job. i do it all the time. my lawyers and i have made multiple requests to the state department and the white house for these materials, yet these materials were not provided to me. and they have also refused to share these materials with this committee. these documents are not classified and, in fairness, in fairness, should have been made available. in

department stating that they had heard that the c.n.n. is currently being blocked by o.m.b. this apparently refers to the congressional notification state would send for ukraine f.m. after i have no further information on this on july 25th a member of my staff got a question from the ukraine embassy contact asking what was going on with ukraine security assistance. because at that time we did not know what the guidance was on usa i the o.m.b. notice of apportionment arrived that day but this staff member did not find out about it until later i was informed that the staff member told the ukrainian official that we were moving forward on us ai but recommended that the ukraine embassy check in with state regarding the aftermath sometime during the week of august 6 to 10 a ukraine embassy officer told a member of my staff that a ukrainian official might raise concerns about security assistance in an upcoming meeting my understanding is that the issue was not in fact raised again i have no further information about what concerns about the secu

the state department and the n.s.c. informed of our activities and that included communications with secretary of state pompei o. the state department had refused to give those documents they were obtained through a freedom of information lawsuit by the watchdog group american oversight now senate democrats are asking pompei oh in a letter to recuse himself from the state department's response to the impeachment inquiry pump aoe was quick to respond i'm not going to accuse myself from this i know precisely what american policy was with respect to ukraine i was working on it and i'm incredibly proud of what we've accomplished also joining in the circle of those implicated in the presidential pressure campaign is the president's top defender in the impeachment inquiry republican devin nunez clearly these little chris accusations don't reflect committee members who are honestly searching for the truth on saturday reports emerge suggesting nunez met with a disgraced former ukrainian prosecutor to find dirt on biden that is

department and the president of the united states. it was really remarkable. >> well, i want to bring in major garrett as well, who has covered congress for many years as well and also has great sources within inside the white house. what do you make of the president tweeting about ambassador yovanovitch as she is testifying before congress and then the chairman of the committee giving her the opportunity to respond to it, which i think had to be one of the most breathtaking parts of this where she described essentially intimidation? >> exactly, norah. i can tell you that's not the script the republicans looking at this hearing and planning for it put forward to their own members. i was texting with a significant republican in the leadership. they had prepared a memo for the house intelligence committee republicans, look, this is a very tough witness, don't try to badger her, don't try to undercut her credibility. go back to two main points. the president does have the power to recall you or remove you for any reason or no reason and

i never talked to the secretary of state or anybody else from the state department. all of what you saw oh, shouldn't be surprising. let's see, a hoax? more fake news, more conspiracy theories. none of that happened. by the way, mr. zucker, i hope your stenographer humpty dumpty is taking notes back to solomon's big breaking news. found in the newly uncovered documents and by the way this is real news. in 2016 a sample question and answer section actually is prepping this ambassador person i don't know much about. how to answer questions during her senate confirmation hearing. one unredacted section reads, quote: question: do you have any comment on hunter biden, the vice president's son, serving on the board of burst marks a major ukrainian gas company? and they suggest the answer. for questions on hunter biden's role on burisma i would refer to you the vice president joe biden's office. remember, biden has been vehemently denying ever talking to his son about his ukrainian business deals but in june of 2016, yep, sleepy joe creepy joe, biden was the official point

the state department for example you will see in the transcript that state department representatives made that claim to their employees they were being bullied by congress and they were concerned about being bullied by their own state department and that was misrepresented to congress. these are the same agency personnel they want to bring in to sit on the deposition but these are decisions the chairs are making trey gowdy and the benghazi investigation and nick mulvaney made and the uniform policy practice of the house. >> i just want to make a record of comment for the hearings but and then try to provide testimony in an orderly way the american people can understand and the facts at the heart of this investigation. and then defied off russians of the national security interest and their interest as well to hold military support with the president of that nation as a leverage to get them in the corrupt act to help the reelection campaign. also looking at allegations there is an effort to cover up these activities. >> talking about the transcript. [inaudible] and john bolton with th

and in fact state department employees were concerned about being bullied by their own state department. and that that bullying was being missed or presented to congress. these are the same agency personnel that these witnesses want to bring in and sit in on that definition -- depositions. it is not just the decisions the chairs are making but trey gaudi made as chair and jim jordan made in his participation in the benghazi information and make mulvaney when he was conducting investigations and this has been the foreign practice of the house. >> when it comes to yovanovitch in mckinley -- do you anticipate bring them back for a public hearing? >> at this point i will not comment on who the witnesses will be in the open hearings but we will endeavor to make the decision about the most important witness are and try to provide testimony in an orderly way which the american people can understand the nature of the allegations and the facts involving the heart of this investigation and that is the president's abuse of his office to coerce an ally that is fighting off russians in our national

that's where the leadership of the state department sits. there was great concern. they were worried. she just wanted to give me a heads up about this and things seemed to be going on. so she wanted to give me a heads up. hard to know how to react to something like that, i asked her what was it about, w

she and her colleagues at the state department. this individual was well versed with all of the same players that were involved in the christopher steele dossier at the state department. >> it seems to be at the nexus, this person who some assume is the whistleblower. i won't make that assume shurn. i frankly don't know. whoever he is or learned finally that he is. he is at the nexus of so much of the communications amongst various groups whether the state department, ukraine, whether working in the united states in various capacities including within the white house. this gets to be a fascinating story in and of itself. >> it really is. but i would urge the investigators in congress as well as the members to look at every single person regardless of the word whistleblower. that's where we are getting caught up here. i was the chief investigator for the government reform and oversight committee. they need to look at each person and create those concentric circles around each person that was on the phone call and figure out who was

and there are morale issues at the state department. >> morale issues at the state department. i can understand why. on march 20th of 2019, president trump we did an article that included a letter from representative pete sessions that said that you had "spoken privately and repeatedly about your disdain for the current administration in a way that might call for the expulsion of you as you ambassador to ukraine immediately." did you speak publicly and privately about your disdain for the trump administration? >> no. >> why do you think the president will want to push such a lie? >> i don't know. i don't know. >> policies change, but to u.s. interests don't. not for those who are seeking to do the work of protecting our nation. the work that you have done for decades. the president, his chief of staff, and his allies seem to want nothing more than to smear the good people trying to protect this country. and to hijack our institutions for the personal and political gain. again, ambassador, we thank you so much for your service. and i will yield my remaining time to the chairman.

does state department have anything on that number? >> our best analysis that the number of a million is a reasonable number to think about the number of persons that have been over the extended period of time held or detained or wrongfully denied their fundamental human rights. i think we think that number's about right. >> just a quick follow-up, sir. the president tweeted just a short while ago that he encouraged you essentially to testify in the impeachment investigation. is that something you are considering? >> when the time is right, all good things happen. >> [ inaudible ] and the clashes between hezbollah, what are you considering to help facilitate peaceful demonstrations in both countries and on lebanon, any updates on military aid to the lebanese army? one more on iran, will the u.s. be able to provide access to the iranian people soon, internet access? >> so let's see. as for internet access, it's come back on just a bit. we have encouraged the leadership of the islamic republic regime to turn it back on so people can comm

in fact, state department employees were concerned about being bullied by their own state department, and that bullying was being misrepresented to congress. these are the same agency personnel that these witnesses want to bring in and sit in on these depositions. but this isn't just a decision that the chairs are making in this investigation. it's the decision that trey gowdy made has chair, it's the same decision that jim jordan made in the benghazi investigations. this has been the uniform policy practice of the house. >> do you anticipate bringing these individuals back for public hearings? >> at this point, i'm not going to comment on who our witnesses will be in the open hearings. but we will endeavor to make the decision about who the most important witnesses are and try to provide testimony in an orderly way in which the american people can understand the nature of the allegations and the facts involving what is at the heart of this investigation. that is the president's abuse of his office to coerce an ally that is fighting off russians in our national security interests. the

i have not had access to all of my phone records, state department emails, and many, many other state department documents. and i was told i could not work with my eu staff to pull together the relevant files and inform having access to the state department materials would have been very helpful to me in trying to reconstruct with whom i spoke and met and when and what was said. as ambassador, i've had hundreds of meetings and calls with individuals, but i am not a note taker or a memo writer. never have been. my job requires that i speak with heads of state, senior government officials, members of the cabinet, the president almost each and every day. talking with foreign leaders might be memorable to some people, but this is my job. i do it all the time. my lawyers and i have made multiple requests to the state department and the white house for these materials. yet these materials were not provided to me. and they have also refused to share these materials with this committee. these documents are not classified. and in fairness, in fairness, should have been made available. in the a

he said it became clear that the state department officials, if not the state department itself, were being drawn into the domestic political arena in some way, and he raised concerns about how ambassadors, u.s. ambassadors, were also drawn into the political arena, something he said should absolutely not have been done. it appears to be at the utilization of ambassadors overseas to advance domestic political objectives. so this part of the testimony trying to make clear, as you said, how irregular this effort was by rudy giuliani, imperils foreign policy, something that led to the ouster of marie yavonovitch, and the failure of the president's top aides like mike pompeo not to do anything about this effort that led to his resignation because of this effort by the state department officials at the direction, at the highest rungs of the government to try to help the president with his view. >> again, the president says his call with ukraine was perfect. he wants everyone to just focus on that call, which was not perfect if you just looked at that call. but when you get the before and a

i have not had access to all of my phone records, state department emails and many, many other state department documents. and i was told i could not work together the relevant files and information. having access to the state department materials would have been very helpful to me in trying to reconstruct with whom i spoke and met and when and what was said. as ambassador, i've had hundreds of meetings and calls with individuals, but i'm not a note taker or a memo writer. never have been. my job requires that i speak with heads of state, senior government officials, members of the cabinet, the president, almost each and every day. talking with foreign leaders might be memorable to some people, but this is my job, i do it all the time. my lawyers and i have made for these materials. yet, these materials were not provided to me. and they have also refused to share these materials with this committee. classified and, in fairness, and in fairness should have been made available. in the absence of these materials, my memory, admittedly has not been perfect. and i have no doubt that a mor

i have not had access to all of my phone records, state department emails, and many, many other state department documents. and i was told i could not work with my e.u. staff to pull together the relevant files and information. having access to the state department materials would have been very helpful to me in trying to reconstruct with whom i spoke and met and when and what was said. as ambassador, i have had hundreds of meetings and calls with individuals but i am not a note taker or a memo writer. never have been. my job requires that i speak with heads of state, senior government officials, members of the cabinet, the president, almost each and every day. talking with foreign leaders might be memorable to some people, but this is my job. i do it all the time. my lawyers and i have made multiple requests to the state department and the white house for these materials. yet these materials were not provided to me and they have also refused to share these materials with this committee. these documents are not classified and in fairness -- and in fairness should have been made availa

we now know a senior state department official believed joe biden had a conflict of interest. he tried to raise this issue with joe biden in 2015 and joe biden's staff turned him away. this isn't a conspiracy theory. r this isn't a fox news fantasy. these are facts that the american media are willfully choosing not to pay attention to, to report, to learn more about. we have to get to the bottom of this. i think the next round of documents -- i'm doing another round of documents in december. i think we are going to learn a lot more, marijuana. >> sean: he is on tape bragging, quid pro quo joe. it's all there. that was the best interview i have ever seen by a 49-year-old kid on gma. do they pay you? yourur dad, yeah, probably that reason. brand new article "new york post" perfectly describes the ongoing soviet style impeachment coup attempt against the president. piece is entitled "pelosi's impeachment rules guarantee partisan circus." how nancy pelosi insist the impeachment procedures adopted last are the fairest possible. don't believe it. injury, a provision slyly added at t

to state department? department of defense? >> this is what they reported to me. i have not seen the documents that have been collected. i only know those documents that i have produced or that my staff at my staff has brought to my attention or that i have received. so no, i do not know what has happened with the documents that have been collected. >> same general question to you, sir. >> i requested it wants given access to documents that had originated or were sent to me for the pertinent matters of this investigation during a finite. back. i don't have information about what is going on in terms of other documents that i did not produce or do not receive. there was a move to gather them, and i understood generally and directly and informally that they had been gathered. that is the extent of my knowledge.

i have not had access to all of my phone records, state department emails, and many, many other state department documents. and i was told i could not work with my eu staff to pull together the relevant files and information. having access to the state department materials would have been very helpful to me in trying to reconstruct with whom i spoke and met and when and what was said. as ambassador, i've had hundreds of meetings and calls with individuals. but i'm not a note taker or a memo writer. never have been. my job requires that i speak with heads of state, senior government officials, members of the cabinet, the president, almost each and every day. talking with foreign leaders might be memorable to some people, but this is my job. i do it all the time. my lawyers and i have made multiple requests to the state department and the white house for these materials yet these materials were not provided to me and they have also refused to share these materials with this committee. these documents are not classified and in fairness, in fairness, should have been made available. in th

clearly, no one at the state department did. what i can say is mister giuliani should have known those claims were suspects coming as they reportedly did from individuals with questionable notice and reason to believe their political and financial ambitions would be stymied by our anticorruption policy in ukraine. after being asked by the under secretary of state for political affairs in early march 2019 to convince my tour until 2020 am of a smear campaign against me issued a new public phase in the united states. in the wake of the negative press, stadiums officials just in an earlier departure and we agree on july 2019. i was abruptly told weeks later in late april to come back to washington from ukraine on the next plane. at the time i departed ukraine had just concluded game changing presidential elections. it was a sensitive period with much at stake for the united states and called for all the experience and expertise we could muster. when i returned to the united states deputy secretary of state sullivan told me there ha

and pompeo, the buck stops with him and he's the leader of the state department. he is sanctions this kind of conduct where the president is literally using his personal lawyer to try to pressure a foreign adversary to impact the next election. you can't do the hear no evil, see no evil thing for pompeo because he runs that department. and it's pretty incredible. sophia, what happens then to mike pompeo, it certainly appears from what we're seeing in the house of representatives you're not going to see mike pompeo testifying. >> well, nothing's going to happen to mike pompeo because president trump loves mike pompeo and vice versa. so from that standpoint, there's really no way to deal with this, and what he has not done in his proper function as secretary of state. i think as far as him testifying, that's never going to happen, as you know because the white house would then claim privilege and i think that, you know, mike pompeo's been an embarrassment if i can be direct about it. he's sat on these videos like a stepford wife it's like he's glassed over, i don't

to the state department? department of defense? >> this is what they reported to me. i have not seen the documents that had been collected. i only know those documents that i have produced or my staff has brought to my attention that i have received. so, no, i do not know what has happened with the documents that have been collected. >> same question to you sir. >> i was granted access to documents that i had -- either had originated or had been sent to me that relevant to the pertinent matters during that time period. i don't have any information about what else is going on in terms of other documents that i did not produce or did not receive. there was a move to gather them and i understood generally and indirectly that we gathered them in that was the extent to my knowledge. >> did they pass them on to you theid they pass them on to administration somehow? >> the only documents i received where those within the parameters i described. those were again the documents that either i produced or that were sent

i mean, she is somebody who served in the department for years, the department of state for years. she is not aligned with any one particular party. so i suspect that she is going to be quite a credible witness like the two witnesses that we saw the other day. >> let me turn to chuck todd who is in washington because for the first time, chuck, we heard yesterday house speaker nancy pelosi really put this in stark terms. she used the term bribery and it was a signal of what an impeachment charge, if it comes, might be. how significant do you think that was? >> well, i think that's a -- i think they believe they're trying to change the language a little bit, trying to penetrate what they think is a little bit of a filter in the american public that isn't necessarily consuming all of this right now. but i expect to see, to hear some of that same language echoed today particularly by the democrats. expect to hear a lot about rudy guiliani today. a lot of questions about rudy guiliani. about what he was up to. i think you're going to hear some surprising, odd things that happened on the

, many other state department documents. and i was told i could not work with my eu staff to pull together the relevant files and information. having access to the state department materials would have been very helpful to me in trying to reconstruct with whom i spoke and met and when and what was said. >> do we know what pompeo's next move is? there's a lot of talk about kansas. he's been flying there a lot. there's some rorring indicating folks think he has his eyes on a senate run. what does your reporting indicate? >> our reporting indicates the republican leadership in the senate is very interested in having him run for senate, and they don't want to lose the senate. and so the -- you know, it's obvious that secretary pompeo through his work as the top diplomat, through his work as the nation's top spy at the cia would be a very compelling candidate in kansas where they're worried they could lose to a democrat, which would be extremely unexpected. i so in the party leadership they want him to do this. meanwhile he is ta

euro state department employee. sort of painting the picture that all of this egregious behavior has not really hurt you, now has it, and then the democrat mr. quigley said, boy, this is just like a hallmark movie. everything turned out great, you got a job at georgetown, right? which was an interesting moment, i thought as we watch all of this carry out this afternoon. but one of the things that continues to come up. and it is a very salient point, we expected some pushback based on what rudy giuliani has said. nobody has tried to nail her down. what about when you said this about president trump? or when you pushed back in this way against president trump? none of that. which definitely leaves a big question mark about whether or not there is anything there. republicans have been criticized for not addressing the substance of the allegations here, and focusing much more on the process. this would go right to the substance, and they are not going there. >> dana: juan, one of the things i did come up, mr. radcliffe,

the state department's its. there is great they were worried. she just wanted to give me a heads up about this. you seem to be going on and so she just wanted to give me a heads up. i you know hard to know how to react to something like that i asked her what it was about what did she think it

the wake of the negative press state department officials suggested earlier departure and we agreed upon july 21000 i was then abruptly told just weeks later in late april to come back to washington from ukraine on the next plane at the time i departed ukraine had just concluded game changing presidential elections it was a sensitive period with much at stake for the united states and called for all the experience and expertise we could muster when i returned to the united states deputy secretary of state sullivan told me there had been a concerted campaign against me that the president no longer wished me to serve as ambassador to ukraine and that in fact the president had been pushing for my removal since the prior summer as mr sullivan recently or counted during his senate confirmation hearing neither he nor anyone else ever explained or sought to justify the president's concerns about me nor did anyone in the department justify my early departure by suggesting i had done something wrong i appreciate that mr sullivan publicly affirmed at his hearing that i had served capably admi

troubling and there are morale issues at the state department. >>> morale issues at the state department. i can understand why. on march 20th, 2019, president trump tweeted an article that included a letter from representative pete sessions that said you add and i quote privately and repeatedly about your disdain for the current administration the way that call for the explosion of you as you ambassador to ukraine and immediately, could you speak publicly and privately about your disdain for the trump administration. >> no. 720 say the president would want to push such a life. >> i don't know. >> policies change but u.s. interests don't. not for those who are seeking to do the work of protecting our nation come the work you have done for decades. in the present and chief of staff, and his allies seem to want nothing more than to smear the good people and trying to protect this country. and hijack our institutions for their personal and political gain. and again ambassador, we thank you so much for your service. and it will yield my remaining time to the chairman. >> thank you. >> good af

security assistance funding in general there are 2 typical parts state department and d. o. d. and i believe it was around that day that o.m.b. put a hold on congressional notification and you had any earlier indications that this might be the case prior to that there were there were some general inquiries on how the funds were being spent things of that nature nothing specific but no no hold 'd certainly we'll where anyone in the national security community who supported withholding the aid know no one from the nationals security none no one from the state department correct no one from the department of defense correct and anyone into your understanding raise the look galatea withholding this system it was raised on several occasions and who raised those concerns so the following the july 18th. sub p.c.c. which is again what i coordinate or what i convene at my level there was a july 23rd aapc see that would have been conducted by mr morrison there would be there were questions raised on as to the legality of of the hold over the subsequent week the issue was analyzed and dur

while keeping the state department and the n.s.c. closely apprised of the challenges we faced on july 25th presidents trump and selenski had their official call i was not on the call and i don't think i was invited to be on the call in fact i 1st read the transcript on september 25th the day it was publicly released all i had heard at that time was that the college gone well looking back i find it very odd very odd that neither i nor ambassador taylor nor ambassador volker ever received a detailed readout of that call with the biden references now there are people who say they had concerns about the call but no one shared any concerns about the call with me at the time which frankly would have been very helpful to know on july 26th ambassador taylor ambassador volker and i were all in kiev to meet with president selenski the timing of that trip immediately after the call between presidents trump and selenski was entirely and tiredly coincidental the key of meetings had been scheduled well before the date that the white house finally