castor, you just invoked tim morrison. let me put up slide 9 of mr. morrison's testimony on page 38 of his testimony. mr. morrison said, or the question was, question by mr. goldman: you heard the call, you recognized that president trump was not discussing the talking points that the nsc had prepared based on official u.s. policy and was instead talking about the investigations that fiona hill had warned you about. then you reported it immediately to the nsc legal adviser. is that the correcting. before i ask you plrks droos. earlier in the presentation we showed the testimony of what president trump is trying to do which is running a domestic political errand. is that what you said in your testimony? >> yes, it was about two specific investigations that president trump did ask president zelensky to do of the these are the same two investigations that were discussed and were the only two investigations that were at issue throughout the entirety of the scheme. and so what our evidence found was that time there was a reference to investigations, it ref

let me go to tim morrison who you invoked, slide 11. mister morrison was asked by congressman's wall well on the intelligence committee picking up in the middle of that question it says the one call you listen to between the president of the united states and the president of ukraine, the president of the united states priority was to investigate the biden's and i ask why you didn't follow up on the president's priority when you talked to the ukrainians, mister morrison said i did not understand it as a policy. let me ask you. there was a package prepared before that call of what donald trump was supposed to talk about with president zalinsky. am i correct that one of the things in prepared remarks was the anticorruption platform that he ran and won on. >> witnesses testified that is a consistent and persistent policy objective for the united states. >> did donald trump mention his corruption with zielinski? >> now. >> did he mention anything other than the two investigations that were politically helpful to him, the 2016 election inves

according to testify from tim morrison at the nfc, the summary was accurate and complete. nsc staff member colonel alex vindman testified that any omissions in the summary were not significant and that editing was not done maliciously. president trump has declassified and released the call summary so the american people can review it and assess it for themselves. i'll make a few points that seem to have gone undernoticed. the call summary reflects absolutely no pressure or conditionality. president zelensky vocalized in concerns with the subject matter discussed. and there is no indication of bribery, extortion or other illegal conduct on the call. the call summary shows president trump and president zelensky engaged in pleasantries and cordialities. the call reveals laughter. put simply, it is not the shakedown that some democrats have described. president trump raised his concerns about european allies paying their fair share in security assistance to ukraine, a concern that president trump would continue to raise both publicly and privately. there is no discussion on th

according to testimony from tim morrison, the summary was accurate and complete. lieutenant colonel alexander vindman testified that any omissions in the summary were not significant and that editing was not done maliciously. president trump has declassified and released the call summaries of the american people can review it and assess it for themselves. i will make a few points that seem to have gone under noticed. the call summary reflects absolutely no pressure or conditionality, president zelensky vocalized no concerns with the subject matters discussed. and there is no indication of bribery, extortion, or other illegal conduct on the call. of the call summary shows president trump and president zelensky engaged in pleasantries and cordiality's. the summary reveals laughter, simply put, not the sinister mob shakedown that some democrats have described. president trump raised his concerns about european allies paying their fair share and security assistance to ukraine. a concern that president trump would continue to raise both publicly and privately. there wa

now to tim morrison, who you invo invoked. slide 11. mr. morrison was asked by our own congressman swalwell who was on the intelligence committee and said just a going to pick up in the middle of this long question. it said you listen to the one call that you listened to between the president of the united states and the president of ukraine, the president of the united states priorities were to investigate the bidens and i'm asking you, sir, why didn't you follow up on the president's priorities when you talked to the ukrainians? mr. morrison said sir, i did not understand it as policy objective. mr. goldman b, let me ask you. there was a package prepared before that call of what president trump was supposed to talk about with president zelensky. correct? >> yes. >> and am i correct sir that one of the things he was supposed to talk about in his prepared remarks was the anticorruption platform of president zelensky he ran and won on? >> yes, the witnesses testified that's a consistent and persistent policy objective for the united states.

if i may. >> tim morrison did not -- rep. nadler: the gentleman has the time, not the witness. >> let me ask. mr. castor: volker never meant -- rep. nadler: the gentleman has the time. >> will this witness be able to cross-examine it like he is being able to cross-examine -- rep. nadler: the gentleman is not recognized. the gentleman will not call out in the middle of testimony. >> [indiscernible] does not make it you point you are doing it right. it was your testimony, the democrats are about blocking information when they should be seeking information. mr. castor: that is absolutely right. you said he trump administration has cooperated and facilitated congressional oversight investigations. is that correct? mr. castor: absolutely. the trump participation that has participated until it got to the impeachment inquiry. was on thisair, who call, the trump administration -- the president directed him not to appear. i am asking timothy president direct him not to appear? mr. castor: i think he was allowed to come. >> he was not

tim morrison testified he went for a different reason. hehe didn't say that he went because he was concerned that the called. he went to the national security council for two reason. number one, they were not on the call said he wanted to update them about it. he was concerned ifo, the call leaked out, how it would play in washington's polarized environment which is exactly what we have here. he was also concerned that it might affect bipartisan support in congress. they've traditionally been one of the few where republicans and democrats share interest and for good reason, he didn't want to craniums to get a distorted perception of what actually happened on the call because we are talking about eight lines of concerned in the amount of ambiguity. this meeting on may 23 there's a question i guess it's ambiguous but it's a question about whether when the president referred the delegatio delegatio the inauguration on the 20th. they come back and it's the secretary and senator johnson and a. is a path to invite him to the white house and the

according to testimony from tim morrison at the nsc the summary was accurate and complete. lieutenant colonel alexander vindman testified that any omissions were not significant and any editing was not done maliciously. president trump has declassified and released the call summary so the american people can assess it and review it for themselves. i'llve make a few points that sm to have gone under noticed. the call summary reflects absolutely no pressure or conditionality. president zelensky vocalized no concerns with the subject matters discussed. there is no indication of bribery, extortion or other illegalhe conduct on the call. the call summary shows president trump and president zelensky engaged in pleasantries a and cordialities. the call is not the sinister mob shakedown that some democrats have described. president trump raised his concerns about european allies paying their fair share in security assistance to ukraine. a concern that president trump would continue to raise both publicly and privately. there is no discussion on the call, i repeat no discussion on t

according to testimony from tim morrison at the nsc, the summary was accurate and complete. nsc staff member lieutenant colonel vindman testified that any omissions in the summary were not significant and that editing was not done maliciously. president trump has declassified and released the summary so the american people can read it and assess it for themselves. i'll make a few points that seem to have gone undernoticed. the call summary reflects absolutely no pressure or conditionality. president zelensky vocalized no concerns with the subject matters discussed. and there is no indication of bribery, extortion or other illegal conduct on the call. the call summary shows president trump and president zelensky engaged in pleasantries and cordialities. the call summary reveals laughter. simply put, the call is not the sinister mob shakedown some democrats have described. president trump raised his concerns about european allies paying their fair share in security assistance to ukraine, a concern that president trump would continue to raise both publicly and privately. there

aaron, there may not have been a call on september 9th, but according to the testimony from tim morrison and bill taylor, as elie just said on september 7th, there was a call with a different tone. explain why that call is so significant. >> well, just what elie had said, and also this is coming now in that time frame of just a few days after september 1st when gordon sondland had already corrected his testimony once and said that he wasn't in warsaw and did in fact deliver threatening message basically to the ukrainians that their $400 million in u.s. security aid would probably not come unless they made a statement on these investigations, announcing what basically what trump wanted. so the thrust that morrison, that taylor, everyone leaves this call that happened somewhere around, you know, 6th, 7th, 8th of september before this one that is the very clear message that trump has been talking about -- the thrust that taylor and all these folks are talking about at that point in time, what are the exact words we need the ukrainians to say to please the president? that's a far more muddle

tim morrison, talked about instances where ambassador land the warsaw meeting september 21st and fiona hill talked about issues of that sort and a number of witnesses, you're correct. >> ambassador reker. >> yes, he said he was a problem. >> dr. hill raised concerns about his behavior and said he might be an intelligence risk, is that correct? >> she did. she had issues with his tendencn telephone calls. which obviously, can be monitored by the bad guys. was spinning certain things and he admitted that. >> he admitted he exaggerated. also, when it comes to his communications with the president, we try to get him to list all the communications to the president. i think he gave us six and then when he was back, he walked us through each communication w and by the way, it was about christmas party, when the president of finland was here and then congresswoman spier asked him the same question in the open hearing and he said he talked to the president. so the record is mixed. >> i think my time is up. bou thank you both, yield back. >> gentleman, mr. chairman. mr. chairman? mr. chairman? >

when tim morrison came in, we thought he was a witness for the democrats. we didn't ask for tim morrison. he ended up giving honest testimony that came to our benefit. did you get a leaked version of tim morrison's? no, because that was to our advantage. did you get something leaked from ambassador volker? no, because that was to our advantage. what they would do is leak out things that were to their advantage -- >> congressman, i will tell you, there were plenty of leaks from both sides, to your advantage -- >> name them for the american people. name them right now. name who on the republican side leaked it out. i'm willing to hear it. you know, listen, you know this is -- >> before the public -- >> you know, this is -- you may promise me but name the people. i can tell you that here -- i was in the room. i was one of the few people. i controlled what happened. and i can tell you when you look at republican leaks, there were not republican leaks because they were all democrats out there getting ahead of it. and am times -- >> i don't want to divulge source

morrison at the n.s.c. this summary was accurate and complete and ses staff member lieutenant colonel alexander vinland testified that any omissions in the summary were not significant and that editing was not done maliciously president trump has declassified and released the call summary so the american people can review it and assess it for themselves i'll make a few points that seem to have gone under noticed the call summary reflects absolutely no pressure or conditionality. president selenski vocalize no concerns with the subject matters discussed and there is no indication of bribery store sion or other illegal conduct on the call the call summary shows president trump and president selenski engaged in pleasantries and cordiality. calls summary reveals laughter simply put the call is not the sinister mob shakedown that some democrats have described president trump raises concerns about european allies paying their fair share and security assistance to ukraine a concern that president trump would conti

tim morrison says the same thing. >> what can did ambassador sondland it tell you that he told mr. yermac? >> that the ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make an investigation for the aid to be litted. >> was there any doubt at all that president was demanding ukraine announce investigations? lieutenant colonel vindman says, not at all. question. was there any doubt in your mind as to what the president or president was asking for, our president was asking for as deliverable? vinden, "there was no doubt." fiona hill, backs him up. >> when i came in, gordon sondland was basically saying look, we have a deal there will be a meeting. i have a deal with chief of staff mulvaney. there will be a meeting if the ukrainians announce these investigations into 2016 and burisma. >> george kent, also really clear that white house meeting president zelensky wanted was paced on politically-motivated investigations. >> in midaugust it became clear that giuliani's efforts to jin up politically-motivated investigations were leveraging president ezelensky's desire to a white house m

tim morrison said he had a sinking feeling and went and talked to attorneys about it. bill taylor said he was concerned about this and talked to others about it. the witnesses who heard it contemporaneously said it had to deal with a quid pro quo, had to deal with investigations even though president trump said there was no quid pro quo, he said zelensky needed to go out and make a public statement about the investigations. >> what do you think of this? >> calls into the white house are actually logged. the other question is whether or not gordon sondland is actually confused about this call. if there is really only one call. i agree the additional quid pro quo call is not exactly exonerating the president, what happened to the extent the president did say the words, no quid pro quo, he then went on to describe and request a precise quid pro quo. that really does undercut any semblance of a defense here whatsoever. >> go ahead, jeffrey. >> what's wrong with these people? why don't they take notes when they talk to the president of the united states? is that a lot to as

and then you have tim morrison and ambassador taylor saying, no, when we got the readout from the call immediately after sondland was on the call with the president for tim morrison, the readout said that he said no quid pro quo but, and then all the spelled-out demands for biden and the 2016 election and burisma. that's damning evidence of that was the call of where join came up but it followed wall the demands of a quid pro quo. what it does is it flips on its head the most helpful conversation potentially for the president, that's why he came out reading it almost verbatim from what sondland had said an it's the most incriminating conversation. because it's the very conversation that tim morrison and the gop witness says he immediately told bolton and both of them decided they must alert the lawyers. bolton called ambassador taylor in ukraine on a saturday and taylor went into the embassy to have a conversation about what happened on that call. it's the most incriminating phone conversation in the entire he zblod ry episode. >> timelines are important. if you were going to timeline

>> i agree with that and we've heard from certain fact-based witnesses so far like kurt volker and tim morrison, i would want to hear them testify, but beyond that i would like to hear from the whistle-blower. i believe hunter biden is a fact witness. the investigations that president trump was concerned about, they were interfering in the 2016 election. whether it is the op-ed, or working with the ukrainian embassy to dig up dirt on the trump campaign, to take down a trump campaign official or the other investigation with hunter biden. these are legitimate investigations. i want the other 97% of the story to get out and i believe that when you get the rest of the story out, he won't be just found not guilty but actually acquitted and that is the story that will be written for decades and generations to come. >> laura: i agree. congressman gates, we are almost out of time but you're at the white house tonight. what are you recommending data? >> i have a different view. i think even if he took every single fact that the democrats allege is true, this does not rise to an impeachable offe

but we have testimony from both the nsc's tim morrison and also ambassador bill taylor, we're told about this call the day it happened. you have trump talking to sondland and then sondland calls morrison. the president said, he wants no quid pro quo, but he wants president zelensky to go to the microphone and announce investigations. and we have the same thing and he once again says, i talk to the president, the president wants zelensky to go in front of the microphone and say what's happening. then he tells taylor, i talked to zelensky, and zelensky told me he'll do it, he'll go in front of a cnn interview and announce what he said he would. >> you're really looking at it through the eyes of a lawyer and parsing all of this information. and so what you describe in your piece is a phone call -- even if the president says no quid pro quo, he's describing a quid pro quo. i'm not saying that, but what i'm saying is -- >> you can't commit a crime and say, by the way, it's not a crime. what he described was a quid pro quo. sondland is calling it preconditions. we have morrison saying it was r

tim morrison talked about instance where ambassador sondland was showing up uninvited. morrison didn't understand why sondland was trying to get into the warsaw meetings september 1st. and dr. hill, fiona hill told us about issues of that sort and a number of witnesses, you're correct. >> and ambassador weeker said he was a problem. >> a problem. >> dr. hill raised concerns about his behavior and said that he might be an intelligence risk, is that correct? >> she did. she had issues with his tendency to pull out his mobile device and make telephone calls. which, obviously, can be monitored. >> yes. >> by the bad guys. >> and we talked about how he was spinning certain things. and he admitted that. how he was spinning. >> he admitted he exaggerated. >> yes. >> also, you know, when it comes to his communications with the president, we try to get him to list all the communications with the president. i think he gave us six. and then he walked us through each communication with the president. it was about a christmas party. when the president of finland was here. then congr

we know from the witness testimony from one of the witnesses who testified in the house, tim morrison, that john bolton had a one-on-one conversation with donald trump trying to convince trump to release the aid. we don't know exactly what was said and what happened during that meeting? john bolton knows. we know when bolton came out, he said -- he meaning trump -- he's not ready yet. that's a crucial conversation. really there's only two people who can tell us what happened there. donald trump who i would not count on ever testifying and john bolton. bolton needs to get serious here. enough with the book deals. enough with the twitter. if he has something to say and he clearly does, let's get him under oath and hear what he has to say. for better or worse for republicans, for democrats, whoever it may help or hurt, let's get some truth here. >> elie, it's christmas so let's take a step back here. do you think there's any chance the democrats and republicans will be able to come together in the new year? >> well, i'll sound a little note of christmas optimism. i do think and hope ther

first of all on the call, tim morrison, general kellogg have a different view of the call than lieutenant colonel vindman and jennifer williams. going to the point that the call is ambiguous, so that's the first thing. timrs morrison testified that h went to the national security counsel lawyers foron a very different reason. he did not say he went to the nsc lawyers because he was concerned about thens call. he went to the national security lawyers for two reasons. number one, they weren't on the call. we wanted to update them about it. number two, he was concerned about leaks. and he was concerned that if his call leaked out, how it would play in washington's polarized environment, which is exactly what we have here. he was also concerned if the call leaked, that it might affect bipartisan support in congress. you know, issues of ukraine have traditionally been one of the few issues where republicans and democrats share interest. the third reason he didn't want the ukrainians to get a distorted perception of what appened on the call because on thepp call, we're talking about eight lines

tim morrison says the same thing. >> what did ambassador sondland tell you that he told mr. yermak? >> that the ukrainians would have to have the prosecutor general make a statement with respect to the investigations as a condition of having the aid lifted. >> so was there any doubt? any doubt at all that the president was demanding ukraine announce investigations? lieutenant colonel alexander vindman says none at all. question: was there any doubt in your mind as to what the president or our president was asking for as a deliverable? vindman: there was no doubt. fiona hill backs him up. >> when i came in, gordon sondland was basically saying, look, we have a deal here that there will be a meeting. i have a deal here with chief of staff mulvaney there will be a meeting if the ukrainians open up or announce these investigations into 2016 and burisma. >> george kent also really clear that the white house meeting president zelensky wanted was dependent on politically motivated investigations. >> in mid-august it became clear to me that giuliani's efforts to gin up politically motivated

>> yes, tim morrison talked about instances where ambassador sonland was showing up uninvited. morrison didn't understand why sonland was trying to get into the warsaw meeting on september 1st. and dr. hill told us about issues of that sort and a number of witnesses. you are correct. >> and ambassador reeker and sonland too. >> yes, reeker said he was a problem. >> yes. and dr. hill raised concerns about his behavior and said he might be an intelligence risk; is that correct? >> she did. she had issues with his tendency to pull out his mobile device and make telephone calls which obviously can be monitored. >> yes. >> by the bad guys. >> we talked about how he was spinni spinning certain things. he admitted that. how he was spinning. >> he admitted he exaggerated. also, when it comes to his communication with the president, we tried to get him to list all of the communications with the president. he gave us six. then when he was back -- we walked us each communication with the president. it was a christmas matter and when the president of finland was here. and congresswoman spe

>> yeah, tim morrison talked about instances where ambassador sondland was showing up uninvited. morrison didn't understand why sondland was trying to get into the warsaw meetings september 1st. and dr. hill, fiona hill told us about issues of that sort and a number of witnesses, you're correct. >> yeah, i believe ambassador reeker said he was a problem, yeah. >>. >> dr. hill raised concerns about his behavior and said he might be an intelligence risk, is that correct? >> she did. she had issues with his tendency to pull out his mobil device and make telephone calls, which obviously can be monitored. >> yes. >> by the bad guys. >> we talked about how he was spinning, that -- you know, certain things, and he admitted that, how he was spinning, and -- >> he admitted, he exaggerated. >> he also -- >> when it comes to his communications with the president, we tried to get him to list all the communications with the president, i think he gave us 6. and then when he was back at -- he walked us through each communication with the president. it was about the christmas party, when the pre

tim morrison, when questioned, there was no quid pro quo? correct. the aid was released. four facts never changed. president trump and zelensky says no pressure and no conditionality between aid and investigation, no quid pro quo. ukrainians were not aware aid was withheld when the president spoke and ukraine didn't open an investigation but still received from president trump. mr. castro, has anyone heard from the whistleblower reit in closed door heart attacks or public hearings? >> no. >> did chairman schiff state he would call the whistleblower to testify? >> no. >> has that happened? >> no. >> is he going to? >> i hope so. >> has aid to other countries also been held up? >> yes. >> on october 2nd, the "new york times" reported a whistleblower approached a house intelligence committee aid with his concerns about mr. trump. >> sorry. say that again? >> on october 2nd, the "new york times" reported a whistleblower approached a house intelligence aide about his concerns about mr. trump. is that accurate. i think it was about the threats -- >> that's not what i'm asking.

tim morrison talked about instances where ambassador sondland sort of showing up uninvited. morrison didn't understand why sondland was trying to get into the g warsaw meeting september 1st. and dr. hill, fiona hill, told us about issues ofll that sort d a number of witnesses you're correct. >> and ambassador reeker and ambassador sondland too, correct?ba >> i believe ambassador reeker -- >> said he was a problem. >> said he was a problem, yeah. >> yeah. and dr. hill raised concerns about his behavior and said that he might be an intelligence risk, that is correct? >> she did. she had issues with his tendency to pull out his mobile device and make telephone calls. >> right. >> which>> obviously can be monitored. >> yes. >> by the bad guys. >> we talked about how he was spinning that, you know, certain things and he admitted that, how he was spinning. and -- >> he admitted he exaggerated. he also -- you know, when it comes to his communications with the president, we tried to get him to list all the communications with the president. i think he gave w us six. and then when he

. >> but witnesses such as tim morrison, the deputy assistant the to the president, testified about what was not in those talking points. >> m morrison, were these references to crowd strike, the server in 2016 election and to vice president biden and his son, were they included in the president's talking points? >> they were not. >> are you aware of any witness who testified that investigating the bidens was an objective of official u.s. policy? >> no, it was not before and it was not after this call. >> and anything ever found of those investigations that might have occurred. >> anything ever found of those investigations that may have occurred with respect to the former vice president. >> every witness said there's no factual basis for either of the investigations. >> so mr. trump did not use official talking points? >> correct. >> there were fact witnesses that confirmed that. >> when you hear those words, do you hear the president requesting a thoughtful anti-corruption program consistent with u.s. policy? >> mr. goldman -- >> i do not. we were hoping -- we recommended the president

tim morrison, when questioned, and there was no quid pro quo, answered, correct. the aid was released, for facts never change. both president trump and president zelensky say there was no pressure, the call transcript shows no different reality to the aid in the investigation. no quid pro quo. the ukrainians were not aware that the aid was withheld when the president spoke. ukraine did not open investigation, but still received eight and a meeting with the president. mr. castor, has any committee heard from the whistleblower, either in closed or hearings or an open hearings? >> no. >> did chairman schiff state that he would call the whistleblower to testify? >> he did. >> has it happened? >> it has not. >> is it going? to >> i hope so. >> have other countries -- >> yes. >> mr. goldman. on october 2nd, the new york times reported that the whistleblower quote, approach a house intelligence committee aide with his concerns about mr. trump. is that accurate? >> i'm sorry? >> on october 2nd, the new york times reported that the whistleblower -- is that accurate? >> i t

. >> but i witnesses such as tim morrison, the deputy assistant to the president and senior director for europe, testified about what was not in those talking points. >> now, mr. morrison, were these references to crowd strike, the server in 2016 election, and to vice president biden and his son. were they included in the president's talking points? >> they were not.g >> are you aware of any witness who testified that investigating theo bidens was an objective o official u.s. policy? >> no, it was not before and it was not after this call. >> andbe anything ever found in those investigations that might have occurred? >> i'm sorry? >> anything ever found of those investigations that may have occurred with respect to the former vice w president? >> every single witness said there's no factual basis for either of the investigations. >> so mr. trump did not use official talking points. >> correct. >> and there were fact witnesses who confirmed . that? >> that's right. >> when you hear those words, do you hear the president requesting a thoughtful and well-calibrated anti-corruption progr

ambassador sondland also testified president trump wanted nothing from ukraine.on tim morrison when questioned, and there was no quid pro quo? answered correct. the aid was released, the four facts neverre changed. both president trump andr president zelensky say there was no pressure. the call transcript shows no conditionality between aid and investigation, no quid pro quo. ukrainians were not aware the aid was withheld when the president spoke. stille received aid and a meetg with president trump.id mr. castor, has any committee heard from the whistle-blower either in closed door hearings or in openhe hearings? >> no. >> did chairman schiff state that heha would call the whistle-blower to testify? >> he did. >> has that happened? >> it has not. circumstances it going to occur? >> i hope so. other countries' aid also been held up? >> yes. >> mr. goldman, on october 2nd, "the new york times" reported that the whistle-blower, quote, approached a house intelligence aide with his concerns about mr. trump. thatut accurate? >> i'm sorry? saye? that again? >> on october 2nd, "the new york times" re

. >> witnesses such as tim morrison, senior director for europe, testified about what was not in those talking points. >> now, mr. morrison, were these references to crowdstrike to the servering 2016 election, and vice president biden and his son, were they included in the president's talking points? >> they were not. >> are you aware that it was -- >> no, it was not before and was not after this call. >> anything ever found of those investigations that might have occurred? >> i'm sorry, can you repeat the question? >> anything ever found of those investigations that may have occurred with respect to the former vice president? . >> every single witness said there's no factual basis for either of the investigations. >> so mr. trump did not use official talking points? >> correct. >> and there were fact witnesses who confirmed that? >> that's right. >> when you hear those words, do you hear the president requesting a thoughtful and well-calibrated anti-corruption program consistent with u.s. policy? >> so, mr. goldman -- >> we do not. we were hoping -- we recommended the president very c

tim morrison, when questioned, and there was no quid pro quo, answered, correct. the aid was released, for facts never change. both president trump and president zelensky say there was no pressure, the call transcript shows no different reality to the aid in the investigation. no quid pro quo. the ukrainians were not aware that the aid was withheld when the president spoke. ukraine did not open investigation, but still received eight and a meeting with the president. mr. castor, has any committee heard from the whistleblower, either in closed or hearings or an open hearings? >> no. >> did chairman schiff state that he would call the whistleblower to testify? >> he did. >> has it happened? >> it has not. >> is it going? to >> i hope so. >> have other countries -- >> yes. >> mr. goldman. on october 2nd, the new york times reported that the whistleblower quote, approach a house intelligence committee aide with his concerns about mr. trump. is that accurate? >> i'm sorry? >> on october 2nd, the new york times reported that the whistleblower -- is that accurate? >> i t