Transcripts For CSPAN2 Impeachment Inquiry House Hearings Impeachment Hearing With Lt. Col.... 20240713

Earlier today the House Intelligence Committee held its third hearing against President Trump hurco lawmakers heard testimony from lt. Col. Vindman, National Security Council Director for europe at Jennifer Williams russia and europe advisor to Vice President pentz. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] the committee will come to order good morning everyone this is the third in a series of public hearings will be holding as a part of the impeachment inquiry prick without objection the chairs authorized to declare recess at any time for there is a quorum present well proceed in the sameze fashion as in the first hearing of will make a statement and then we will turn to our witnesses for their Opening Statements and then two questions prick audience members we respect you and your interest to be here we asked for your respect t as we proceed with todays hearing is the intention to proceed without disruption as chairman ill take all necessary and appropriate steps to maintain order to make sure it is run in accordance with house rules revelation one resolution 660 iraq myself an Opening Statement into the emperor at one impeachment inquiry into the 45th president of United States donald j tropical last week we heard from experienced diplomats testifying about the president scheming over official acts over hundreds of millions of dollars of us military aid made undeliverable by the new ukrainian president to politically motivated that that would help his Reelection Campaign one involved the biden the other the discredited Conspiracy Theory that that they were is responsible for interfering or 2016 elections. As david holmes was told immediately after speaking to the President Trump did not give a expletive aboutaf ukraine. Its only the big stuff that benefits the president like the biden investigation that giuliani was pushing. For a foreign leader to invest dash announce the investigation the president announced his own personal interest above those of the nation he undermined military and diplomatic support for a keyum ally and undercut anticorruption efforts in ukraine how could diplomats urge ukraine from refraining from political investigations from its own citizens if the president engaged to engage in precisely the same investigations of one of our own citizens. At the white house career professionals became concerned that President Trump with the chief of staff Nick Mulvaney and Rudy Giuliani pushing a policy that was at odds with National Interest. This morning we hear from two National Security professionals that were aware of those efforts. Lt. Col. Vindman whose family fled oppression in the soviet union as a toddler a career army officer and iraq war veteran awarded a purple heart and jul july 2018 detailed to the white house to coordinatee policy with ukraine. Jennifer williams is a Career Foreign Service officer detailed to the office of the Vice President responsible for europe and eurasia related issues following the phone call with president zelensky on april 21st, the president asked t 14 to represent him at the upcoming inauguration. And he would be a coveted attendee second in significance only to the president and would send an important signal ofki support to the new ukrainian president. In early may Rudy Giuliani was planning to go to ukraine to have the bidens investigated but it had to be called off aftero became public he blamed people around president cancely for having to and saying they were antagonistic three days later the president called off the Vice President s attendance at the inauguration progressed at a lower level delegation was named as ambassadors or call the three amigos but lt. Col. Vindman would also attend freckle after returning from the inauguration several members of the inauguration briefed the president on their interactions with president zelensky and urged him to meet with ukrainian president but instead he criticized ukraine and instructed them work with rudy. A few weeks later on in july 10h meeting at those officials including lt. Col. Vindman according to chief of staff mulvaney that the meeting would happen if ukraine undertook certain investigations National Security advisor bolton abruptly ended the meeting and said he would not be part of whatever drug deal they are cooking up. And deterred bringing the ukrainian delegation downstairs to the part of the white house and was more explicit accordingh to witnesses to investigate the bidens if they would get a white house meeting with trump after this discussion going to the National Security council top lawyer to report the matter he was told to return in the future with any concerns and soon find the need to do so. One week later july 18 omb announced on a Video Conference callk that mulvaney at trumps direction was freezing nearly 400 million and military assistance to ukraine to enjoy the support of the entirety of the National Security establishment. One week aftererto that trump would now have the infamous phone call with president zelensky. During that call he complained the us relationship with ukraine had up and reciprocal later president zelensky says thank you for defense in ukraine was ready to buy more javelins and antitank weapons trumps Immediate Response is i would like you to do us a favor though. Trump then requested that president zelensky investigate the theory and look into the bidens neither was part of the official prep material of the call but they were in Donald Trumps personal interest of his Reelection Campaign and ukrainian president knew about both in advance because they were pressing ukraine for weeks about the investigation into the 2016 election over the bidens. Lt. Col. Vindman and ms. Williams were on the july 2h call due to the unequal bargaining position of the two leaders in the dependency on the us the favor was really a demand. After the call multiple individuals concerned enough to report it to the top lawyer of a National Security council the second time in two weeks lt. Col. Vindman had raised concerns with tennessee lawyers. Williams also thought asking president zelensky to undertake these was inappropriate it might explain Something Else she had become aware of that hold on military assistance to ukraine. Ms. Williams and lt. Col. Vindman took note of the word by president zelensky that was taken out of the call now walked away locked away in a server he must have been prepped to make that connection between biden and charisma that has now beent confirmed. With a july 25 call lt. Col. Vindman pushed release of aid to ukraine and struggle to learn why it was being withheld to reach ukrainian officials prior to this becoming public by mid august the deputy ambassador asked why the United States was withholding aid although lt. Col. Vindman did not have an answer it was explicit to a meeting in warsaw that they needed to publicly a commit to these investigations if they hope to get the aid. We all saw the president s tweet about you on sunday afternoon and the insults he felt that the ambassador last friday you are here today in america people are grateful. Lt. Col. Vindman we have seen far more scurrilous attacks in your character and watched certain personalities question your loyalty we know you are shed blood for america and we owe you an immense debt of gratitude. I hope no one on this committee will become a part of those vicious attacks. Todays witnesses like those who testified last week are here because they were subpoenaed not because they are for or against impeachment that question is for congress if the president abuses power invited foreign interference into elections and to extort or bribe an ally to aid their Reelection Campaign by withholding official acts or hundreds of dollars of needed military aid it would be prepped for us to decide if those are compatible with the office of thers presidency. I now recognize a Ranking Member for any remarks they iduld like you would like to make. I would like to address the American People watching at home. If you watch the impeachment hearings last week you may have noticed a disconnect between what you saw in the Mainstream Media accounts describing it. When you saw three diplomats who disliked President Trumps ukraine policy discussing secondhand and thirdhand conversations about theirr objections with the trump policy. Meanwhile they admitted they had not talked to the about these matters and were unable to identify any crime or Impeachable Offense the president committed. What you read in the pressd was explosive and shocking testimony that fully supports the democrats accusationsns. But these accounts have a familiar ring because this is the same preposterous reporting the media offered for three years on the russian hoax on a nearly daily basis the top news outlets in america reported on the newest bombshell revelations showing that President Trump and everyone surrounding him were russian agents it wasnt that long ago we were reading these headlines from cnn Congress Investigating rush investment ties with trump officials. This was false. New york times Trump Campaign aides had repeated contact with russian intelligence. Also falls. The trump server communicating with russia. False. New York Magazine will trump the meeting with his counterpart or his handler cracks false. The guardian. Secret talks at the ecuadorian embassy. Also falls. The speed for coPresident Trump directed his attorney to lie to congress about the moscow tower project. All of these are false. No objectivity or fairness in the media russia stories just a fevered rush to tarnish and remove a president who refuses to pretend the media are Something Different than what they really are. Puppets for the democratic party. With their bias misreporting the media lost confidence of millions of americans because they refuse to acknowledge how badly they botched the story they have learned no lessons and simply expect americans uswill believe as they try to stoke a partisan frenzy. In previous earrings i have outlined three questions the democrats are media dont want asked or answered instead of shedding light the media tries to smother and dismiss them. It starts with what is the full extent of the coordination of thei whistleblower and who else did the whistleblower coordinate this with rex the media has fully accepted thehe stunning reversal of the needs of the whistleblower to testify to this Committee Democrats were insisting on his testimony the media wanted it to. But things have changed since it became clear the whistleblower would have to answer problematic questions that include these. Was the full extent of the whistleblowers prior coronation with chairmanship and anyone else he cooperated with while preparing the complaint . What a whistleblowers political biases and connections to democratic politicians . How does the whistleblower explain the inaccuracies in the complaint . What contacted the whistleblower have with the media which appears to be ongoing . What are the sources of the whistleblower information . Who else did he talk to and was he prohibited bywht law to convey any of that information . Media have joined the democrats to cross examine this crucial witness now that the whistleblower has successfully kick started impeachment he has disappeared from the story as if the democrats put the whistleblower in their own witness protection program. My second question what was the full extent of ukraines election meddling with the Trump Campaign cracks in these depositions and hearings republicans decided ukrainian meddling to oppose the Trump Campaign many were reported including the posting of many primary source documents by john solomon the democrats switched from russia to ukraine with the impeachment crusade solomon reporting on marie smith and ukraine have become inconvenient for the democratic narrative so the medias smearing solomon. On the hill they told the staff yesterday they would conduct a review the decision comes a hill writer was told she was to stop speaking to the hillal because it ran solomon stories and she urged the writer to relay her concerns to management. Now that solomons reporting is a problem for the democrats of the problem for the media as well. I submit for the record solomons october 31st story debunking the myths about biden and election interference for quite hnencouraged viewers today to read the story and dryer own conclusions about the evidence solomon has gathered. Ask unanimous consent to put this into the record. Without objection to make a Concerted Campaign to discredit their own colleagues and shocking we see it again in the sudden denunciation of New York Times reporter as a conspiracy theorist after he uncovered a 2017 political peace entitled ukrainian efforts to sabotage trump backfire my third question. Why did barisma hire hunter biden and did it affect any actions under the Obama Administration . We have heard testimony from the democrats of witnesses that diplomats were concerned of a conflict of interest regarding hunter biden because he had a secured well paid position having no qualifications on the board of a corrupt Ukrainian Company while his father was Vice President charged with overseeing ukrainianal issues. After trying out several different accusations against resident trump democrats have settled on bribery. According to widespread reports they replaced their quid pro quo allegation because i was not pulling well. If the democrats and the media are so subtly concerned about bribery you think it would take some interest in barisma paying hunter biden 83000 a month and you think they would be interested in joe biden threatening to withhold us loan guarantees unless the ukrainians fired a prosecutorld investigating barisma. That would be a textbook example of bribery. The media are free to act as democratic puppets and to lurch from the folks of their puppet masters but they cannot reasonably expect to do so without alienating half the country who voted for theat president that they are trying to expel. Americans have learned to recognize fake news when they see it if the Mainstream Press will not give it to them straight they will go elsewhere to find it which is exactly what the American People arees doing. I yield back. I think the gentlemen today we are joined a by lt. Col. Vindman and Jennifer Williams. Lt. Col. Vindman is an active duty military officer joining the army after serving multiple tours overseas serving in south Korea Germany and iraq. Deployed to iraq at a time of heavy fighting and awarded the purple heart after being wounded in a roadside bomb. Since 2008 lt. Col. Vindman for an area officer specializing in eurasia at home and us embassies in ukraine and russia. Serving as a Political Military Affairs officer for russia for the joint chief of staff joining the Trump Administration a jul july 2018 when he was asked to serve on National Securityt council. Jennifer williams began her career 2005 shortly after graduating from college when she joined department of Homeland Security as a political appointee during the george w. Bush administration after working as a field representative on the bush cheney president ial campaign she joined Foreign Service the following year Beirut Lebanon and jamaica. Prior to joining the office of the Vice President she served as the public Affairs Officer at april 2019 was detailed to the office of the Vice President where she serves as a special advisor on Foreign Policy team covering europe and russia issues she keeps the Vice President aware of issues and prepares them for foreignpolicy engagements worker two final points, the first witness deposition were unclassified the principal advisor the National Security adviser on ukraine and other countries in my portfolio the role the nsc is to develop and coordinate and implement the lands and policies with a full range of diplomatic military and economic National Security issues for my core function is to corn a policy with the department and agencies. The committee has heard from many colleagues of the strategic importance working against russian aggression. Is important to know our policyg ukrainian sovereignty and prosperity in instructing a free and democratic ukraine as a counter to russian aggression with a consistent via bipartisan policy objective both democratic and republican and that t6 election created the unprecedented opportunity to realize our strategy of strategic objectives. Spring 2019 i became aware of two disruptive actors primarily ukraine then prosecutor and for mayor Rudy Giuliani the personal attorney of the president to have false narratives that undermine the United States ukraine policy. The nsc and interagency partners including the state department grew increasingly concerned about the impact of such information having on our countrys ability to achieve our National Security objectives. April 21st 2019 lt. Col. Vindman was elected president on unity and perform an anticorruption platform. President john called him on apt to congratulate on his victory. Was a staff officer who produce the materials and one of the Staff Officers who listen to the call. Wit was positive and the president said he wanted to work with t6 and extended an invitation to visit the white house. In may i attended the inauguration of t6 led by the delegation the members provided President Trump a debriefing offering pet loan positive assessment for after the debriefing President Trump signed a congratulatory letter to t6 and extended another invitation to visit the white house. July 10 the National Security advisor for ukraine was in washington dc and met with bolton. Including secretary rick perry and i attended. We fully anticipated ukrainians would raise issue of a meeting between the president s the ambassador cut the meeting short when they start to talk about the requirement of specific investigations to secure a meeting with the President Trump then there was a short debriefing that ambassador importance to deliver over the 2016 election i stated this is an appropriate and had nothing to do with National Security but they also asserted his comments following the meeting going to the lead counsel t6 won a parliamentary election in another landslide victory in the propose President Trump call for t6 to congratulate him. On july 25th the call occurred i listened in in the situation room with white house colleagues. I was concerned by the call. What i heard was anst appropriate and i forwarded my concerns that it is improper for the president of the United States to demand a Foreign Government investigating us citizen and political opponent. I was also clear if ukraine pursued investigation that would also be clear into the elections of biden and barisma this would undoubtedly result ukraine losing on partisan support it with the rush of strategic objectives in thee region. Want to emphasize to the committeert that i recorded my concerns relating to ambassador solomon and the president i did so out of a sense of duty i reported my concerns to efficient channels to the chain of command. My intent was to raise these concerns they had significant National Security implications for our country. I never thoughtain i would be here testifying in front of this committee and the public about my actions my only thought wasng that to carry out my duty. Following each of my reports i immediately returned to work for the countrys Foreign Policy objectives for what i have done throughout my mattel it military career want to take a moment to recognize that we are scheduled to appear before the Committee Want to say those distinguish an honorable Public Servants is reprehensible it is natural to disagree and in spirited debate that has been the part of our country but we are better than personal attacks the uniform eyewear today is of the United States army members of the all volunteer force are made up of a patchwork ofof people with the social economic backgrounds who come together to protect and defend United States of america we do not serve a party but a nion im humbled to come before you the army is the only profession i have ever known i decided i wanted to spend my life serving this nation to give my family refuge from oppression for the last 20 years it has been ane honor to represent and protect this great country. Next month will mark four years one 40 years since my family arrived as refugees when my father was 47 years old he left behind his entire life and the only home he had ever known to start over in the United States so his three sons and have better lives and safer lives. His courageous decision inspired a great sense of gratitude all three of us have served are currently serving the military our collective military service is part of our familys history i also recognize my simple act of appearing here today just like the courage of my colleagues would not be tolerated in many places around the world. In russia my act of expressing concerns over the chain of command would have severe personal repercussions and offering public testimony involving the president which really cost me my life. I am grateful for my fathers brave act of hope and the privilege to be an american citizen where i can live free and free of fear for mine and my family safety. I am sitting here today in the us capital talking to elected professionals it is proof that you made the right decision 40 years ago dad to leave the soviet union come here to United States of america in search of a better life for aro family. Do not worry. I will be fine for telling the truth. Thank you again for your f ca lconsideration ill be hapo answer questions. Spin i thank you colonel and ms. Williams. Your family are more than welcome here. Fortyfive minutes of Commission One of questions by the chairman than 45 minutes by minority counsel that may not be delegated to other members. Following that we will proceed under the five minute rule every member will have a ddance to ask questions i recognize myself for the first 45 minutes. Before we get into the substance of your testimony ms. Williams i want to ask you about a phone call between t 14 and t6. Were you on the call quick. I was. Did you take notes quick. Yes because her something about that call that could be relevant to the investigation. I have taken a position as we previously discussed with majority and minority staff of the committee the office of the Vice President has taken the position that the september 18 call is classified as a result i would refer the committee to the Public Record which includes ms. Williams testimony which haswo been publicly released as well as the public readout of that call which has been previously issued by the white house. Beyond that given the position of the Vice President s office i have advised ms. Williams not to answer for the giquestions of that call in a classified setting. Thank you counsel. If there is something relevant to the inquiry and that call if you would be willing to make a classified submission to the committee quick. I would also refer to my testimony that i gave in the closed session and im happy to have peer for a classified setting ases well. It may not be necessary for you to appear if you would submit the information inin writing to the committee. I would be happy to do so. Going to the phone call aprit the first between President Trump and t6 did you appear the talking points during that call quick. Yes i did. Did they include rooting out corruption in ukraine quick. Yes spirit that is something the president was raise with president zelensky quick. Is with the recommended talking points, yes. Did you listen in on that call quick. As i i did. The white house has released a record of that call did the president ever mentioned corruption in the aprt call . To the best of myen reelection recollection he did not. On april 21st on a highlevel delegation was it yourd understanding to attend the inauguration . That was my understanding. Ditties subsequently tell the Vice President not to attend the inauguration . I was informed by the chief of staff office that the president had told the Vice President not to attend but i did not witness that conversation. Am i correct you learned this on may 13. Thats correct. In myor correct the date had not been set. Correct so what accounted for the president s decision not to attend . I do not like you were a member of the us delegation to the inauguration on may 20th. Yes chairman. Did you have an opportunity to offer any advice to president zelensky . What advice . During the bilateral meeting meeting with the new president and his team i offered two pieces of advice. To be particularly cautious withes regards to russia and its desire to provoke ukraine and second to stay out of us domestic policy politics. Why did you feel that was necessary to stay out of domestic politics . Of the march and april time frame it became clear that there were actors, public nongovernmental actors promoting idea of investigations with ukrainian interference and consistent with policy to advise any country in the world to not understate politics as i was passing the same advice consistent with us policy. Lets turn to the Security Assistance which i thank you both testified that you learned in early july. They correct why president put a hold on Security Assistance to ukraine . My understanding omb was reviewing to make sure it was in line with administration priorities. It was not more specific than that. That is consistent. To make sure that it remained consistent with administration policies. You attended a meeting in john boltons offic july 10th where the ambassador interjected about a white house visit. What did he say at that time . To the best of my recollection the ambassador solomon said in order to get a white house meeting ukrainians would have to provide a deliverable of specific investigations. What was ambassador boltons response . We had not completed all of the agenda items for the meeting and ambassador bolton abruptly ended the meeting. Did you report this incident . Yes i did. So the understanding to commit to investigations for the white house meeting . It may not have been entirely clear at that moment he stated he had this conversation with the chief of staff but it wasnt clear at that point. But there was agreement with Nick Mulvaney that president zelensky would get the meeting if they undertook these investigations. Correct. Two weeks later there was the infamous july 25th call. What was your realtime reaction to hearing thatat call . Chairman, without hesitation i knew i had to report this to the white house counsel. I had concerns and it was my duty to report my concerns to the proper people in the chainy of command. What was your concern . As i said in my statement it was inappropriate, improper for the president to demand an ndvestigation into a political opponent especially a foreign power where at best a dubious belief this would be an impartial investigation and that this would have significant implications to become Public Knowledge and undermine ukraine policy and to undermine National Security. You described this as a ydemand. What is it about the relationship between the president of the United States and president of ukraine that led you to conclude when the president asked a favor it was a demand . The culture that i come from with the military culture, when a senior asks you to do something, even if unpleasant it is not to be taken as a request but as an order. In this case the power twoarity between the leaders, my impression was in order to get thed white house meeting president zelensky would have to deliver. Ms. Williams i thank you described your reaction in your deposition when you listen to the call you found it unusual and an appropriate. But i was struck by Something Else that it shed some light on hostile motivations on the hold. What did you mean by that . I was asked about how i felt about the call during the closed her testimony and what i was thinking about is the first time i heard internallyas the president reference a particular investigation that previously i had only heard about through mister giulianis press reports. So in that moment it was not clear there was a connection or linkage between the ongoing hold of Security Assistance and what they are asking president zelensky in regard to the investigation. We do not have any information to draw any firm conclusions. But was your any question it was related . It was the first i had everr heard that was not specific in nature in that regard. Both of you recall president zelensky in that conversation raising the issue or raising barisma. Correct. Correct. Yet barisma does not appear in the call record. No correct. Thats right. Why was that left out . I was not involved in the production of that transcript. I attribute that to the fact this transcript produced may had not caught the word barisma it was in the transcript released it just said the company which is accurate. It is not a significant omissio omission. You pointed out that word was used. Correct. Yet it was not included in the record released to the public. It is informed speculation that the folks that produce the transcripts do the best they can and they just did not catch the word and it was my responsibility to make sure that the transcript was as accurate as possible. You testified in the deposition you found it striking that president zelensky would bring up barisma so that indicated to you he was prepped for the call to expect this issue to come up. What led you to that conclusion . It seemed unlikely he would be familiar with a Single Company in the context of a call that was on the broader bilateral relationship and it seemed to me he was either tracking this issue because of the press or otherwise prepped. Good morning to both of you. On july 25th at approximately 9 00 a. M. You are both sitting in the situation room probably not too much further away than you are right now and preparing for a longawaited phone call andeen President Trumph president zelensky. Now in advance of the phone call did you prepare talking points as you did for april 21s . Yes i did. What were they based upon . This is not in the Public Record i cannot comment too deeply but the areas we have consistently talked in public as cooperation with the reform agenda, anticorruption efforts and president zelensky to implement two and russias war against ukraine. So official us policy . Is there a process to determinee official policy . That is my job to policies so that year i have been on staff i have undertaken an effort to make sure we had a cohesive and coherent policy. As you listen to the call did you observe if President Trump was following the talking points based on this policy . Counsel the president can choose to use the talking points or not but they are not consistent with what i provided, yes. Look at a couple of excerpts from this call and right after president zelensky thanked President Trump for the United States support in the area of defense President Trump asked president zelensky for a favor then raises a theory of ukrainian interference in the election and says i would like you to do us a favor because our country has been through a lot in ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like to find out about the whole situation of ukraine they say crowd strike i guess you have one of your wealthy peopleth, the server they say ukraine has it. Was the statement bait based on the official talking points you had prepared . Know. Was it related to the interference of part of the official us policy . Know it was not. At the time of this call were you aware of a theory ukraine had interfered in the us election . I was. Were you aware of any credible evidence to support the theory . I have not. Are you also aware Vladimir Putin has promoted thisto theory of ukrainian interference in the 2016 election . I am aware of that fact. What country did Us Intelligence services determined have interfered in the 2016 election . Mimic to the consensus of the Intelligence Community that the russians interfered in 2016. Lets go to another excerpt where President Trump asked president zelensky to investigate his politicalom opponent joe biden. It sounds horrible to me he said. Again colonel vindman was this included in your talking points . It was not. To request to investigate a political opponent with official u. S. Ch policy . It was not consistent with the policy iw understood it. Are you aware of any credible allegations were evidence to support this notion that Vice President biden did something wrong or against u. S. Policy with regard to ukraine . I am not. Ms. Williams are you familiar with any evidence to support this theory against Vice President biden . No i am not. Prior to the july 25 call, approximately how many calls between the president of the United States and foreign leaders had to listen to . I would say roughly a dozen. Had you ever heard a call like this . As i testified before, i believe what i found unusual or different about this call was the president s reference to investigations. That struck me as different than other calls i listen to. You testified you thought it was political in nature. Why did you think that . I thought that the references to specific individuals and investigation such as former Vice President biden and his son struck me as political in nature given that the foreigne former e president was applicable opponent. You thought it can be designed to assist President Trumps reelection effort . I cannot speak to the president s motivation and referencingly it. I just noted that the reference to biden sounded political to me. Colonel vindman, you said in your deposition it does not take a Rocket Scientist to see the political benefits of the president demands. For those of us who are not Rocket Scientists, can you explain what you meant by that . Mys, understanding, the connection to investigating applicable opponent was inappropriate and proper, i made that connection as soon as the president brought up the biden investigation. Then you testified that President Trumps request for a favor from president zelensky would be considered as a demand to president zelensky, after this call did you ever hear from any ukrainians in the United States or ukraine about any pressure that they felt to do these investigations that President Trumpsu demanded . Not that i can recall. Did you have any discussions with officials at the embassy here in washington, d. C. . Yes, i did. Did to discuss the demand for investigations with them . I did not. Did you discuss any point theyre concerned about the hold on Security Assistance . To the best of my recollection in the august timeframe, the Ukrainian Embassy started to become aware of the hold on Security Systems and they were asking if i had any comment on that or substantiate that. That was before it became public is all right . Yes. What did you respond . I believe i said i dont recall frankly. I dont recall what i said. But i believe it may been along the lines that im not aware of it. Ev you testified one of your concerns about the request for investigations related to u. S. Domestic politics was that ukraine may lose bipartisan support, why was that the concern of yours . Ukraine is in a war with russia in u the Security Systems that we provide ukraine is significant. The Security Assistance and maybe even more importantly the signal ofin support. Ukrainian sovereignty and integrity that would likely encourage russia to pursue and potentially escalate further aggression undermining ukrainian sovereignty, European Security and u. S. Security. Ukraine is heavily dependent on United States support both diplomatically, financially and also militarily . Cracked. What languages do you speak . Russian and ukrainian and a little bit of english. [laughter] do you recall what language president zelensky spoke on this july 25 phone call . I know he made an effort to speak english, he had been practicing his english but he also spokeke ukrainian. I want to look at the third expert from the july 25 call in chairmanship to justice with you and is questioning and you see specifically to the company that you mention, is that a portion of the call record that colonel vindman, you thought president zelensky actually said burisma burisma. In his use of understanding when President Trump mentioned the bidens that that referred to the company for reason myio soundedo you like use prompter prepared for this call is that right . That is correct. I want to go to the next slide if we could which is a text message that neither of you is on but this is from ambassador kirk booker to andre. And who is andre . He is a Senior Advisor within the president ial administration as Senior Advisor for president zelensky. This text messageid is left more than a half hour after the call on july 25 and since neither of you are on it ill read it. From ambassador volker, good lunch, thanks, heard from white house, assuming presidency convinces trump he will investigate, get to the bottom of what happened in 2016, we will nail down visits to washington. Good luck, seee you tomorrow kirk. Is this the thing you are referring to when you say sounded like president zelensky was prepared for this call . This would be consistent. Yes. Turning from the fort excert from the july 24 call, where president zelensky links the white house meeting to the investigation that President Trump request. President zelensky says, i also want to thank you for your invitation to visit the United States, specifically washington, d. C. On the othero hand, i also want to ensure you we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation. When president been solons he says on the other hand, would you agree hes acknowledging a linkage between the white house visit he mentions in the first sentence in the investigation he mentioned in the second sentence . It could be taken away. Im not sure it seems a reasonable conclusion. If that is the case, that would be consistent with the text message that ambassador volker sent to andre right before the t call. Is that right . Seemingly so. You testified in your deposition that a white house visit, and oval office visit is very important to president zelensky, why is that. The show of support for president zelensky, celebrate new president , frankly new politician on the ukrainian political scene, looking to establish as a regional and maybe a world leader would want to have a meeting with the United States, the most powerful country in the world in ukraine most significant benefactor to implement his agenda. It would provide him with legitimacy. Yes. Just to summarize, in the july 25 call between the president of the United States and ukraine, President Trump demanded a favor of president zelensky to conduct investigations that both of you acknowledge were for President Trump political interest, not that National Interest and in return for his promise of a much desired white house meeting for president zelensky. Colonel vindman is not an accurate summary that we just looked at . Yes. Ms. Williams. Yes. Colonel vindman, you immediately reported fiscal to the nsc lawyers, why did you do that . At this point i had already been tracking this initially what i would describe as alternative false narrative and i waswh certainly aware of e fact that it was starting to reverberate in getting traction in the fact in the july 10 call ended up being pronounced by a public official ambassador someone had me alluded to this and i was subsequent to that report and i was invited to follow with concerns to mr. Eisenberg. We will discuss the look july alternative bar false narrativee you referring to two investigations that President Trump referenced in the call . Yes. Some point did you also discuss how the written summary of the call record should be handled with the nsc lawyer . Following the report there was a discussion in the legal shop on the best way to manage, yes. What did you understand they concluded . Myh t understanding is that s was viewed as a sensitive transcript and to avoid leaks in effect recall the term properly or something along preserved integrity of the transcript, it should be segregated to a small group of folks. To preserve the integrity of the transfer, what does that mean . Im notgr sure, it seems lika legal term, im not an attorney but i did nott take it of anything that serious, and understood that they wanted to keep and a small group. If there was real interest in preserving the integrity of the transcript, do you think they wouldve accepted your correction that breeds my shouldve been included. Notou necessarily, the way tt these edits occur they go through like Everything Else i made my contribution it was cleared by mr. Morrison and when i returned it sometime that does not happen there are administrative errors in this case and when i first saw the transcript without the items that i attempted to included do not see that as nefarious i just said no big deal. You said two issues, what was the other one there is a reference in section on page four of the top paragraph, let me find the right spot. You can look into it, there are videos recordings. So it shouldve said to what you heard that there are recordings . Correct. Did you ultimately learn where the call record was put . I understood it was being segregated into a separate system, separate secure system. Why would he be put on a separate Security System . This is definitely not unprecedented but at times if you want to limit access to a small group of folks you put on a secure system to ensure a small Smaller Group of people have it. Cantu also limit the number of people who can access on a regular system . You could do that but to my recollection it was made on the fly after my conveyed my concerns to mr. Eisenberg, he came in and he had not heard the entire conversation and when it was mentioned that it was sensitive with onthefly decision to segregate in the other system. Mr. Eisenberg and the other lawyers krista mark. But it was not a mistake to put on the highly costly system, is that right . Im not sure i wit understan. Wasnt intended to put on the highly classified system by the lawyers . Or was it a mistake it was put there. I think it was intended but intended to prevent leaks and limited a access. You testified about the april 21st, call a little earlier, and colonel vindman, you indicated you did include in your talking points the idea of ukraine rooting out corruption but that President Trump did not mention corruption. I want to go to the white house readout from the april 21st, call and im not going to read the whole thing but you see the highlighted portion where says root out corruption, in the end the readout was false. Is that right . Maybe that is a bit its not entirely accurate but im not sure if i would describe as false. Is consistent with u. S. Policy in these items are used as messaging tools also. A statement that goes on in addition to reading out the meaning itself is also a messaging platform to indicate what is important with regards to u. S. Policy. It is a part of u. S. Policy that ukraine should read outrd corruption even if President Trump did not mention it in the 21st phone call. Is that right . Certainly and he also did not mention in the july 25 phone call is that right . . Correct. So even though it was included in talking points for the april 21st, call and presumably even though you cannot talk about it for july 21 call, it was not included in either, is thatab right . The april 21st, call you dont mention it in either. Correct. When the president says that he held up Security Assistance because he was concerned about rooting out corruption in ukraine, that concern is not expressed in the two call phone conversations that he had earlier this year. Correct. Ms. Williams, you testified earlier that the april 21st, call President Trump asked Vice President pence to attend president zelenskys inauguration, is that right . That is right. On may 13 you are just informed by the chief off staff office that Vice President pence will not be going a as per requt of the president. Thats what i was informed. And you do not know what had changed from april 21st, through may 13, is all right . No not in terms of that decision. Colonel vindman, since you in particular more perhaps than msr portfolio focuses on ukraine, i want to ask you if you were aware of the following things that happen from april 21st, through may 13. Were you aware that investor you bottom fish was recalled from ukraine in that time . Yes were you aware that President Trump the notification occurred toward the end of april and she was finally recalled in the may 20 timeframe. She learned about it on april 21st . Is that right correct. s and president putin . Were you aware that Rudy Giuliani had planned a trip to go to ukraine to pressure the ukrainians to initiate the two investigations that President Trump mentioned on the july 25 call in this time. I was aware that he is travelingnt there and he had ben promoting the idea of thesese investigations. I want to move to the july 10 meeting that you referenced colonel vindman exactly did he say when the ukrainian officials raised the idea of a white housy meeting . As i recall, he referred to specific investigations that ukrainians would have to move over to get these meetings. What happens at the broader meeting after he made that reference . Ambassador bolton ended the meeting. Did you have conversations with ambassador bolton about this meeting . Neu did not. Did you follow them to the board room for meeting followup . It was a photo opportunity that we leveraged to demonstrate u. S. Support to the white house visit demonstrating the National Security o advisor. And then we went on to huddle or debrief. Was investigation that ambassador sondland referenced were also discussed in the boardroom meeting . They were. What it investor sondland say. He referred to investigations into the Bidens Burisma in 20. How did you respond . I said to the request to induct these meetings was an appropriate and these investigations were inappropriate and had nothing to do his National Security policy. Was ambassador volker in this meeting as well . I do not recall specifically i think was there for a portion of the time but i dont recall fusing the whole meeting. Was a statement made in front of ukrainian officials . I believe there were some discussion prior to ukrainians leaving and it was apparent there was some discord between the senior folks of investor sondland and other white house and myself, they were asked about so i dont recall they were there for the intern discussion. The senior white house staff youre referring to, does that include fiona hill your immediate supervisor at the time. Correct. You said you also reported this incident to the nsc lawyers, is that right . That is correct. Response . S the John Eisenberg said he took notes while i was talking and he said he would look into it. Why did you report this meeting and this conversation to the nsc lawyers . Because it was inappropriate and following the meeting i had a short conversation following the post meeting in the boardroom at a short conversation with abbasid or doctor hill and we discussed the idea of needing to report the. In my correct that no later than that july 10 meeting the ukrainians had understood or at least heard that the Oval Office Meeting that they so desperately wanted was condition on the specific investigations into paris some in the 2016 election . That was the first time i was aware of the ukrainians being approached by a government official. And directly linking the white house meeting to the investigations . Correct. You testified in your Opening Statement you attended thehe september 1 meeting between Vice President pence and president zelensky in warsaw, is that correct. That is correct. What was the first thing president zelensky asked Vice President pence about the meeting . President zelensky asked the Vice President about the status of Security Assistance because he had seen the political article in others news reporting that the Security Assistance was being held. And you testified in your deposition that in that conversation, president zelensky emphasized that the military assistance, Security Assistance was not just important to assist ukraine in fighting a war against russia but it was also symbolic in nature. What did you understand him to mean by that . President zelensky explained that equally with the financial and fiscal value of the assistance with the symbolic nature of the assistance that really was the show of u. S. Support for ukraine in ukraines solvent terry and integrity. And he was stressing that to the Vice President to underscore the need for the Security Assistance to be released. If the United States was holding the securityta assistan, is also true that russia could see that as a sign of weakening u. S. Support for ukraine and take advantage of that . I believe what is what president zelinski was indicating that any signal or sign that u. S. Supportli was wavering would be construed by russia as potentially an opportunity for them to strengthen their own hands and ukraine. Did penance provide a reason for the holden Security Assistance to the ukrainian president in that meeting . He did not specifically discuss the reason behind the hold but he did reassure president zelensky of the strongest u. S. Unwavering support for ukraine and they talked about the need for European Countries to step up and provide more assistance to well. E as did Vice President pence report back to President Trump on the meeting to your knowledge . Vice president conveyed to president zelensky he would follow up with President Trump that evening and convey to President Trump what he had heard from president zelensky with regard to his effort to implement reform and ukraine and i am aware that the Vice President spoke to President Trump that evening that i was not privy to the conversation. Are you also aware however, the Security Assistance hold was not lifted for another ten days after this meeting . That is correct. In my correct that you do not learn the reason why the hold was lifted . That is correct. Colonel vindman you did not learn why the hold was lifted either, is all right . Correct. Colonel vindman are you aware that committee launched an investigation into ukraine matters on september 9, 2 days before the hold was lifted . I am aware and i was aware, on september 10 the Intelligence Committee requested the whistleblower complaint from the department of national intelligence, are you aware of that . I do not believe i was aware of that. Were you aware that the white house was aware of the whistleblower complaint prior to that date . The first day heard of the whistleblower complaint i believe when the news broke, i was only aware of the Committee Investigating the hold on Security Assistance. Is accurate to say that whatever reason that was provided for the hold including the omitted strat administrativs that right to your understanding . Im sorry i did not understand that. The ministry to policies of President Trump supported the securityun assistance, is that your understanding . The policy was to suppor secy assistance to ukraine. I yield back. Now recognize Ranking Member nunes and minority counsel for 45 minutes. Thank you. Mrs. Williams welcome, i want to establish a few basic facts about your knowledge of ukraine, burisma, and your role of the bidens. You spend amount of your time on ukraine, correct . Ukraine is one of the countries in my portfolio, i would not say an extraordinary amount of time but the Vice President has engaged in my month. And its in your portfolio . That isga correct. First off were you aware and sobeinseptember 2016, jeffrey cd for an investigation into the president of burisma, were you aware of these public statements . No not at the time. You are today . I have since heard them, yeah. Did you know of antitrump efforts by ukrainian officials as well as alexander, d c consultant. I was not aware. Did you know about the Deputy Assistant secretary of state concerns about the conflict of interest into hunter biden sitting on the board of burisma . I did not work on the ukrainian policy at the time, i became aware in the last year or so . I became aware through mr. Kents testimony in thehe process. Did you know that financial records show a Ukrainian Natural Gas Company routed 3 million to american account tied to hunter biden . No i was not aware. Until . Until . Until others have been testifying in more detail on those issues. You have been following it more closely . Correct. Did you know that bres mother is illegal representatives met days after they forced the firing of the to prosecute . Again i was not working on ukraine policy at the time. Im just try to get through this. Did you know that burisma lawyers per the department in 2016 after then raid in months before the firing and they invoked Hunter Bidens name as a reason to intervene . I was not aware. Did you know that joe biden called ukrainian president at least three times andthth fabric 2016 after the president and owner of bres mom home was raided by the state Prosecutor Office . Not at the time period. State Prosecutors Office . Not at the time. Again, ive become aware of that through this proceeding. Thank you, miss williams. Lieutenant colonel vindman, im going to ask you the same questions. Just to some basic facts about your knowledge of ukraine, burisma and the role of the bidens. In september 2015, u. S. Oms to ukraine publicly called for an investigation into i wasnt aware of them at the time. Whetime. When did you become aware of them . During the course of the testimony and depositions after the impeachment inquiry began. Did you know of antitrump efforts by various officials as well as alexander . Im not aware of any of these interference efforts. Did you know about the Deputy Assistant secretary concerns about the potential conflict of interest with hunter biden sitting on the board of briefs . Only thing im aware of is to protect the deposition. Did you know financial records show the gas company had more than 3 million to the American Academy tied to hunter biden . Im not aware of this fact. Until recently. I guess i didnt independently look into it. Im just not aware of what kind of payments he may have received. This isnt something that i am aware of. , the legal representatives met with ukrainian officials after Vice President biden forced the chief prosecutor. En im not aware of these meetings. Did you know that they pressured the state department february, 2016 after the raid in the month before the fire into a invoked his name as a reason to intervene . Im not aware of any of these facts. Did you know joe biden called the ukrainian president at least three times in february, 2016 after the president home was raided by the state Prosecutors Office . Unaware of the fact vice biden was engaged with ukrainian and numerous engagements. Thats what im aware of. Lieutenant colonel, as you may or may not know this committee has spent nearly three years conducting various investigations a starting with e russian collusion folks, democratic hysteria over the lack of collusion in the report and now this impeachment charade. One of the most concerning thing is regardinthings regarding alle investigations is the amount of classified or otherwise Sensitive Information that i read in the press that derived either from the committee or sources in the administration. To be clear i am not accusing you of accusing you of leaking information however given that you were the first witnesses who actually have some firsthand knowledge of the president s call by listening in july 25, it is imperative to the american publics understanding of the event but we get a quick matters out of the way first. Let me just go to you first. For the purposes of the following questions, im only asking tha at the time. Co. From july 25 through september 25. Okay. Did you discuss the july 25 phone call between President Trump and president zelensky or any matters associated with a phone callen with any members of the press . No. To be clear you never discussed these matters with the New York Times, washington post, politico, cnn or any other media outlet . Know i did not. Did you ask or encourage any individualt to share the substance of the phone call or any Matter Associated with the phone call with any member of the press . I did not. Do you know of any individual that discussed the subs use of the phone call or Matter Associated with the call with any member of the press . No i do not. The same questions for you. Did you discuss the july 25 phone call between President Trump andnd president zelensky n any Matter Associated with a phone call with any member of wethe press . I did not. Just to be clear, you did not discuss this with the New York Times, washington post, politico, cnn or any other media outlet . I did not. Did you ask or encourage any individual to share the substance of the phone call or ny Matter Associated with the call of any member of the press . Iwi did not. Do you know of any individual that discussed the substance of the july 25 phone call or any Matter Associated with the call with any matter of the press . We have a shop and they field any type of questions. I do not engage with the press at all. Let me ask the question again. T do you know of any individual that discussed the substance of the july 25 phone call or any Matter Associated with the call with any member of the press . We have a press shop whose job is to engage on any of these types of questions. I am not aware, but its possible and likely that the press shop would have fielded these type of questions. The question is do you know any individual do you personally know any individual that discussed the substance of the july 25 phone call or any Matter Associated with the call with any member of the press . Thank you Ranking Member for clarifying. I do not. Thank you. Ms. Williams, did you discuss july 25 phone call with anyone outside the white house on july 25 or july 26, and if so, with whom . No, i did not discuss the call with anyone inside or outside of the white house. During your time on the nsc, have you ever access to a colleagues work computer without their prior authorization or approval . I have not. To clarify, im in the office of the vic Vice President , not the. Right, but representing no, i is not. Thank you for the clarification. Did you discuss the july 25 phone call with anyone outside of the white house on july 25 or the 26th, and did so with whom . Yes, i did. My function is to coordinate u. S. Government policy interagency policy, and i spoke to two individuals with regards to providing some sort of a readout. Two individuals that were not in the white house. Not in the white house. U. S. Government officials with appropriate needed to know. What agencie agencies or visa officialwere theseofficials awa . Department ofls state, state, Deputy Assistant secretary, who was responsible for the portfolio in eastern europest including ukraine, and an individual from the office in the Intelligence Committee. As you know, the Intelligence Committee has 17 different agencies. What agency was this individuall from . If i could interject, we dont want to use these its our time, but we need to protect the whistleblower. See to please, stop. I want to make sure that there is no effort to help the whistleblower for these proceedings. If the witness has a goodfaith this may reveal the identity of the whistleblower, that is not the purpose that we are here for, and i want to advise the witness accordingly. You testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistleblower. Ranking member, [inaudible] Lieutenant Colonel, you testified in the deposition that you did not know who the whistleblower was. I do not know who the whistleblower is. How is it possible for you to name these people and then out the whistleblower . For the advice of the council, i have been advised not to answer specific questions about members of the Intelligence Community. I are you aware that this is them Intelligence Committee is conducting an impeachment hearing . Of course i am. What is the appropriate place for you to come to justify that be the committee about someone within the Intelligence Community . Ranking member come up with the advice of my council and the instructioncounsel and theinstr, ive been advised not to provide anybout specifics on who ive sn to with the committee. These individuals were with a need to know. This is you can plead the fifth. You are here to answer questions and you are here under a subpoena seeking can either answer the question or plead the fifth. Excuse me. On behalf of my client, we are following the rule of the committee, the rule of the chair with regards to this issue and this doesnt call for an answer that is invoking the fifth or any theoretical issue like that. We are following the ruling of the chair. Was ruling is that . The council is correct. The whistleblower has the right, the statutory right to anonymity in the proceedings they will not be used to help the whistleblower. And i have advised my client accordingly coming and hes good to follow the ruling of the chair. If there is an alternative for you want to work something out with the chair, thats up to you. We have attempted to subpoena the whistleblower to sit in for a deposition. The chair has tabled a motion and has been unwilling to recognize the motion over the last few days of this impeachment inquisition process. For that i will go to thank you. The call transcript as published on september 25 is complete and accurate. What both of you attest to that . Ms. Williams. I didnt take a word for wora accounting. When i first saw the publicly released version looks correct to me. T kernel vindman . I certainly would describe it as correct. In the testimony you set a veruse it veryaccurate. Project. And you had a couple of edits i think that you had burisma on page four where president zelensky was talking about the company mentioned in the issue. Im sorry could you say that again. You explain that you offered and added that onn page four the transcript that was ultimately published, you thought president zelensky mentioned the word burisma. I had it in my notes. And ms. Williams, that was on page four, correct . Correct. And after the deposition he u went back in to check your notes and t you had president zelensky using the term burisma as well is that correct . Thats correct. That cambut that came up on a different part of the transcript then what kernel vindman was relating to, correct . Yes, i believe so. Yours came up on page five it would have been a substitution forso the berg case. Thats why i have it in my notes. Kernel vindman, weve had some discussion today about whether the president had a demand for president zelensky. You suggest in the president s words they are ambiguous and he uses some phrases that certainly could be characterized as hedging. On page three in the first paragraph he talks about whatever you can do come he talks aboutha the possible. On page four, he mentions if you docan speak to him and talking about the attorney general, Rudy Giuliani and then at the end of the first paragraph he says whatever you can do come of the president also says you know, if you can look into it, and i asked you during your deposition whether you saw were acknowledged the fact certain people could read that to be ambiguous. Correct. Id and you said people want to hear what they have already bpreconceived. Is that what you testified . Actually i would like to ask for a page. 256. Thank you. Just a minute. Okay. We have the page you then you went on to say you agree to, yes i guess you could interpret it different ways. Is that correct . Yes. Okay. Turning attention to the preparation of the transcript. That followed the ordinary process, correct . So i think i if followed the appropriate process in terms of making sure that eventually it came around for clearances for accuracy, but it was in a different system. I will get to that in a second as it relates to the storage of it. You have some concerns, mr. Morrison articulated his concerns about if the transcript was leaked out, and i think both you and mr. Morrison agreed it needed to be protected. Just a correction i dont think it was mr. Morrison. It was mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Morrison testified at the deposition we dont have that in front of us if you could give us that we can take a look. I can say d for myself there were concerns about, the leaks. They seemed valid and i wasnt particularly critical. I thought this was sensitive and wasnt going to question the attorneys judgment on that. Even on the codeword server, you have access to it. Yes. At no point in time in the course of your official duties were you denied access to the information. Correct. Ms. Williams, i want to turn to you for a moment. You testified that you believe the transcript is complete and accurate than the one issue that you mentioned . Substantively accurate, yes. Now, did you express any concerns, anyone in your office about what you heard on theiv call . My supervisor was listening in on the cause while because he had served heard the same information i didnt have the need to have a conversation with him. And you never did with anyone else in the office . I didnt discuss the call with anyone. Said to the chief of staff for the Vice President s council or anyone of that sort . Again, my immediate supervisor, Lieutenant General kellog was in the room with me. Did you ever discuss the content of the call . We did not. In the runup to the meeting in warsaw, the Vice President was meeting with president zelensky september 1 in warsaw. You were involved with the preparation of the briefing material . I was. Did you flag over the Vice President the parts of the call that have concerned you . No, we did not include the call transcript in the tracing book. We dont normally include previous calls and the books. Just wondering if the concerns were so significant, how come nobody in the Vice President s staff at least alerted him to the issue that president zelensky might be on edge about something mentioned on the 725 call . Again, my supervisor had been on the call with me, and i ensured the Vice President have access to the transcript in a moment on the day. As we were preparing for the september meeting with president zelensky, the more immediate issuee at hand was two days prir that the news had broken about the whole on the Security Assistance. So, we were much more focused on the discussion was likely to occur up to hold on the Security Assistance. To your recollection coming during a meeting with president zelensky andat Vice President me pence . I was. At the president didnt come up withe. A bidens or bidens or the investigations . They did not. Kernel vindman, you testified at the president has a longstanding concern about corruption in ukraine, correct . I dont recall, but there are concerns, there are broad concerns about corruption. You would agree that if the u. S. Is giving hundreds of millions of dollars to a foreign nation that has a corruption problem thats certainly something the u. S. Government officials and the president would want to be concerned about . Yes. And if a foreign country has a problem with oligarchs taking money,t taking u. S. Taxpayers dollars, thats something the president ought to be concerned about in advance of expanding the aid of . Yes. And i believe you did testify that corruption is endemic in ukraine . Correct. Are you also aware of the president s skepticism of foreign aid generally . Im. Its something he made a part of hisy . Priority to make sure e u. S. Foreign aid is spent wisely. This prevent. You are also aware the president has concerns about burden sharing among our allies. Yes. With respect to ukraine, he was very interested and engaged in seeing if there was a possibility for our european allies to step up and contribute more . I think that would be in the context of the military assistance in terms of the burden sharing some of the European Union provides over 15 billion. Okay. But youat are aware of the president s concern of the burden sharing. Sim. Turning the attention to the company of speed eight. The cofounder of burisma is one of ukraines largest natural gas producers, correct . That is mymy understanding, yes. And its been subject to numerous investigations over the years. I am not aware of i guess i couldnt point to specific investigations, but there is a wide call a pattern of questionable dealings and questions about corruption. He served as the minister of ecology during president yovanovitch . And it was testified last week under the Obama Administration the u. S. Government encouraged ukraine to investigate whether he used his government position to grant himself or burisma exploration licenses. Are you aware of that . I would defer to george kent. He has knowledge on ukraine, much deeper knowledge than i have. And if he attested to that, then i would take his word for that. You testified at the u. S. Along with the United Kingdom was engaged in trying to recoup about 23 million in taxpayer dollars from the burisma entity. I understand he testified that, yes. Ni and he also testified that the investigation was moving along and then all of a sudden there was a broad pay and the investigation went away. Did you hear him mention that . I heard him mention that. These were before my times are frankly beyontime sofrankly beyi dont know much more. Fair enough. Right around the time it was paid, the company sought to bolster their board. Are you aware that they tapped some luminaries for the Corporate Board . I learned that at some point. Including the president s of poland ate some point kerry and hunter biden . I came to learn that as well. Is there any experience that he has in the ukrainian Corporate Governance rolled . I dont know which about mr. Hunter biden. We talked a little about your deposition about whether mr. Biden was qualified to serve on the board, and i believe you acknowledged but apparently he was not in fact qualified . As far as i can tell, he didnt seem to be, but i dont know his qualifications. Okay. Ms. Williams, i want to turn our attention to the inaugural trip. At one point, the Vice President s and Vice President s office was focusing on attending that, correct . Thats right. Its somewhat complicated because as i understand, the white house doesnt have the president and Vice President to be out of the country at the same time. Thats correct. Into during the timeframe the president was in japan, i believe may 24 through the 28th and then he returned to europe for the dday ceremonies. I think you told us that there was a window at the end of may that if the Vice President was going to attend the inauguration it had to be the 29th, 30th, 31st or first. There were discussions with the team and as we have learned obviously the parliament wasnt goinparliament wasntgoing to cn until midmay so wed wouldnt know formerly with the dates would be, but he understood thai the initial thinking is that they were looking at the dates at the end of may and so honing in on the timeframe, we were aware of the plan to travel on either end, and so that is why we advised that the ukrainians that if he were toto participate in the only available dates would be may 30, 31st or june 1. Before the Vice President travels to a foreign nation to advance the work and cartels, it is relatively involved preparation experience. Thats correct. Do you know if the secret service ever deployed . My understanding is the team was looking into the preparations including Hotel Availability andnd we were tryig to determine when it would be appropriate to send out the secret service and other advanced personnel in order to lay out the groundwork fo the trip because we were not sure yet a when debate would be how e hesitated to send notes. But ultimately the secret service as i understand it did not deploy a. I do not believe they did. And the inauguration was may 20 if i am not mistaken. Thats correct. And you had about four days of notice. They decided may 16 to set the date for may 20 that is correct. So that made it quite difficult for the Vice President and the whole operation to mobilize and get over to traine, correct . It would have been that we already stopped the planning by eethat point. And when did that happen . Neither team. How did you hear about that . I was called by a colleague and the Vice President s office utand told to stop the trip planning. Into the assistant to the chief of staff . Thats correct. You didnt hear about it from the chief of staff . Correct. You heard about it from the assistant . Thats right. Did you have any knowledge of the reasoning for stopping the trip . I asked my colleague why we should stop trip planning and why the Vice President wouldnt be attending and i was informed that the president had decided d the Vice President wouldve wast attended the inauguration. But do you know why . She didnt have that deformation. And ultimately, the Vice President went to canada for the u. S. Mca event during this window of time, correct . Correct. It is conceivable that he decided he wanted the Vice President to go to canada on behalf of u. S. Mca instead of doing anything else. Im really not in a position to speculatete what the motivations were behind the decision. You know hes done quite a bit of this, correct . And are you aware whether anyone at the state department inquired about the availability for the trip to canada . At was played . Maybe may . I wasnt involved in the trip planning for canada. One of my colleagues was in charge of that so im not aware of the specific request about the Vice President s availability. I was aware from my colleague who was planning the trip that w mwe had competing trips potentially in that open window that i was told to ukraine trip would take priority. But ultimately, you dont know. I dont know about the canada trip . You dont know the reason as toto why the Vice President was into canada for thehe event instead of going to ukraine . I would say i dont know the reason behind why the president directed the Vice President bought to go to ukraine. I cant speak to the motivations about the canada trip. Colonel vindman, i would like to turn a little bit to the ju july 10 meeting in ambassador boltons office and the subsequent post meeting in the board room. Who all was in the july 10 meeting to the best of your recollection . We talked about the roomba or about the actual meeting with ambassador bolton . We will te start with the ft meetinmeeting in the ambassadors office. From the u. S. Side, we had ambassador bolton, doctor hill. There was another special assistant to the president , myself for the ukrainian side, we have [inaudible] , yermak and i think alexanders advisor to. And yo and you recall you could not to testify why . I noted that it ended abruptly, but i didnt frankly exactly know why. In the meeting you dont nremember ambassador sondland using the word by ben . To the res best of my recollection, he didnt. And they recanted to take a photo . Correct. The general feeling was positive even though it may have ended abruptly . I think ambassador bolton was exceptionally qualified and he understood the Strategic Communications opportunity of having a photo, and we prompted him to before we completely adjourned to see if he was willing to do a photo and heeded. I think you said you to get . Nt i certainly took a couple of them, yes. The. That is correct. Have you heard on the firsthand account anyone on the inside . Or were you following news accounts . I certainly was followingr thnews account from the ukrainin side in u. S. Press. And my colleagues in the inner agency also were concerned about this as assault started in the marchi timeframe animating from john solomon story all the way through. There had been ongoing conversations from several different sources. When ambassador solomon investigated, you had a clue of what the issue is . And then he took the photo, the nice photo and then went to the board room. Correct. I think you said, yet hard time remembering exactly what was said in the board room, it was for month ago hard to be precise about t whether sondland in what specific words he used, whether he is burisma 2016 investigation. I believe in the sin the deposition of the three elements, burisma, bite is in 2016 elections were mentioned. In the boardroom customer. Correct. Maybe we can go back to this but i think on 64 of your testimony, you told us you dont remember them using 2016 in the boardroom. I believe i followed up because his question was asked multiple times, i said all three elements were in there. Let me ask. There was some discussion when mr. Larson took over the portfolio for doctor hill whether you were silent, to feel like youhi were . I certainly was excluded or did not participate in the trip to ukraine at the end of august and i initially before it changed from a trip to a Vice President trip i was not participating in that one. So i did not miss that. No. Did you express any concerns about why you were not included on the strips . Mr. Morrison i was on leave from the third of august through the 16th or so of august and he called me and asked me too return, there was obviously high party travel to the region and he needed my assistance to help plan for and asking me too return earlyre frm leaf and i take infrequently and after returning from leave early when i was told i was ongoing i inquired about it, correct. What feedback did he give you . He initially told me that the aircraft that was acquired was too small and there was not enough room. Have you ever had any discussions with mr. Morrison that he or doctor hill had with your judgment . 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 asked to do that . I dont know but every single time i dismissed it, upon returning i notify my chain of command in the appropriate counterintelligence folks about the offer. Ukraine is a country thats experienced war with russia and certainly of the defense is a key position for the ukrainian president , to do so, that was a big honor correct. I think it would be a great honor and frankly am aware of Service Members that have left service to help nurture the developing democracies in that part of the world and former officer that became a minister defense. The im and american, i came here when i was a toddler and i immediately dismissed these offers, i did not entertain them. When he made this offer to you initially did you leave the door open, was it reason he had to come back and ask it a second or third time or was he just trying to convince you . The whole notion is rather comical that i was being asked to consider whether id want to be a minister of defense, i did not leave the door open at all but it is pretty funny fori Lieutenant Colonel of the United States army which really is not the senior to be offered illustrious of a position. When he made this offer to you was he speaking in english or ukrainian . He is flawless english speaker and speaking english. Clear, there were two other officers that were sitting next to me when thisis offer was made. And who were they . One of them you may have been, david holmes and i dont know, another Foreign Service officer. We went on to met mr. Holmes last friday evening. Delightful. And you said when you return to the United States you paper it up with fci clearance whenever Foreign Government makes an overture like that you paper it up until your chain of command . I did but i dont know if i fully entertain as a legitimate offer i was making sure i did the right thing in terms of reporting. Did any of your supervisors, doctor hill of the time or doctor cooperman or in bolton ever follow up with you about that . Its rather significant ukrainian offered you the post of defense ministe a minister, u tell anyone in your chain of command. After i spoke to the deputy senior director, once and mentioned it to both of them i do believe there was ever a followup discussion. Okay. So it never came up with either of them . Following the conversation i had with doctor hill, i dont believe there was a subsequent conversation and i dont recall ever having a conversation with him about it. Did you brief director morrison when he came aboard . No, i completely forgot about it. Subsequent to the nature, did donnie looper ever ask you to reconsider . Were there any other offers customer. No. When he visited for the july 10 meeting with ambassador bolton did it come up again . It never came up again. Okay. Did you think possibly this information got out, and might create a perception of a conflict that ukrainian spoke so highly to offer you the Defenses Ministry post, on one hand but on the other hand youre responsible for ukrainian policy of the National Security council. Frankly is more important what my american command thinks of any these are honorable people i dont know if you meant as a joke or not but its much more important to my civilian white house National Security chain of command thinks more so than anybody else and if they were concerned about me being able to continueu my duties they wouldve brought that to my attention paid doctor hill stayed on for several more months and we continue to work to advance u. S. Policy. Okay. During the time relevant of the committees investigation did you have any communication with them outside of the july 10 meeting . I recall a courtesy note within days of his return to july which he wanted to preserve an open Channel Communication and i said please feel free to contact me with any concerns. Were you following this, two tracks ambassador taylor walked through it in his testimony on wednesday, he called it a regular channel and he called it an irregular but not outlandish channel when ambassadors sondland and volker channel. Were you tracking those channels during this time. I tried to recall at which point i became aware of ambassador i was aware that they were working together sondland and ambassador volker and secretary prairie were working together to advance u. S. Policy interest that were in support of will have been agreed to but i did not learn until july 10 and actually there may have been a slightly earlier point i recall meeting in which investor bolton facilitated a meeting between volker and bolton in the june timeframe and there may have been discussion about the external channel. But i think they did not become aware of thesese particular u. S. Government officials being involved in the alternate track until july 10. We had some discussion that mr. Giuliani was promoting a negative narrative about the ukraine and certain officials were trying to help the president understandiv with zelenskyfi it was a new day in ukraine is going to be different. Is that your understanding . That is correct. That is what was being reported by the Intelligence Committee and the concerned voices of the various people that actually met with him including foreign official. To the extent that youre aware ofe what ambassador sondland schools were in ambassador volkers goals, you think they were just trying to do the best that they could and tried advocating the best interest of the United States . That is what i believe and what i still believe frankly. Into the extent mr. Giuliani maam had different views the return to help them w understand that it was time to change those views. I think they were trying to bring him in to the tent and have him support the direction that we had settled on. And you never conferred with mr. Giuliani . No. No meetings, phone calls or any of that sort . I did not, i only know him as new yorks finest mayor. Americas mayor. Did you have any discussions or communications during this relevant time. I have never had any contact of the president of the United States. My time is expired. Thank you. We will now move to the ofiveminute member around, are you good to go forward or do you need a break . I think would like to take a short break. Lets take a five or ten minute break and will resume with the fiveminute round. If i could ask, the audience members to please allow the witnesses to leave the room first. The committee is in recess. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]