That a businessman would have knowledge is limited in any when he is about to sign a transaction. But if you go after his integrity, right, if you go check. And by that he clearly meant after his public service, if you go after his military record, that President Trump was youre done. Thinking about or had in front but chuck, isnt there a high stakes problem with that, for of him the possibility of providing Security Assistance to trump and the republicans to say, because then the next question is, okay, who does know ukraine. It was similar to writing a check to someone who youre what trump said . Bolton and trump. About to send. He used that analogy very and they dont want those folks to come before congress. I absolutely agree. Im saying if there is a path to clearly to indicate that this try and point out that he has limited knowledge, thats the would be this would require path and its a narrow one. Something. If that person owed him does it ultimately work . No, it doesnt. Right. Because there are other something, before he signed the check, he wanted to get whatever percipient witnesses. Thats what you do in a he was owed paid back to him. Criminal defense, and its not going to work here. Ambassador volker used very its only going to thats a similar language about a week tenminute exam. Later, which indicates to me two. Exactly. That they had that conversation if its done right. As well. If its done right. Did ukraine owe anything to so what theyre going to do, what youre going to see, is the United States . Mr. Goldman, they didnt. Kind of presaged by what they owed appreciation for the
congressman nunes said in his support, and they appreciated opening statement. That. Let me read for our viewers but there was not there was what stopped all of you in your nothing owed to President Trump tracks and bring ambassador on that. Mcfaul in on this because he was but you understood the upshot tweeting about the many layers of this comment made by both of problems on this bombshell ambassador sondland and weve been talking about. Let me just underscore this. Ambassador volker to be that this is what Ambassador Taylor President Trump believed that said. This is what all of our legal ukraine owed him something eagles are talking about as sort personally, is that accurate . Of the new bombshell. Hard to understand, but there actually we have it, lets listen to it. Was a feeling by President Trump last friday, a member of my staff told me of events that occurred on july 26th. That he and this came out in while ambassador volker and i the transcript im sorry, visited the front, this member this came out in the discussion of my staff accompanied ambassador sondland. With the inaugural delegation ambassador sondland met with mr. When they came back to have a yermak. Conversation with president following that meeting, in the trump on may 23rd, that he had a presence of my staff, at a restaurant, ambassador sondland called President Trump and told feeling of having been wronged him of his meetings in kiev. By the ukrainians. The member of my staff could hear President Trump on the phone asking ambassador sondland and so this was something that about the investigations. He thought they owed him, to fix ambassador sondland told that wrong. President trump the ukrainians right. Were ready to move forward. But what he was talking about, following the call with President Trump, the member of as you understood it, in the my staff asked ambassador context of the conversation, sondland what President Trump thought about ukraine. They owed him these investigations that he wanted. That would have been to fix ambassador sondland responded that President Trump cares more the wrong, exactly. And those investigations into about the investigations of the 2016 election and biden and Biden Which Giuliani was burisma. Thats correct. Now, during this early period pressing for. At the time i gave my deposition on october 22nd, i was not aware in september, weve talked a little bit about the fact that you continually heard that the of this information. Im including it here for president was repeatedly saying completeness. As the committee knows, i that there was no quid pro quo, reported this information is that right . Through counsel to the state thats correct. And he still says that departments Legal Adviser as repeatedly today, but regardless well as to counsel for both the of what you call it, whether majority and the minority of this committee. Its a quid pro quo, bribery, it is my understanding that the committee is following up on this matter. Extortion, abuse of power of the office of the presidency, the and ambassador mcfaul, as we listened to that, it was noticed fact of the matter, as you understood it, is that security that there are two more depositions with brandnew witnesses that will be heard from on friday. Assistance and the white house your thoughts on the impact of meeting were not going to be provided unless ukraine initiated these two that. Well, i want to say two investigations that would things about it. Benefit Donald Trumps first, the substance is a reelection, is that what you understood the facts to be . Bombshell. And if ambassador sondland wants mr. Goldman, what i can do to come and testify to say its here for you today is tell you not true, we can do that, but it stands as fact now, as what i heard from people. Ambassador taylor said it. But i want to underscore how in this case it was what i heard from ambassador sondland. Completely extraordinary it is for any ambassador to call the he described conditions for the president of the United States, to do so on an open cellphone Security Assistance and the line is another thing, lets put white house meeting in those terms, that is, they were that aside for now, but this whole you know, this alibi dependent on, conditioned on, that President Trump barely pursuing these investigations. And you heard that from knows who this guy is, i dont ambassador sondland himself, know who he is, and yet he is correct . Correct. And you also heard a similar calling him from kiev to report story from mr. Morrison as well, on what President Trump is that right . Obviously wants to know about who also talked to ambassador his quid pro quo. I think that really undermines sondland about the conversations his argument that there is no that he had had in warsaw with ukrainians. Direct connectivity with the and what mr. Morrison president. And the second one, if i can get recounted to you was it in, tim morrison, the other substantially similar to what mr. Sondland recounted to you, right . Yes. Part of this i just want to and so regardless of what underscore, hes the senior ukrainians may say now, now that director of russia, europe, ukrai everything is out in the public ukraine. And were here in this public he is the president s most Senior Adviser at the white house. I had a job like that working hearing, that they felt no for obama with respect to russia. And when i spoke to any u. S. Pressure from President Trump, it was your clear understanding, was it not, that in early Government Official, everybody knew that i was speaking on september, when the Pressure Campaign was still secret, that behalf of the president. I was the person that knew his the ukrainians believed that thoughts and views on russia. They needed to announce these and in this case, on ukraine. So this notion that its all public investigations, is that right . Hearsay and phone talk, no. Mr. Goldman, i know that the you have two people very close to the president , ambassador ukrainians were very concerned sondland calling him on his cellphone from a kiev restaurant, which ive never about the Security Assistance. Heard of before, and tim and i know that they were morrison corroborating the prepared or preparing to make a evidence that the witness, the things that Ambassador Taylor public statement, that is, with testified today. Ambassador mcfaul, i a cnn interview, that that was being planned. Those are the two pieces that i constantly come back to Donald Trumps use of the word human know. And that cnn interview was to carnage in his inaugural address announce these investigations, when i think of what happens to as you understood it, right . People who go to work for him, and Gordon Sondland is no that was the implication. That was certainly the exception. What do you make in light of implication. Weve been focused a lot on todays bombshell of the the september time frame. Fourpage amendment to his
but i want to go back two months testimony that he gave last to july, before the july 25th week . Hes in trouble, hes boxed in call. And you testified, ambassador by more than a dozen witnesses who have testified to a clear taylor, in your opening quid pro quo going all the way statement, that it was in the to donald trump around the meeting and the aid. Middle of july when you understood that the white house thats definitely my reading meeting was first a condition on of it. And by the way, i would add to that list ambassador volker. These investigations; is that we havent talked much about correct . Him, but hes part of the three yes. We were preparing and i agreed that the white house amigos. Its part of all of this. Meeting was going to be an i hope when both of them come before this committee they important step in u. S. ukrainian realize the magnitude and the relations. Moment and they do the right so in june and in early july, thing by just telling the truth, because i dont think it serves their interests to say i dont attempts to work out a way to recall, im not aware, no quid get that meeting included a phone call. Pro quo here. And so there were several this testimony today from conversations about how to have this phone call that eventually Ambassador Taylor especially was extraordinary. And by the way, i told you he was going to have a great voice happened on eventual 25tjuly 25. For television, and he does. And you described a white house meeting with a number of i just hope both of those officials where ambassador individuals listen to this bolton used the term that closely and do the right thing something was a drug deal. What did you understand him to and just tell the truth and come mean in hearing that he said clean. And a huge tip of the hat, hes been roundly described on used this term, drug deal . Twitter as having a front line quality voice. Mr. Goldman, i dont know. So heres to you, pbs, for seth i dont know what ambassador bolton had in mind. Was that in reference to a the standard. George conway, i think mike discussion in that meeting related to the white house mcfaul makes a great point. Meeting that president zelensky you can be a career ambassador, a Career Member of the foreign wanted and in connection to the investigations . The context of that comment service, and never have a phone call with the president of the United States. Thats absolutely right. Was the discussion that mr. And sondland is the one who apparently called trump. Was it in the middle of the night, to figure out what to say to respond to taylor, when doniluk, the ukrainian taylor said, what do we got here, a quid pro quo . Counterpart, had with mr. Bolton. I mean, you dont just wake up that conversation was productive the president in the middle of the night. And apparently the president , according to sondland, wasnt in to the point were the white a very good mood. House meeting was raised and so hes calling the president of ambassador sondland intervened the United States on a cellphone on the middle of the night and to talk about the now trump is saying, i dont investigations. Know him . Its a joke. Senator mccaskill, ambassador bolton ceased the meeting, closed the meeting, traditionally u. S. President s
finished the meeting, and told are awakened in the middle of the night to find out about u. S. His staff to report this meeting air strikes overseas or, god to the lawyers. Forbid, Hostage Takings and things like that. The Security Breaches here. And he also later then indicated whats happening to us is beyond to fiona hill, who was also a bizarre, because this stuff is so big and so impactful that all the other stuff falls off the participant on the nec staff, table. But when you think about the that he, ambassador bolton, point this man made when he was running for president about didnt want to be associated with this drug deal. Hillary clinton supposedly playing Fast And Loose with the so the implication was, it was the domestic politics that was security. Hes taking personal calls on being cooked up. And did ambassador sondland cellphones in the middle of the say this in front of the night from somebody who is located in an area where russia ukrainian officials, to your listens to everything. Understanding . Ambassador sondland, in the so it is so bizarre to me that meeting where ambassador bolton was having the conversation with this is something that we just his counterpart, raised the lay aside and go, this isnt that big a deal, whereas his issue of investigations being entire campaign was focused on important to come before the lax security at the state department. And this guy is rolling over in white house meeting that had bed and taking a personal call
just been raised. On his cellphone from a guy in and ukrainians official were there . And ukrainian officials were kiev or keev i guess it is. In that meeting, yes, sir. Around this same time frame, in july, did you have any discussions with ukrainian were saying it wrong. Official about these investigations . To the point about National Security, because this is about what donald trump knew and when i dont recall. He knew it and whether or not well, let me show you a text its an impeachable and message that you wrote on july something hell be convicted for in the senate, we may 21st, where you wrote it, again, underreport the significance of the National Security frame. To ambassador sondland and and what i would imagine the volker. National security hard wiring of if you could just read what you both these men. Wrote here on july 21st. They are in government to gordon, one thing kurt and i protect and boost young talked about yesterday was sasha democracies on russias border. I mean, they are sort of the danyliuks point that president best of what the American Government produces. Zelensky is serious about let me follow up on that, ukraine being taken seriously, because i think this is something that is heartbreaking. Not merely as an instrument in the idea that this president washington Domestic Reelection things an Inspector General needs to be a loyalist and members of the National Security council need to be loyalists . Politics. What did you understand it to that really undermines the mean, that zelensky had concerns
entire premise of this about being an instrument in democracy, that there are washington Domestic Reelection certain jobs that you are in fact all about protecting the politics . Mr. Danyliuk understood that country and not the individual who is just passing through in the oval office. These investigations were and thats what this guy has pursuant to mr. Giulianis done that is permanently damaging to the fabric of this request to develop information, country. You think about, this is the to find information about burisma and the bidens. This was very wellknown in part of it that makes me so distraught about the republican public. Mr. Giuliani had made this point party. Jim mattis resignation letter, clear in several instances in george kents closed door the beginning, in the deposition about putin and the springtime. And mr. Danyliuk was aware that leader of hinge ungary that got between transactions with the ukraine. That was a problem. Why cant we look voters in the and would you agree that eye as republicans and say, the because president zelensky is worried about this, they president is doing everything understood at least there was some pressure for them to pursue Vladimir Putin wants and nothing these investigations; is that that American Foreign policy dictates. Its astonishing, because fair . Mr. Danyliuk indicated that when you read these words and listen to these words, these men president zelensky certainly are talking about duty and honor
understood it, that he did not and country and freedom. Want to get involved in these those words mean nothing to type of activities. Now, im going to move ahead donald trump. Because all donald trump cares about, again, is himself. Now to july 25th, which is when and we heard it even from his President Trump and president zelensky had the phone call. But before we get to the phone henchman sondland, sondland call, i want to show both of you talking about he doesnt care a text message, neither of much about ukraine, he cares which neither of you is on about those investigations and getting that statement from this text message. It is between ambassador volker ukraine about biden. And Andriy Yermak, a top aide to and this should appall all president zelensky. Americans and should appall i will read it, because neither of you is on it. Especially republicans, the party of ronald reagan, the ambassador volker says, good party of abraham lincoln. Lunch thanks. Heard from white house. Its absolutely bizarre that people cant stand up and just assuming president Z Convinces Trump he will investigate get to say this is wrong. Its not hard. The bottom of what happened in its obvious. Please note the emotion in 2016, we will nail down date for their voices when they talk visit to washington. Good luck. About ukraine, and cheering on see you tomorrow kurt. And this was a half hour, less ukraine as a country in its battle with russia, for than a half hour before the call starters. And for i mean, whats so actually occurred. Now, Ambassador Taylor, was amazing is that they were ambassador volker with you in fighting for the ukrainians to honor and respect the rule of ukraine at this time . He was. Did you know that he was law. Whats so amazing about the prepping president zelensky for
this phone call with President Trump sort of if you could trump in this way . Even call it a philosophy, is not in this way, mr. Goldman. Its completely upside down. He was corrupting u. S. Relations with a country fighting but i knew that ambassador corruption in its own recent volker was prepping ukrainians for the phone call earlier on, history. I might just now see the price of loyalty, because of that is, at a meeting in thats going to happen to ambassador sondland. Whats going to happen to toronto, on july 2nd, mr. Him . Criminal investigations, as chuck and i know, you build by taking these depositions, volker, ambassador volker had a getting their testimony. Now sondland has already had to come back once and say, oh, i conversation with president forgot some stuff, here it is. Zelensky and had indicated in a now hes going to have to come back and say, oh, i forgot about phone call that he at that time that call i had with the president of the United States on my cellphone. Was going to talk mr. Zelensky, from a restaurant. From a restaurant, which is pretty hard to forget. President zelensky, through the so now weve got a situation in steps that needed to be taken in which sondland may have to flip, order to get to the phone call. Understood. Effectively, in order to save and you testified earlier that his hide. The Security Assistance had and let me sound a National Security note, because this already been frozen, to your knowledge, at least by july testimony today helped me take 18th, is that right . Something sort of from the abstract and move it to the thats correct. So that was just a week earlier than this. Concrete. Correct. So just so were clear, russia is attacking ukraine in Ambassador Taylor, before this ukraine. July 25th call, President Trump ukrainian soldiers are dying
because of russian attacks in had frozen the security their own country. Assistance that ukraine needed, in fact i think Ambassador Taylor said that the incursion was roughly 7 of ukrainians and that the white house meeting was conditioned on ukraine 14,000 lives. Initiating this investigation, the equivalent of the size of and that had been relayed to the texas. Equivalent of the size of ukrainians, is that an accurate State Of Play at this time . Texas. Thats an accurate state of so to the extent that this is play. I at that point had no just a president trying to get a statement from some foreign leader completely misses the point. Indication that any discussion ukraine is under attack. Their people are dying. Of the Security Assistance being this is a war. Subject to conditioned on and this president wants something in return. This is what he said just investigations had taken place. Right. But you understood that the now. It reminded me of mueller saying white house meeting was . Thats correct. Russia is attacking us as we sit all right. Lets move ahead to this july here today. Ambassador taylor started his 25th call between the opening remarks by saying, even president s. As we sit here today the russians are attacking ukrainian now, am i correct that neither of you were on this call . Soldiers in their own country is that right, mr. Kent . And have been for the last four years. Thats correct. I saw this on the front line and you were neither as well . Last week, the day i was there, thats correct. So you both read it after it a ukrainian soldier was killed and four were wounded. Was released publicly at the end so this thing thats of september . Yes. Happening in another part of the yes. I want to spend just a little world matters a lot, not just to time reading the transcript as ukraine, but as Ambassador Taylor said, they are our
weve been encouraged to do. And i want to particularly note strategic partner, right . Ukrainian National Security four excerpts of the transcript. Interests are our national one that relates to the security security interests. Whats happening there matters a assistance weve been talking lot to nato, to western europe, about. Another that discusses a favor to eastern europe, to the future that President Trump asks of of the atlantic alliance. President zelensky. A third where President Trump it goes to the credibility of asks the ukrainian president to the United States of america. Right. Investigate his political standing up for the values that the United States of opponent, former Vice President biden. America we thought stood for. And then a final one where the ukrainian president directly but i believe ambassador links the desired white house taylor and mr. Kent made it very clear that we have significant visit to the political National Security interests in investigations that president this part of the world, and the trump wanted. So lets look at the first president of the United States was leveraging that for personal excerpt, which is near the political gain. That is, in georges word, beginning of the call, when astonishing. Its astonishing, and its just a direct violation of his oath of office. President zelensky discusses the military aid that the u. S. Provides ukraine, he says, i its foundational. Would also like to thank you for and this is the ultimate. These are words that we used your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to when we wrote that oped when cooperate for the next steps. Specifically, we are almost the scandal first broke. Ready to buy Morafte Aftejaveli its the ultimate impeachable offense. If you were going to make up a the United States for defense
purposes. Now, at this time of this phone set of facts that was as bad as call, Ambassador Taylor and mr. You could get, this would be it. Like a law school test. Like a law school test. Yes. And Ambassador Taylor, you p a President Breaching his duties to the nation. This would be it. Obviously also knew that the aid just to look inside the had been frozen as well, since committee room, we appear to be he was responsible for doing that; is that correct . Thats what i had been told. Back under way. Thats what we heard on that although i did not see the conference call, yes. Witnesses seated, the committee but to neither of your knowledge, the ukrainians were not aware of that at that point . Appears to be ready. Not to my knowledge. Not to my knowledge. But right after president mr. Schiff was in an animated conversation with the zelensky thanks President Trump for his great support in the republicans just before we area of defense, President Trump decided to dip in. Then says, and well go to the you see some vacant chairs on the republican side. Next excerpt, i want you to do and indeed the witnesses are not us a favor, though, because our yet back at the table. Look, the stakes couldnt be country has been through a lot and ukraine knows a lot about higher. As george said, the problem is, it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with ukraine. In deciding which side to be on, they say crowdstrike. I think they have it wrong. I guess you have one of your
wealthy people. The server, they say ukraine has i dont think its between rutrp and the democrats. It. Then at the end of the paragraph he says, whatever you can do, we have all day to see how its very important that you do the other side wants to frame it, if thats possible. What weve all witnessed, into prime time tonight, something tells me. Now, mr. Kent, youve testified thats probably true. A little bit about how important this white house meeting was to president zelensky. How would you expect a new ukrainian president to interpret a request for a favor for the president of the United States . I cannot interpret the mind of president zelensky other than to say that it was very clear that what they were hoping to get out of this meeting was a date and a confirmation that he remember, nunes opening was could come to washington. Obviously you cant put about a ukrainian sequel. Yourself in the mind, but if the i think everyone should get out ukrainian president for a there google to look up uranium country thats so dependent on the United States for all one. Back to order. Things, including military the chair now recognizes the Ranking Member and minority assistance, is requested to do a counsel for 45 minutes. Thank you. Favor, how do you think the ukrainians would interpret that . If you go further into the the call summary for which the
democrats want to impeach call record as part of this, and President Trump is dramatically we dont have it on screen, but different from their nefarious depiction of it. To the best of my recollection, reading it after it was released on september 25th, president what it actually shows is a Pleasant Exchange between two leaders who discuss mutual zelensky went into having cooperation over a range of whatever your problems were, issues. The democrats claim this call that was the old team, ive got a new team, and we will do demonstrates extortion, bribery, and a host of other monstrous whatever is appropriate and be transparent and honest about it. Crimes being committed against i dont remember the exact president zelensky. Words, but he was trying to be, in his own words and response, yet President Trump zelensky be responsive to conduct the himself insists there was business of Ukrainian Government in a transparent and honest nothing improper whatsoever about the conversation. Manner. Now, when he talks about this this helps to explain why in this committees last public hearing democrats recited a crowdstrike and the server, what do you understand this to be a reference to . To be honest, i had not heard figu of crowdstrike until i read this fictitious version of the call instead of reading the actually transcript. The democrats depicted the transcript on september 25th. President saying, quote, i want you to make up dirt on my do you now understand what it relates to . I understand it has to do political opponent, understand, with the story that theres a lots of it, on this and on that, server with missing emails. Unquote. The transcript did not show i also understand that one of President Trump saying anything the owners of crowdstrike is a remotely like that. The president did not ask russian american. Ukraine to make up dirt on i am not aware of any ukrainian anyone. But the democrats are not trying connection to the company. To discover facts. Are you aware of this is all theyre trying to invent a part of a larger allegation that ukraine interfered in the 2016 narrative. If the facts they need do not election . Yes, that is my exist, theyll just make it up. Understanding. And to your knowledge, is not only does president zelensky there any factual basis to deny the democrats characterization of the call, support the allegation that but as Ambassador Taylor ukraine interfered in the 2016 testified to this committee, the ukrainians did not even know at election . To my knowledge there is no the time of the call that a factual basis, no. Temporary delay was put on the and in fact who did interfere Security Assistance for them. With the 2016 election . I think its amply clear that furthermore, Absolus The Ambass testified, these holds occur russian interference was at the from time to time. Heart of the interference in the both he and ambassador volker 2016 election cycle. Lets move to the third were confident the delay would be lifted and in fact milit has section, about Vice President biden. It says, the other thing, theres a lot of talk about about bidens son, this is substantially improved since President Trump took office. President trump speaking, that biden stopped the prosecution Ambassador Taylor testified that
and a lot of people want to find President Trump was the first out about that so whatever you president to see that ukraine was afforded javelin antitank weapons. This was a very strong message that americans are willing to provide more than blankets. Can do with be great. This was the obama at that time biden was thene in. Administrations approach. Note this important fact. The Security Assistance was provided to ukraine without the ukrainians having done any of the things they were supposedly when Vice President acted in being blackmailed to do. So were supposed to believe ukraine, did he act in accordance with official u. S. That President Trump committed a policy . He did. Now, lets go then to the terrible crime that never last excerpts that i wanted to actually occurred and which the highlight, which is president zelensky speaking. Supposed victim denies ever and he says, i also wanted to happened. Thank you for your invitation to i would like to briefly speak visit the United States, about the core mistruth at the specifically washington, d. C. On the other hand, i also want heart of the democrats to ensure you that we will be very serious about the case and we will work on the impeachment drive. Investigation. Now, Ambassador Taylor, right they say President Trump wanted the ukrainians to, quote, manufacture dirt. After president zelensky once again, democrats simply mentions his muchdesired made it up. Washington visit, he says, on but lets consider the broader the other hand, and then says question about why president that ukraine will be very trump may have wanted answers to serious about the investigation. Questions about Ukraine Meddling is this the same link between the white house visit and the in 2016. Investigations that ambassador the democrats downplay, ignore, volker had texted to Andriy Yermak just a few minutes before outright deny the many this conversation . Thats my assumption. Implications that the ukrainians actually did meddle in the now, just to summarize what election, a shocking aboutface weve just read in this july for people who for three years 25th call between the argued foreign Election Meddling president s, the ukrainian was an intolerable crime that president thanked President Trump for Security Assistance threatened the heart of our democracy. While the brazen suddenness of that President Trump had just frozen, to which President Trump responded that he wanted this is jarring, this denies a president zelensky to do him a major part of their argument. Favor though by investigating after all, if there were the 2016 u. S. Election and the bidens. President zelensky says that he evidence of ukrainian meddling, will pursue these investigations right after he mentions the and meddling is a dire threat, then President Trump would have white house visit. A good reason for wanting to find out what happened. Is that your understanding, Ambassador Taylor, of what we and since the meddling was aimed just read . Yes. And mr. Kent, is that yours . Against his campaign, he would have good reason for sending his yes. I yield back. The majority time has personal attorney to make
inquiries about it. Expired. Would you gentlemen like a brief whats strange is that some of the witnesses at these hearings recess . Lets take a fiveminute recess and then well resume with and previous depositions who express alarm about these minority questioning. Inquiries were remarkably uninformed about these indications of ukrainian Election Meddling and why the you heard chairman schiff, a president may have been fiveminute recess and then the concerned by them. For example, i noted previously questioning resumes. Nicolle wallace, your Alexander Chalupa admitted to impressions of the witness . Im gobsmacked by the contrast, the patriotism, the officials that she worked to dig up dirt on the Trump Campaign which she passed on to the dnc stoicism, the fact patternhyste, and the Hillary Clinton campaign. Chalupa revealed that ukrainian officials themselves were also working directly with reporters public handwringing, but that to trade information and leads they very calmly, meticulously about the Trump Campaign. Took notes of the transgressions. Ambassador kent, you didnt seem they went through the chain of to be too concerned about it in the last round of questioning, command at the state department. So ill just skip you, because i mean, i think we have to get we know that wasnt a concern. Right away to the bombshell. But Ambassador Taylor, you testified to this committee that theres a Bombshell Revelation in this testimony, another you only recently became aware direct line drawn directly to of reports of this cooperation between Ukrainian Embassy donald trump in his extortion of the ukrainians and holding up officials and chalupa to military aid in exchange for investigations, a brandnew set undermine the Trump Campaign at of facts and evidence tying him straight to that. Your last deposition; is that nicolle, we talked at the correct . Beginning of the hearing, was mr. Nunes, it is correct that this going to matter, was i had not known about this everybodys votes kind of baked before. In. I think testimony like this just going over your last deposition, ambassador. Thats exactly right. Shows televised testimony in which people can see for themselves the credibility of it cites evidence asserting this really patriotic american coming forward and then saying the Hillary Clinton campaign, it what he said, there is a quotes, ukrainian bombshell here in that parliamentarian saying, quote, Ambassador Taylor testifies two different things, first that he it was clear they were supporting Hillary Clintons reveals a new conversation that candidacy. They did everything from Organizing Meetings with the a staffer had with ambassador clinton team to publicly supporting her to criticizing sondland, and sondland was talking to President Trump on a trump. I think that they simply didnt cellphone in ukraine. Meet with the Trump Campaign and that staffer basically reports that trump cared only because they thought hillary would win, unquote. About getting to the bidens, not Ambassador Taylor, you testified about security for ukraine or you were unfamiliar with that
anything like that. So thats a new conversation we didnt know about. Statement; is that correct . Then second, there was a whole that is correct. You also said you are unaware thing we knew about, a text that then Ukrainian Ambassador exchange between sondland and taylor that occurred on to the u. S. Valerie chalet wrote september 1st, in which the an oped in the hill during question that taylor asks the 2016 president ial campaign sondland is, quote, are we now criticizing thencandidate saying that Security Assistance and white house meetings are trump; is that correct . Conditioned on investigations . That is correct. You said you did not know and the answer that sondland gave, which we knew, was call that lushenko had admitted that me. And now we know exactly what happened on that call, which is that sondland said to taylor, part of his motivation in spreading information about the this isnt just about a white socalled black ledger, a house meeting, this is about withholding all the security disputed document purport to go assistance. It ties the president directly reveal corruption by a former to this. George, on this bombshell, Trump Campaign official, was to undermine the trumps candidacy. But also just on what weve just this was in your deposition. Been listening to. Absolutely, the point that is that still correct . That still correct, sir. You made, the stark contrast thank you, mr. Taylor. Fusion gps Contractor Nellie Orr between these incredible Public Servants who serve with dignity, testified that lushenko you in taylors case i guess for 50 years. 50 years. And kent talking about how hes a third generation. George kent. Serving now for 60 years. Testified you were unaware that these are people who could make millions of dollars in the he served as a source for that private sector and instead they project. Ambassador taylor, is that still correct . Chose to serve their country and it is, sir. Theyre serving the cause of you said you did not know freedom in eastern europe. That Ukrainian Internal Affairs and the National Security of the minister avakov mocked and United States, which both disparaged then candidate trump on facebook and twitter, is that through democratic and republican administrations have determined that the National Still correct . That is correct. Security of the United States Ambassador Taylor, in your depends on promoting freedom testimony to this committee you throughout europe against said you were never briefed on russian aggression. These reports and statements, that you did not to due and we heard, in the words of ambassador sondland, donald diligence before taking your trump doesnt give a hoot about post to discover that president s that, he cares about trashing and mayor giulianis concerns joe biden with this conspiracy may have been and that you theory. Here is an exercise. What they may have been and that you did not discuss them with we have four better than average lawyers here, were up to our ambassador yovanovitch. Is that still correct . Keyster in lawyers. Unfortunately. Yes, sir. Furthermore, you said it if i tasked you to come out upset you to hear about the many indications of ukrainian and go after these witnesses,
Election Meddling. Your precise words were, im how do you do that . How do you impeach the integrity going to read them back to you, of these two men at the witness based on this political article, table . Which again surprises me, very carefully. Disappoints me because i think its a mistake for any diplomat and we will see if nunez or Government Official in one country to interfere in the political life of another, immediately defers to the lawyer thats disappointing, unquote. Ambassador taylor, is that still they have working. If you just try to cross them on your their direct knowledge of trumps involvement and then m Ambassador Taylor, is it still shut it down, then you maybe your sentence . Make a point. Snie lo but if you try to go after these i looked into the circumstances for several things guys who are oozing credibility, you just mentioned. I mean and patriotism. And patriotism and service to in 2016, candidate trump made a country above all, it was Statement Saying that it was clearly that taylor was not after trump. I mean, he was picked by trump possible that he would allow and pompeo for this job. He was a trump appointee. Crimea to go back to russia. So if you try to go after him as some kind of deep state nevertrumper bs, its going to hee inion that irresponsible
really look awkward, its going that crimea wanted to go back to russia. What i can tell you mr. Nunes is to be like fingernails on a blackboard. This is a very difficult job the that those sentiments is lawyer has. I would just hate to see what amazingly inflammatory to all u happens when it gets turned over to the republican members, how ukrainians. So i think i can understand they try to tear these guys up, and it would be a big mistake, i that. Are you aware during the 2012 think. Chuck . First of all, you have three very good lawyers and then you have me. Not true you dont impeach their election when at the time integrity, i think their integrity is unimpeachable. President obama leaned over on a in fact when Ambassador Taylor started, he said im not here to hot mic to the then russian advocate for impeachment, im president and said he would have not taking a side, im just telling you what i saw and heard to wait until after the election, was that inflammatory and read and wrote. To the ukrainians also . But i do think there is a very i dont know, sir. Narrow path to crossexami i just want to be clear that some Government Officials crossexamination, and claire touched on it. You didnt speak personally with the president , did you, ambassad opposed President Trumps in fact there are many conversations he had about this approach to ukraine but many had matter that youtr, all of our no idea what concerns him. In this case, it was numerous indications of ukrainian interference of the 2016 election to oppose his campaign and support Hillary Clinton. Once you know that, it is easy to understand the president s desire to get to the bottom of this corruption and exactly what happened in the 2016 election. With that i will turn over. Ambassador taylor and mr. Kent, President Trumps concerns of ukraine role in 2016 election, you believe he genuinely believes that we are working against them, right . Ambassador taylor . I dont know what President Trump or candidate trump was thinking about this . May 23rd after the zelensky inauguration, did he lament that the ukrainians were out to get him . I heard that his response to
the suggestion mr. Zelensky visited President Trump in the oval office was not well received. He had concerns about ukrainians, yes. From the president s perspective if the ambassador of ukraine of the United States, one of the most influential diplomats is planning an oped with the okay with former Prime Minister is saying things on social media. Theyre also saying some very unkind things on social media about the president. You certainly can appreciate that President Trump was very concerned that some elements of
the ukrainian establishments were not in favor of him and out to get him. I will allow the question but are you asking are you seriously interrupting our time here . I wont dock this into the time. I want to be clear, ambassador, if you are able to verify the things that counsel asked you is fine, otherwise, questions from the majority or minority that assumes facts before you, you should be caution about that. Mr. Chairman, point of order. The time is with the minority counsel. Mr. Ratliff. First 45 minutes and literally had an objection to almost the foundation of every question mr. Goldman asked regarding facts and not evidence leaving but House Resolution 660 does not say we are under the federal rules of evidence. It is your position that i should be asserting objections to questions that violate the federal rules of evidence, let me know now because this hearing is going to change significantly. As i said mr. Ratliff, i will answer the question. I think the gentleman has a different question about the rules. What are the rules thats going to govern this . I am asking and yielding you for a question to the question that i just asked. What purpose do you seek recognition . To answer mr. Ratliffs question . I have answered it. You have not answered my question whether or not i should be asserting facts not in evidence or leading objections to questions that are oppoposedm
this point forward. Mr. Ratliff, i am not objecting the question but i am in Jukti Instructing the witness they should not presume questions from the minority or majority may represents facts or evidence thats not correct. I i have answered your question and well resume to questions and the clock. You can appreciate President Trumps concerns . I dont know the exact nature of President Trumps concerns. In my deposition i recall you handed me the political article which listed at least three of the elements that you have described earlier. And you recognized and i confirmed with the minority members that first i heard of
those and i was surprised. I dont know President Trumps reaction to those. In the Information Published by luschenko, member of the parliament about the manaforts black ledgers in august of 2016, you mean that very day it was published, mr. Manafort resigned from the campaign, correct . I dont know. But, certainly that gives rise to some concern that is there were elements to the ukrainian establishments that are out to get the president. Thats a reasonable believe of his . I dont know. The run up to the 2016 election, many facts remained unresolved. Agreed . Sorry, whats the question . The 2016 elections, many
facts remained unresolved. General barr in may of 2019 asked for that effort initially was administrative review has turned into a criminal probe and u. S. Attorney durham is casting a wide net and following a feedbacks where they may lead, are you aware of that . I am aware of an investigation. Thats as much as i am aware. Any information resides in ukraine is perfect appropriate to get to the bottom of that for the ukrainians cooperate with the United States to share that information, correct . Can you say that one again . I appreciate it if you would restate the question. Ukraine should cooperate with
theit the United States and the ukrainians doing improper things, the ukrainians ought to investigate that themselves. Ukrainians American Relations are supportive. The ukrainians will certainly be responsive. The president on the call july 25th, urges there is a connection between the Ukrainian Government and the Justice Department, thats the perfect way to raise an issue with the ukrainian president , correct . It is appropriate for the Justice Department and the prosecutor again to cooperate and exchange information, yes. To the extent the president had concerns and the Attorney General is having u. S. Attorney durham looking into that. Is that entirely appropriate for the president to flag this for
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.