white house meeting ever provided. so the third or fourth fact, i do think that needs to be clarified particularly as we are focusing on what direct evidence is. let s give more examples. three of the individuals participated in the july 25th call, is there a testimony direct evidence and what happened during that call? yes, although i think the call record is better evidence than there. the day after that call, devon holmes testified that juld ambassador sondland, is that direct evidence? that s direct evidence. speaker after the july 25th ca call, ukraine would investigate the bidens. is that direct evidence? yes. his own words but seems to me like there is a lot of direct evidence. is there are the direct evidence
a motion to insert instead, mr. chairman? before i recognize ms. mcbath, i want to announce with respect to scheduling that this hearing will proceed until the votes are called. it may and neck before votes are called to the which would be nice. we would recess for the votes and will reconvene here as soon as the votes on the floor are over. it s going to be a close call. we will see. i will further announce that i m not prepared to say anything further about the schedule of the committee beyond today s hearing. point of order, mr. chairman excuse who seeks recognition for point of order? it is i. for purposes
september 7th in a call with ambassador sondland. mr. goldman, did you receive testimony about this september 7 call? yes, we received testimony from three witnesses about it and it gets a little complicat complicated. but that was a consistent refrain through all of the witnesses is the president did say no quid pro quo. mr. morrison that same date? mr. morrison then reported to master taylor, correct? that s correct, yes. both mr. morrison and ambassador taylor took most of those instructions, yes question marks because they did. whether notes or the nose produceto the commi? they were not, that set of notes was blocked consistent with the president s direction?