return for the 2016 dnc server and burisma investigation. when you heard burisma, you didn t see it as code for biden, the bidens? i did not. when did you know that. your testimony saying that burisma included the biden s when the readout came out. my testimony wasn t specific with regards to the date. september? i don t recall the date. if i told you that the legal definition of bribery was an event of offering, giving, soliciting or receiving of any item of value and the means of influencing an action of an individual holding a public or legal duty. do you believe that not only was it quid pro quo but it was bribery. not a lawyer and i m not going to characterize what
something was or wasn t legally. you also said in your opening statement that secretary perry and yourself, as well as ambassador volker worked with giuliani on the ukraine matter, and express direction of the president. is that right? you also go on to say that we did not want to work with giuliani
Direct and straightforward. all right, i yield back. mr. stewart. i have unanimous consent request. state your request. d.o.e. responds to investors homes comments before the house intelligence committee attribute to press secretary, ambassador sondland s testimony to misrepresented secretary perry s interaction with rudy giuliani and direction the secretary received from president trump. secretary perry spoke to rudy giuliani only once at the president s request. no one else s was on that call. at no point before, during, or after the phone call to the words biden or burisma come up in the presence of secretary perry. i asked for therapy entered into the record. without objection although i would know they have also refused to come and testify under oath. the american people expect a