Investigations were important to President Trump. We did not discuss any classified information. Other witnesses have recently shared their recollection of overhearing this call. For the most part, i have no reason to doubt their accounts. Its true that the president speaks loudly at times and its also true, i think we primarily discussed asap rocky. Its true that the president likes to use colorful language. Anyone who has met with him at any reasonable amount of time knows this. While i cannot remember the precise details, again, the white house has not allowed me to see any readouts of that call and the july 26th call did not strike me as significant at the time. Actually, actually, i would have been more surprised if President Trump had not mentioned investigations. Particularly, given what we were hearing from mr. Giuliani about the president s concerns. However, i have no recollection of discussing Vice President biden or his son on that call or after the call ended. I know that members of this committee frequently frame these complicated issues in the form of a simple question. Was there a quid pro quo . As i testified previously with regard to the requested white house call and the white house meeting, the answer is yes. Mr. Giuliani conveyed to secretary perry, ambassador volker, and others that President Trump wanted a Public Statement from president zelensky committing to investigations of burisma and the 2016 election. Mr. Giuliani expressed those requests directly to the ukrainians. And mr. Giuliani also expressed those requests directly to us. We all understood that these prerequisites for the white house call and the white house meeting reflected President Trumps desires and requirements. Within my state department email, there is a july 19th email. This email was sent. This email was sent to secretary pompeo, secretary perry, ryan mccormick, who was secretary perrys chief of staff at the time. Ms. Kenna who is the executive secretariat for secretary pompeo. Chief of staff mulvaney and mr. Mulvaneys Senior Advisor rob blair. A lot of senior officials. A lot of senior officials. Here is my exact quote from that email. I talked to zelensky just now. He has prepared to receive potuss call. Will assure him that he intends to run a fullytransparent investigation and will turn over every stone. He would greatly appreciate a call prior to sunday so that he can put out some media about a friendly and productive call, no details, prior to ukraine election on sunday. Chief of staff mulvaney responded, i asked the nsc to set it up for tomorrow. Everyone was in the loop. It was no secret. Everyone was informed via email on july 19th, days before the president ial call. As i communicated to the team, i told president zelensky in advance that assurances to run a fullytransparent investigation and turn over every stone were necessary in his call with President Trump. On july 19th, in a Whatsapp Message between ambassador taylor, ambassador volker, and me, ambassador volker stated, had breakfast with rudy this morning. Thats ambassador volker and Rudy Giuliani. Teeing up call with yermak monday. Thats Senior AdvisorAndriy Yermak. Must have helped. Most important is for zelensky to see that he will help investigation and address any specific personnel issue, if there are any. On august 10th, the next day, mr. Yermak texted me. Once we have a date, which is a date for the white house meeting, we will call for a press briefing announcing upcoming visit and outlining vision for the reboot of the u. S. Ukraine relationship, including among other things, burisma and election meddling in investigation. This is from mr. Yermak to me. The following day, august 11th, and this is critical. I sent an email to counselor and lisa kenna. Lisa kenna was frequently used as the pathway to secretary pompeo, as sometimes he preferred to receive his emails through her. She would print them out and put them in front of him. With the subject ukraine, i wrote, mike, referring to mike pompeo, kurt and i negotiated a statement from zelensky to be delivered for our review in a day or two. The contents will hopefully make the boss happy enough, the boss being the president , to authorize an invitation. Zelensky plans to have a big pressor, press conference, on the openness subject, including specifics next week. All of which referred to the 2016 and the burisma. Ms. Kenna replied, gordon, ill pass to the secretary. Thank you. Again, everyone was in the loop. Curiously, and this was very interesting to me, on august 26th, shortly before his visit to kyiv, ambassador boltons office requested mr. Giulianis Contact Information. From me. I send ambassador bolton the information directly. They requested mr. Giulianis Contact Information on august 26th. I was first informed that the white house was withholding security aid to ukraine during conversations with ambassador taylor on july 18th. 2019. However, as i testified before, i was never able to obtain a clear answer regarding the specific reason for the hold. Whether it was bureaucratic in nature, which often happens. Or reflected some other concern in the interagency process. I never participated in any of the subsequent dod or dos review meetings that others have described so i cant speak to what was discussed in those meetings. Nonetheless, before the september 1st warsaw meeting, the ukrainians had become aware that security funds had yet to be dispersed. In the absence of any credible explanation for the hold, i came to the conclusion that the aid, like the white house visit, was jeopardized. In preparation for the september 1 warsaw meeting, i asked secretary pompeo whether a facetoface conversation between trump and zelensky would help to break the log jam. And this was when President Trump was still intending to travel to warsaw. Specifically, on august 22nd, i emailed secretary pompeo directly, copying secretary kenna. I wrote, this is my email to secretary pompeo. Should we block time in warsaw for a short pull aside for potus to meet zelensky . I would ask zelensky to look him in the eye and tell him that once ukraines new justice folks are in place in midseptember, that zelensky, he, zelensky, should be able to move forward publicly and with confidence on those issues of importance to potus and the u. S. Hopefully, that will help break the log jam. The secretary replied, yes. I followed up the next day asking to get 10 to 15 minutes on the warsaw schedule for this. I said wed like to know when its locked so that i can tell zelensky and brief him. Executive secretary kenna replied, i will try for sure. Moreover, given my concerns about the security aid, i have no reason to dispute that portion of senator johnsons recent letter in which he recalls conversations he and i had on august 30th. By the end of august, my belief was that if ukraine did something to demonstrate a serious intention to fight corruption and specifically addressing burisma and the 2016, then the hold on military aid would be lifted. There was a september 1st meeting with president zelensky in warsaw. Unfortunately, President Trumps attendance at the warsaw meeting was cancelled due to hurricane dorian. Vice president pence attended instead. I mentioned to Vice President pence before the meeting with the ukrainians that i had concerns that the delay in aid had become tied to the issue of investigation. I recall mentioning that before the zelensky meeting. During the actual meeting, president zelensky raised the issue of Security Assistance directly with Vice President pence. And the Vice President said that he would speak to President Trump about it. Based on my previous communication with secretary pompeo, i felt comfortable sharing my concerns with mr. Yermak. It was a very, very brief pull aside conversation that happened within a few seconds. I told mr. Yermak that i believed that the resumption of u. S. Aid would likely not occur until ukraine took some kind of action on the Public Statement that we had been discussing for many weeks. As my other state Department Colleagues have testified, this security aid was critical to ukraines defense and should not have been delayed. I expressed this view to many during this period but my goal at the time was to do what was necessary to get the aid released. To break the log jam. I believed that the Public Statement we had been discussing for weeks was essential to advancing that goal. You know, i really regret that the ukrainians were placed in that predicament. But i do not regret doing what i could to try to break the log jam and to solve the problem. I mentioned at the outset that throughout these events, we kept state Department Leadership and others apprised of what we were doing. State department was fully supportive of our engagement in ukraine efforts and was aware that a commitment to investigations was among the issues we were pursuing. To provide just two examples, on june 5th, the day after the u. S. eu mission hosted our independence day, we did it a month early, acting assistant secretary phil reeker sent an email to me, to secretary perry, and to others forwarding some positive Media Coverage of president zelenskys attendance at our event. Mr. Reeker wrote, and i quote, this headline underscores the importance and timeliness of zelenskys visit to brussels and the critical and the critical perhaps historic role of the dinner and engagement gordon coordinated. Thank you for your participation and dedication to this effort. Months later, on september 3rd, i sent secretary pompeo an email to express my appreciation for his joining a series of meetings in brussels following the warsaw trip. I wrote, mike, thanks for slepping to europe. The chemistry seems promising. Really appreciate it. Secretary pompeo replied the next day on wednesday, september 4th, quote, all good. Youre doing great work. Keep banging away. State Department Leadership expressed total support for our efforts to engage the new ukrainian administration. Look. Ive never doubted the Strategic Value of strengthening our alliance with ukraine. And at all times, at all times, our efforts were in good faith and fully transparent to those tasked with overseeing them. Our efforts were reported and approved and not once do i recall encountering an objection. It remains an honor to serve the people of the United States as their United States ambassador to the european union. I look forward to answering the committees questions. Thank you. We will now proceed to first round of questions. There will be 45 minutes of questions conducted by the chairman and Majority Council followed by 45 minutes for the Ranking Member or minority council. Following that, unless i specify additional time, well proceed under the fiveminute rule and every member will have the chance to ask questions. I recognize myself, or majority counsel, for the first round of questions. Mr. Sondland, theres a lot of new material in your Opening Statement for us to get through. But i want to start with a few top line questions before patching it over to mr. Goldman. In your deposition, you testify that you found yourself on a continuum that became more insidious over time. Can you describe what you mean by this continuum of insidiousness . Well, mr. Chairman, when we left the oval office, i believe on may 23rd, the request was very generic for an investigation of corruption in a very vanilla sense. And dealing with some of the oligarch problems in ukraine, which were longstanding problems. And then as time went on, more specific items got added to the menu. Including the burisma and 2016 election meddling specifically, the dnc server specifically. And over this over this continuum, it became more and more difficult to secure the white house meeting because more conditions were being placed on the white house meeting. And then of course on july 25th, although you were not privy to the call, another condition was added. That being the investigation of the bidens. I was not privy to the call and i did not know the the condition of investigating the bidens was a condition. Correct. You saw that on the call record, correct . It was not in any record i received. But when you did see. Yes, i saw that in september, correct. So on this continuum, the beginning of the continuum begins on may 23rd when the president instructs you to talk to rudy . Correct. And you understood as a direction by the president that you needed to satisfy the concerns that Rudy Giuliani would express to you about what the president wanted in ukraine . Not to me. To the entire group. Volker, perry, and myself, correct. In your Opening Statement, you confirm that there was a quid pro quo between the white house meeting and the investigations into burisma and the 2016 election that giuliani was publicly promoting. Is that right . Correct. And, in fact, you say other senior officials in the state department and the chiefs of staffs office, including mick mulvaney, secretary pompeo were aware of this quid pro quo that in order to get the white house meeting, there were going to have to be these investigations the president wanted. Correct. And those, again, are investigations into 2016 and burisma slash the bidens . 2016 burisma. The bidens did not come up. But you would ultimately learn that burisma meant the bidens when you saw the call record, correct . Of course. Today, i know exactly what it means. I didnt know at the time. And then on july 26th, you confirm you did, indeed, have the conversation with President Trump from a restaurant in kyiv that david holmes testified about last week, is that right . Correct. And you have no doubt no reason to doubt mr. Holmes recounting of your conversation with the president . The only part of mr. Holmes recounting that i take exception with is i do not recall mentioning the bidens. That did not enter my mind. It was burisma in 2016 election. You have no reason to believe mr. Holmes would make that up if thats what he recalls you saying, you have no reason to question that, do you . I dont recall saying biden. I never recall saying biden. But the rest of mr. Holmes recollection is consistent with your own . Well, i cant testify as to what mr. Holmes might or might not have heard through the phone. I dont know how he heard the conversation. Are you familiar with his testimony . Vaguely, yes. And the only exception you take is to the mention of the name biden . Correct. And i think you said in your testimony this morning that not only is it correct that the president brought up with you investigations on the phone the day after the july 25th call. But you would have been surprised had he not brought that up, is that right . Right because we had been hearing about it from rudy and we presumed rudy was getting it from the president. So it seemed like a logical conclusion. Holmes also testified you told him President Trump doesnt care about ukraine. He only cares about big stuff that relates to him personally. I take it from your comment that you dont dispute that part of the conversation. Well, he made that clear in the may 23rd meeting. That he was not particularly fond of ukraine and we had a lot of heavy lifting to do to get him to engage. So you dont dispute that part of mr. Holmes recollection . No. In august, when you worked with Rudy Giuliani and a top ukrainian aide to draft a Public Statement for president zelensky to issue that includes the announcement of investigations into burisma, you understood that was required by President Trump before he would grant the white house meeting to president zelensky . Thats correct. And the ukrainians understood that, as well . I believe they did. And you informed secretary pompeo about that statement, as well . I did. Later in august, you told secretary pompeo that president zelensky would be prepared to tell President Trump that his new justice officials would be able to announce matters of interest of the president which could break the log jam. When you say matters of interest of the president , you mean the investigations that President Trump wanted, is that right . Correct. And that involved 2016 and burisma or the bidens . 2016 and burisma. And when youre talking about here breaking the log jam, youre talking about the log jam over the Security Assistance, correct . I was talking log jam generically because nothing was moving. But that included the Security Assistance, did it not . Correct. And based on the context of that email, this was not the first time you had discussed these investigations with secretary pompeo, was it . No. He was aware of the connections thauf connections that you were making between the investigations and the white house meeting and the Security Assistance . Yes. Did he ever take issue with you and say, no, that connection is not there . Or youre wrong . Not that i recall. You mentioned that you also had a conversation with Vice President pence before his meeting with president zelensky in warsaw. And that you raised the concern you had as well that the securi Security Assistance was being withheld because