By announcing an investigation that would benefit someone in the United States and it wasnt clear to me that it would be worth it, that a meeting would be worth it. So essentially there taylor saying, his personal belief was that if President Trump was going to withhold the Ukraine Military assistance and that will launch an investigation into Vice President biden and his son and he didnt think that would be a worthwhile exchange. On the open hearings, chairman intelligent adam schiff announced that would take place wednesday november 13 and friday november 15 and thats really what democrats here, our sources here on the hill are telling us will mark a whole new investigation. Excuse me, a whole new phase of this investigation into President Trump. On wednesday, ambassador bill taylor and state Department Official george kent will testify on friday we will hear from former ambassador to the ukraine maria jovanovich. Take a listen to chairman adam schiff here. Speak of those open hearings will be an opportunity for the American People to evaluate the witnesses for themselves, making determinations about the credibility of the witnesses, and also to learn firsthand about the facts of the president s misconduct. Key republicans are already taking issue with the democrats playing making plans. Listen to this. So all three of the witnesses that are now slated to testify openly and in public have already testified behind closed doors to the Intelligence Committee right here. We will continue going through those transcripts now. Shannon we have a couple of new things happening on this front. First, i want to ask you about these open hearings that are taking place next week. And it jim jordan, we heard yesterday might end up being placed on the Intelligence Committee and maybe that will happen before next week. But that is a curious thing of why not wanting special envoy kurt vogel to be the first to testify in open hearings when he was the one that was deposed. Any thoughts on that . Well some thoughts that the democrats might think that bill taylor or other officials might have better testimony for their narrative. But remember the president this morning tweeted out a thank you to colt Mike Kurt Volker because it appears that he is backing up some of the president s account there was not a quid pro quo. What i think is very important are a couple things. Number one when you see what adam schiff and the democrats are trying to do in the release of the transcript, they say right at the top in their press release the testimony of ambassador taylor, a west point grad, vietnam vet and nonpartisan diplomat, they are saying all of that dana of course because there narrative, the democrats, will try to be at these public hearings. That these are people largely who are testifying on a nonpartisan basis. If the reason you would have jim jordan join devin nunes on the intel panel is they are going to push a much different narrative. That these are never trumpers that weve heard the president talk about who have an asked like ax to grind or political bias against the president. Dana but one of those points that Gillian Turner and shes had 6 minutes to look at a 330 page document so we dont know the details yet. But one of the things she said was i had concerns about this and i raise my concerns and to me, that sounds like a proper way to do things. I dont know how his character could be disparaged in that regard. Right. Remember one of the things bill taylor has testify to that we had heard without getting the full transcript. We had heard days ago that he had suggested that he learned from investor sunderland, the other ambassador involved here who has a key role that may be the u. S. Aid to the ukraine was being withheld until President Trump got the investigations he wanted. Remember, ambassador sunderland initially suggested in his testimony that that was not the case and now he has come back to the committee and has refreshed his memory if you well. He has said it, he did have concerns about a quid pro quo. Bottom line is, i think andy mccarthy, a Fox News Contributor and contributor as well as National Reviewer has written about this extensively. He doesnt quite understand why the republican response has been whether there is quid pro quo or not, the fact of the matter is this does not rise to the level of a no impeachable offense. Instead youve heard, and, he had to sort of walk that back. The message has been all over the map. But what matters more is the substance of what these diplomats are going to say and the crossexamination of people like jim jordan. Thats why the republicans want to get somebody strong like jim jordan for these public hearings because, we are going to learn more. They have not been before the tv cameras, they have not been crossexamined before the American People and, thats one thing that we originally talked about. That was apparently among Senate Republicans of course the impeachment starts in the house and the senate is wondering, is there anything they should be doing in the meantime . One of the questions is, should somebody like Lindsey Graham who is a judiciary or over at the Foreign RelationsCommittee Bring up hunter biden, and interview him and try to at least get that part of the story into the newsmax while they try to beat back with the democrats have which is power to release things when they want. Right. The democrats have been controlling the narrative which is why i was referring back to the crossexamination, that the president and the republicans on the hill have sort of been demanding and urging witches to get this in the public light so we can do some crossexamining and maybe bring up hunter biden and other issues. While the transcript are getting all the attention today its a wall street journal story that people should Pay Attention to. The wall street journal has gotten documents suggesting that hunter biden may have been used to try to help burisma, the Energy Company in the ukraine to get a meeting. We dont know if such meetings happened, or if there was any influence peddling going on behind the scenes, we dont have basic answers to, a, what what did hunter biden do to get some 81,000 per month from burisma while his father, the president of the United States, was overseeing the policy. Now there may be documents suggesting that hunter biden was being used to lobby the obama biden demonstration. But to your point i bet there will be republicans saying we have got to get some testimony from people. Dana if you could stay with us we want to bring in our senior producer on capitol hill, chad program. Youve had another 6 minutes to look through so tell us what you know so far. Im going to go through a couple of key sections here. First of all, in july according to the testimony, it became clear. Thats the word that bill taylor used in his testimony, that the meeting with burisma, there was some sort of issue here with burisma, tied to hunter biden. And i will read this other section, this is bill taylor talking about gordon sunderland, european ambassador. They had electronic Text Messages exchanges were taylor expressed concerns about what may have been going on and if there was potentially a quid pro quo. Taylor someone told me many times that President Trump so there was no quid pro quo. I observed to move forward with aid there must be an investigation. Thats part of his testimony there. The other things im noticing and this is at the top of the document, 324 pages, there is a large section that has been redacted. In the other transcripts that have been released this week, we havent seen that, thats new. And again, a little bit of flavor there. You had these guerrilla tactics by republicans, trying to ask questions and bull rush the skiff. If you start at the very top of the transcript they refer to roy. Roy is chip roy, republican congressman from texas and he was someone who is trying to get involved in this. They are only allowing Intelligence Committee members to ask questions during the hearing and that is something that is of note. Dana can i interrupt you for a moment . As i was starting to read through this 324 page document which is not easy to do, and just skimming, i noticed right of the top. I think you and i can speculate because they released this and who we are talking about it. But why would that be redacted . Is that simply because hes not a member of the committee . Its not the chip roy part thats redacted, but its the part about reductions. Dana i know theres a tendency to over classify and block things out there dont necessarily need to be blocked out but it adds more to the question of how secret these meetings were when republicans were complaining about process. Now, its like what could they have possibly said . This is why weve had a lot of these figures coming in to review their testimony. Some of the president ial advisors have come back in today. The reason why you are talking in a classified setting, they want you to come back in and check your work. Number one. And also make sure that there was something and maybe that was something that bill taylor came back in and that was something they flagged. Dana do you have anything more . Looking at the other things, theres a point where they talk about this exchange and he said he had a sinking feeling when he learned about the talks with gordon sunderland. And we dont have george kemps testimony, he is the state Department Official who would testified at hearing next week. He started to read flag some of the concerns about the informal channel. The Trump Administration was doing some sort of a back channel and irregular thats another term we are seeing type of diplomacy with the ukraine. Again, we will be an open session next wednesday and it will be in a room up here. 1100 longworth. Thats across the street in the longworth house. Its probably one of the most ornate and largest, most cavernous rooms on capitol hill which is where the ways and Means Committee usually meets and thats where the house of representatives met for several years while they revamped the regular House Chamber in the 1940s. So to have it in that room is probably one of the most ornate facilities and capitol hill. Dana i have to say when you said 1100 longworth i went back to when i was a capitol hill staffer in 1995 and i would give tours and stop by there to show people. And its the coldest room on capitol hill so bring your heater. Speak want to water. Lets go back to Gillian Turner. I just want to mention, and you dont have to comment on this. Bill taylor says is learning about this and he has a sinking feeling. Whats interesting to me is the sinking feeling is then replicated, maybe not in exactly those words but the description of concern, worry, it sounds bad and doesnt feel right. There was some sort of consternation about where is this headed and it doesnt look bad, et cetera. Your thoughts on that . Scrolling through taylors testimony a bit more in the last few minutes, to your point it sounds like he was aware and talking to people about his reservations, about taking the ukraine job even before he accepted it. He tells Committee Investigators in his transcript that he was hesitant to take on the ukraine post because he knew already that President Trump was planning to recall Marie Jovanovich and the president had made that decision after hearing from a member of congress, now a former member of congress. He had seen press reports of the intent of mr. Giuliani to travel to the ukraine. To pursue these investigations have mentioned a couple times with the intent of using that information in political campaigns. He then goes on to say i knew there were problems in key avenue and i knew there were problems in washington. I knew secretary pompeo had received a letter from a member of congress or perhaps a former member of congress saying that much i jovanovich, ambassador jovanovich should be removed. I can say i was very concerned about that. What hes essentially saying here is number one, we know that former member of congress was pete sessions, congressman pete sessions. So what hes saying is there was already a campaign to get rid of the sitting ambassador and he didnt want to sign on there were already those political initiations. Dana at henry has been going through this as well. In exchange between adam schiff and bill taylor . Bill taylor. This will give us a flavor for what we can expect in front of the cameras next week when bill taylor testifies publicly. This is one where we noticed chairman shift saying behind closed doors of the initial testimony, this is the first im hearing of security assistance, not just that the white house meeting was being held up there but it was conditioned on the investigation. Did you mean that if the ukrainians didnt do this, the investigations, they werent going to get that, the meeting in the military assistance . Bill taylor says under oath, that was my clear understanding. Security assistance money would not come until the president of the ukraine committed to pursue the investigation. Adam schiff response if they dont do this, they wont get that, is your understanding . Taylor yes, sir. Adam schiff says are you aware that quid pro quo while means literally this for that . And if taylor says i am. Behind closed doors they were able to get somebody who they believe to be a nonpartisan deployment, to say under oath even though they have danced around there for days and weeks. And he has said for weeks now that the bottom line is it doesnt raise to the level of an impeachable offense. And thats what we will hear from republicans in the days of headed but they have taken a long time to get there. Dana and basically antimccarthy was saying, maybe ten days ago that he first wrote that, saying if you want an offramp, this is the one that you should take. Big public hearings at 1100 longworth. They want to make it a spectacle. And of course we will bring it to you live here on fox news. Lets bring in u. S. Attorney brett tolman. Are you hearing anything so far that would be a significant game changer as bill taylors testimony is released . You know, i paid attention to the crossexamination of bill taylor. Its always the most interesting part to me. If you look in pages 80 through 100 for example there is an interesting dialogue that develops in this exchange. The questioner is saying, do you acknowledge that there is corruption in this country . Is it a longstanding policy that the u. S. Is concerned about corruption . Answers affirmatively. He seems reluctant though, he doesnt want to give into the fact that yes, this is a valid concern that ukraine has a lot of corruption. Other criminal Justice System is poor right now. Thats setting the foundation, a very Key Foundation for any argument that the president is accurate when he has concern over corruption. Dana when you read through this testimony, and i appreciate you doing that because i have got to page 80 but its an interesting exchange. Its kind of like an open secret that ukraine has i corruption problem. But when you thing about these public hearings that will happen next week, this is not a criminal investigation. You are a u. S. Attorney, he worked as a prosecutor. So its not as if you are in a court of law, you are in the court of public opinion. They are on the hook. That and how do you consider this . Its interesting because right at the beginning of this, you see the chairman saying no other attorneys for any other individuals are allowed in the room. That is directed at the president. The president is a lot though mike isnt allowed so the person thats accused is not allowed to have anyone there. Then you are starting to sense that both sides are starting to dig into the issue. But whats apparent is that taylor right now is very strong on the fact that he was uncomfortable. But very weak at identifying and pinning down comments or statements by the president himself that was expecting a quid pro quo. Dana whats interesting about all of this is, you know, there is a whistleblower. The whistleblower and then we find out all this information. The aide was a relief released and theres this concern. And yet, its interesting to me that our country has only been through impeachment four times and each time, especially if there is a special prosecutor or special counsel or they change the name back and forth over time, independent counsel et cetera, its not well laid out. You can have a concern and it could be political and you could try to fight that out. We actually have people, witnesses who are on the hook. We also have a long time public servants. West point grads, serving in vietnam. Hes not the whistleblower. So now, he actually has to get lawyers and he asked to answer under oath and hes saying, i had a bad feeling but thats not necessarily impeachable. Im not necessarily asking the question. How are the systems of government set up to work with concerns like this . You forget the exchange that occurs. There is an exchange in which taylor has asked whether or not there is generally a concern on his part or others with the board of directors, and he acknowledges, yes. I had concerns about that. I did notice boards of directors and we were looking at those. Then i was asked if he looked into the hunter biden point of the board and he indicated no. So if you are a witness, everything kind of comes out and gets exposed and he has to acknowledge that he may not have focused on that. He may not have paid attention to it and that goes to credibility. Thats why this process is frustrating for the American People because we also want to credibility. Dana the testimony we had the other day wasnt secret but b